Gun Lawyer

  Episode 283-Fighting the Gun Records Cover-up Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 11 Gun Lawyer — Episode 283 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Gun lawyer, John Petrolino, Citizens Committee, New Jersey, carry permits, African American applicants, retired police officers, freedom of information, institutionalized racism, constitutional carry, national reciprocity, Second Amendment, anti-knife movement, UK gun laws, knife control. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:16 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:18 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:20 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, we are currently watching with great expectation here over a lawsuit that has been brought and filed by our good friend John Petrolino with the help and assistance of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. (ccrkba.org) And what is going on here is very interesting, because John, who many of you know, does excellent reporting on firearm issues, particularly on New Jersey as well. He does great extensive coverage. Well, John was instrumental in having the permit to carry statistics getting publicized and put out there. And with it being put into the ether and made part of an awareness that otherwise really wasn’t there about the key discovery he made regarding blacks, black carry applicants. African American applicants are denied more than double their white counterparts for non-criminal reasons. Okay? Evan Nappen 01:55 And John, he requested the records seeking the statistics on retired police officer carry permits to build on the coverage of all as to who has been denied. So, remember retired police officers in New Jersey can get the RLEO, the Retired Law Enforcement Officer, Card, which in effect functions as a carry permit for retired law enforcement. Prior to the Bruen decision, where it was virtually impossible for folks to get carries, Retired Officers through the RLEO were able to get their carry in that manner. Now, of course, there’s been even more progress where LEOSA (Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act) also covers law enforcement and actually covers New Jersey law enforcement, which to large degree makes even needing a retired law enforcement carry not as necessary as it used to be. But still, it is something that is done, that is issued. Page – 2 – of 11 Evan Nappen 03:14 John requested through, you know, essentially New Jersey’s freedom of information to get the records so that we can continue the further analysis. And what I have here is a news release from Citizens Committee. (https://ccrkba.org/ccrkba-director-sues-nj-officials-over-denied-records-requests/) And what it says, as noted in the complaint, “Plaintiff and the public has a strong interest in ascertaining the relationship between the demographics of carry permit holders amongst the general public and retired law enforcement officers including but not limited to county location, race, sex and the effect of potentially disqualifying criteria in the application population as well as the success rate for the appeal process within the New Jersey State Police.” “Having established Petrolino was deprived of his common law right of access the New Jersey Civil Rights Act was violated, the clear remedy is injunctive relief compelling the production of the records to Petrolino . . .” It continues, “The NJSP”, meaning New Jersey State Police, “has denied countless records requests that I’ve made over the years, never fulfilling even one”, Director Petrolino said. “When I emailed them about these denials, an unnamed person at NJSP basically told me to sue them — so here we are.” Evan Nappen 04:46 That’s right. And as further noted in the news release, “Records concerning the retired police officer permits are about as public as you can get,” says Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “Do they have the same level of perceived bias in their permitting statistics? Or perhaps worse yet, do they not? The public has a right to know this information. We laud Director Petrolino in his quest to hold New Jersey officials accountable by forcing them to be transparent with those they swore to serve.” Yes, it is very important that these records get out there, because the current records already show the institutionalized racism that occurs in carry permitting systems. That alone should stand for why we should have Constitutional Carry in New Jersey, where you do not need any permit, as do the majority of the United States. They have no permit required, and it is something that is not necessary, nor in full exercise of the Second Amendment. We should not even be required to need a permission slip. And this illustrates the reasons why. Because the surest way to avoid the racial discrimination, to avoid these type of coverups over record

