Minnesota Firearm News

West Virginia is advancing legislation to strengthen constitutional carry and shield gun owners from future federal overreach, while Virginia lawmakers are moving forward with sweeping firearm bans and new restrictions. The stark contrast highlights how state-level politics increasingly shape the direction of Second Amendment rights nationwide.

Early voting is underway in Texas, with key congressional primaries drawing attention from Second Amendment advocates. With GOA endorsements highlighting candidates in Districts 2 and 23, gun owners are weighing which leaders will take a firm stance on red flag laws, federal regulation, and constitutional protections in Washington.

Today the Minnesota House Public Safety Committee is hearing HF 3433 and HF 3402—two sweeping proposals that would ban many commonly owned semi-automatic firearms and magazines over 10 rounds. The bills could impose strict registration requirements, criminal penalties, and limited grandfathering, raising significant constitutional and practical concerns for lawful gun owners across the state.

Governor Josh Shapiro’s proposed 2026–2027 Pennsylvania budget includes $1 million for a new Office of Gun Violence Prevention and expanded funding for PICS. Second Amendment advocates warn the measures could grow firearm bureaucracy, increase costs for gun owners, and further entrench the state’s controversial “Record of Sale” system.

New Mexico’s sweeping semi-automatic firearm ban, SB 17, has stalled after failing to advance before the legislative deadline—a significant victory for gun owners and small businesses who mobilized in strong opposition. While the proposal is effectively dead for this session, sponsors have signaled they intend to revisit similar legislation in the future, underscoring the need for continued vigilance and engagement.

The Senate Judiciary Committee’s confirmation hearing for ATF nominee Robert Cekada may have been smooth, but the real question for Second Amendment advocates goes beyond personalities. Under the Supreme Court’s Bruen standard, firearm regulations must align with the nation’s historical tradition—not modern policy preferences. As administrations change, constitutional limits—not individual directors—must remain the safeguard for “shall not be infringed.”