  Episode 282-Court Tosses Polatov Cocktail on Gun Law Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Gun Lawyer Transcript – Episode 282 SUMMARY KEYWORDS Polytoph case, gun rights, New Jersey gun law, firearms purchaser identification card, second amendment, public health, safety, welfare, Bruen decision, essential character of temperament, weasel clause, gun denial, federal case law, voluntary registration, gun lawyer. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Robert Bell, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen Evan Nappen 00:17 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:19 And I’m Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen 00:21 And welcome to Gun Lawyer with a very exciting show today, because we are going to learn about Pearl Harbor. No, it’s all about a different issue. What we are learning about, though, is a great case that just came down from the Appellate Division that my firm was fighting for our client here. It is a really amazing case that is a published decision, and this is very important to understand. In New Jersey, when a decision is deemed published, it means it is law. It acts as law. And the great attorney who argued this case for the firm, and did, in fact, do the appeal as well, is Robert Bell. Rob, welcome to Gun Lawyer. Robert Bell 01:23 Thank you. Great to be here. Evan Nappen 01:25 All right, man. So, we’re all very excited about the (Mikhail) Polatov case, and that’s why we’re saying that the “Court Tossed a Polatov Cocktail on New Jersey Gun Law”. Because this case, which is a great win, actually had some very, very important impacts on our gun rights and in future fights in the courts over gun laws. Why don’t you tell us about this case, Rob, and where we’re at and what’s happened. Go right ahead. Robert Bell 02:03 Certainly. So, Mikhail’s journey in trying to exercise his Second Amendment rights started back in 2020. He applied for a Firearms Purchaser Identification Card and was denied. Not on the basis of any convictions, restraining orders, substance abuse, or anything like that. Nothing objective. Just a 2011 misdemeanor charge that was dismissed and something back in 2002. So, it’s all very remote, and neither of them resulted in convictions, anyway. He gets denied, and he appeals it. He gets in front of our favorite Bergen County judge. I don’t need to say his name, but you can look into the record and find it yourself. Robert Bell 02:51 Don’t worry. He listens to the show. So, it’s okay. Robert Bell 02:56 So, he gets in front of this judge, and he testifies about what happened in 2011 in New York during this incident that was dismissed. And it’s not that the Judge disliked the behavior. He just disliked his “cavalier attitude about it” and denied the permit. Fast forward to 2023. Mikhail applies again, and this time his wife applies as well. Both denied. Simply on the basis of a previous denial. They appeal it. They deny the wife simply because she lives with him, and they deny him because he was dishonest with us before. And if he’s telling the truth now, it means he was either lying then or lying now. It doesn’t matter. It was just a catch 22 of you lied at some point, and I don’t like that. You are not of the essential character of temperament necessary to be entrusted with a firearm. And that’s that, that was the, the addition to the weasel clause that I think our viewers know, right? Evan Nappen 04:11 So, let’s do, let’s explain a little bit. The disqualifiers that exist in the gun laws under (Chapter) 58. There’s a list of what we often call the per se disqualifiers, where somebody like if you’re a convicted felon, it’s a per se disqualifier. And virtually everybody knows that. But New Jersey has this catch-all, the all-inclusive miscellaneous weasel clause that we refer to as “public health, safety, and welfare”. And that provision, that basis for denial is the area where we see the most significant abuse, particularly racist abuse. Where there’s a disproportionate denial of blacks by more than two and a half times to whites. It is the section of the law that is fraught with abuse on stopping the individual from being able to get licensed. The law was changed in New Jersey from just “public health, safety, and welfare”, but adding the phrase about “based on character of temperament”. Well, Rob, why did they add that? Why don’t you tell listeners why? You know the history. Why was that put in there? Robert Bell 05:26 In June 2022, when the (United States) Supreme Court issued the Bruen decision, the anti-gun states, the gun the rights oppressors in New Jersey, New York, California, Maryland, and Massachusetts, were absolutely seething. And they have been going on a temper tantrum ever since. In December 2022, they decided to pass that temper tantrum into legislation that

  Episode 281-Don’t be a Dingus about the Dingus Law Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 12 Gun Lawyer — Episode 281 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey gun law, accidental discharge, Fifth Amendment rights, criminal charges, licensing revocation, public health safety, misdemeanor offense, felony conviction, reckless conduct, gun safety, legal advice, jury trial, Second Amendment rights, gun ownership, legal protections. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:16 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen 00:19 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Say, Teddy, I see you sent me something interesting that you found online. Teddy Nappen 00:26 Well, I always like to check on the Reddit retards to see what they’re saying. Evan Nappen 00:32 Oh, my God. And yeah, you did find some stuff that is very much of concern here, because I don’t want to see any of our people have a problem or get into trouble. And it made it clear to me just how important this Accidental Discharge (AD), the Dingus Law, in New Jersey, is. It is having a tremendous effect, and folks have got to know about it. They’ve got to understand that this is genuine. Teddy Nappen 00:59 And also to be clear, not everyone on Reddit is retarded, but everyone who’s retarded is on Reddit just saying. Evan Nappen 01:06 Ah, okay. Well, I’m glad to know the rules here. But what I want to do is go through the commentary to a certain degree. It is extremely important that individuals don’t make this mistake, because this change is dramatic to New Jersey’s law. And then it instantly has put forward Fifth Amendment rights that must be utilized by gun owners in New Jersey in order to protect themselves. Because the ramifications here are not just criminal, not just potential exposure to a year and a half in State Prison for a mere accident, but also loss of your Second Amendment rights. And not just loss of your rights from becoming a Page – 2 – of 12 convicted felon. Even if criminal charges are not pursued, you’re still going to face potential licensing revocation, pulling you in under the disqualifier of public health, safety, and welfare, what I call the all-inclusive miscellaneous weasel clause that they will use to further disarm you. Evan Nappen 02:19 I’ve encountered case after case after case after case of this. I’ve been, you know, practicing New Jersey gun law now for 40 years. I’ve seen what accidental discharges cause to the individual. I’m not making this up. This is real, and it is a real concern. And they’ve just poured gasoline on the fire by passing this new law that essentially criminalizes this to a degree that it has never been criminalized before. So, our rights become even more critical, and I want to make sure that folks understand this law. So, I’m going to review it and talk about some of the misinformation and such that is out there. And how, again, the anti-Second Amendment, the gun rights oppressionists, how they have structured this law to get it through. To make it have a facial appearance, and yet its effect is hidden until it pounds you, the unsuspecting gun owner. I understand how this system works, and I’ve seen what they do. So, they pass these laws, and in effect, they’re sneaky as all hell. This is a sneaky law that is there to disenfranchise gun owners. Teddy Nappen 03:57 Also the fact that anyone who thinks, oh, this will never happen to me. Oh, I’m a very responsible gun owner. They hate you. That is why they’re laying these traps. And anyone who thinks that this can’t happen to you, tell yourself, oh, I’ve never been in a car accident before. Anyone has ever thought that until it happens. Evan Nappen 04:19 Man, I cannot tell you how many times in the practice of gun law in New Jersey, I’ve had the client say, man, I never thought I’d be calling you. I’ve heard that uncountable numbers of times. I never thought I’d be calling you. Yet here I am. And, frankly, I want the word out so people understand this, and I’m going to deal more with that very fact and the reality of that in some of the commentary that’s here, because it also deserves to be addressed. I’m going to do that. Evan Nappen 04:53 So, first, let’s take a look at the law so you can really understand what the traps are. They’re sneaky tricks. How they passed this, and they know what they’re doing. They know what they’re doing. And they fool the public and create the ability here for the oppressionists to go after the unsuspecting folks that are thinking they’re doing the right thing. So, New Jersey, as you may or may not know, has utterly criminalized accidental discharge, and it is now in law, signed by Murphy. (https://

  Episode 280-Top 7 NJ Carry Guns Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 11 Gun Lawyer — Episode 280 Transcript SPEAKERS Speaker 3, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen Evan Nappen 00:17 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:19 and I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:21 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Hey, Teddy, guess who finally quit smoking? Teddy Nappen 00:28 You quit smoking? Evan Nappen 00:30 No. The Ayatollah Khomeini. Teddy Nappen 00:32 Oh! Evan Nappen 00:35 There you go. Actually, the thing is, we’re now in a situation where you may have seen the warnings going out about an increased, seriously increased, threat of danger in the homeland. For the, who knows, how many that the Biden administration let in, actual terrorists on the terrorist watch list, and how many unknowns and got aways, and just all those folks that have infiltrated the country that they’re warning about sleeper cells and already starting to see some incidents occurring. And I think it’s fair to say that we all need to be very vigilant, and since most of us are folks that are armed, that carry, we become an important element in the defense of our country. Evan Nappen 01:39 So, I want to talk today about practical considerations regarding firearm carry guns in New Jersey. We want to talk about the guns that are appropriate and are really some of the top most popular carry guns in New Jersey. Now, none of this means these are guns we’re going to talk about that make it that. You know, if you choose to carry any gun that you like, that’s fine. None of this is critical of any firearm that you may be carrying. I just want to talk about ones. It was inspired to talk about this from an article I found in Breitbart. Now Breitbart’s article is the “Five Concealed Carry Guns First-Time Buyers Should Consider”. (https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2026/03/03/five-concealed-carry-guns-first-time-buyers-should-consider/) Page – 2 – of 11 Evan Nappen 02:30 and I want to. Teddy Nappen 02:32 Number one, Gyrojet pistol. Evan Nappen 02:34 Right. Definitely grab that old Gyrojet. Oh, my God. In case you don’t know what a Gyrojet is, it was, literally, a rocket firing pistol. It launched cartridges or bullets or projectiles, if you will, in a similar way that you fire rockets, not a bullet. So, it’s actually, a gyro jet gun is closer to an Iranian missile launcher, frankly, than a gun. But they were not a commercial success. They’re very collectible and fascinating. You can read more about Gyrojets online. I happen to own a Gyrojet as an example of a rocket pistol. But no, that’s not a gun I would suggest carrying in New Jersey. Evan Nappen 03:27 First of all, it’s too valuable just to carry, and the ammo is like incredibly hard to find. Each cartridge is very valuable as a collectible in and of itself. But here it is from Breitbart. Now this article is by AWR Hawkins, who’s an excellent gun writer, and as he begins the article, he says, with military action in Iran raging and concerns about staying safe stateside, we thought it would be helpful to put together a list of five concealed carry guns that first time buyers should consider. So, I’m going to, and that’s a good thought right now, what we’re dealing with. I’m going to modify from what he’s talking about, is just to carry guns in New Jersey, whether you’re first time or not a first time. There are advantages and disadvantages to a number of the firearms that they’re putting out, and we have to put in the concerns that we have in New Jersey. One of the primary concerns at the moment in New Jersey is, of course, that you can’t have a magazine that holds over 10 rounds. So, the handguns that we’re going to carry in New Jersey have to have a limitation in the magazine of 10 rounds. Now, that does not include one round in the chamber. So, in theory, you can have 10 rounds in a magazine and one round in the chamber, and you are legal in New Jersey for that carry gun. Evan Nappen 04:56 So, what happens is there are a number of handguns out there that, of course, are wonderful, wonderful guns. They are larger frame and normally hold standard magazine capacity definitely over 10 rounds. And you can start, you know, with just a Glock 19 that would have the standard magazine of 15 rounds. An excellent carry gun and super popular. But in New Jersey, putting aside, let’s just say the Glock 19 happens to fit your hand really well, and I understand that. But in reality, you’re carrying a gun that is larger than you necessarily need. Again, if it works for you, that’s fine, but it’s larger than you necessarily need, which makes it arguably somewhat less concealable. And yet you’re being limited in one of the nice features about it is that you could have the i

  Episode 279-Bang or Bong. Maybe both. Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 11 Gun Lawyer — Episode 279 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Supreme Court case, marijuana user ban, Second Amendment rights, ACLU, NRA, New Jersey, Hughes amendment, West Virginia, machine guns, loopholes, gun rights, felon restoration, Epstein files, Michael Bloomberg, gun violence prevention. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:16 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:18 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:20 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, we have some exciting things coming in the future here. I want to make sure the listeners are well aware. In the Supreme Court, we have a case coming up that is going to look at the prohibitor for firearm possession concerning marijuana use, if you’re a user of marijuana. And the case is U.S. versus Hemani. This is very interesting, because it is widely believed that the Court is going to strike down the gun ban for marijuana users. Regardless of how you feel about marijuana use, I’m looking forward to seeing this opinion, because it may be useful in knocking down other gun disqualifiers. Because, folks, gun disqualifiers, such as the gun ban for marijuana use, is an area of exploitation by the gun rights oppressors. Evan Nappen 01:38 So, if they can’t just get a flat out gun ban through, which they try to do all the time, if they can piece meal gun bans to various classes of individuals, then they get the job done that way. That’s why you see the ever expanding list of persons who they try to get disqualified from being able to exercise their Second Amendment rights. And this case has, I believe, potentially very far reaching implications as to subverting that anti-gun rights, that gun rights oppression tactic. So, we want to look at it at as more than just the marijuana. It will be fascinating to see it be a victory, because we have parties in support of this ban going away as diverse as, on the same side now, the ACLU and the NRA. Both. The ACLU is in favor of getting rid of the marijuana user gun ban, because it is, of course, beneficial to in their view, I’m sure, legalization of marijuana, which is something that they would be in support. The NRA is in favor of it going away, because it is consistent with The NRA’s position of supporting Second Amendment rights. So, this has created the classic strange bedfellows situation. (https://www.marijuanamoment.net/aclu-attorney-confident-supreme-court-will-strike-down-gun-ban-for-marijuana-users-after-oral-arguments-next-week/ ) Page – 2 – of 11 Evan Nappen 03:28 But ultimately, what we see coming from it should be a victory for gun rights. And I believe and hope it will be even further reaching than simply addressing the marijuana question. It’s going to be, I believe, very helpful in fighting other disqualifications. Remember, New Jersey is one of the states that tries to always have an expansive list of what disqualifies a person from being able to exercise their Second Amendment rights. They love to create disenfranchisements of our rights because they are rights oppressors, and this tactic, hopefully, will be taking a hit here. So, we’ll keep you informed about the progress and what occurs under the Hemani decision. Teddy Nappen 04:30 I will say, just from the ACLU, just to be clear, they are heavily backed by the Democrat for their super PACs. I’m just saying. Like that is the, and I can’t wait to see all the individuals of the ACLU all out in mass as they’re about to help win a pro-gun victory as well. Yeah. Evan Nappen 04:55 I guess they’re looking at it more as a pro-marijuana victory and ending prejudice toward marijuana users. But whatever their motivation may be, we are going to be consistent in our support for Second Amendment rights. Getting rid of disqualifiers is getting rid of disqualifiers that are disenfranchisements to our Second Amendment rights. So, hey, at least they’re on the right side on this one, and maybe we can get them to continue to see the light on other disqualifiers. Such as restoration of rights for felons and such, right? I mean, this is something you would think they would be in favor of, as well, for restoration of rights. You paid your dues. You served your time. And if you’re not a violent felon, why are you disenfranchised of your rights? I mean, even violent felons, when you get right down to it. I mean, there’s, I missed that in the Second Amendment, where it says we have a right to keep and bear arms, unless you’re a felon, you know, or any of these exemptions. They aren’t there. So, to what degree we tolerate them, to what degree we may think they’re even valuable, I don’t know, but we need to. I’d rather be seeing us pull back on every type of ban and maximize

  Episode 278-Don’t Let Them Memory Hole Us Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Mass shooting, Canada, gun laws, mental health, firearm license, self-defense, transgender, mandatory buyback, gun control, observational awareness, situational awareness, gun rights, New Jersey, firearm industry, de-banking. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Teddy Nappen 00:17 I’m Teddy Nappen, and welcome to Gun Lawyer. I wanted to kind of address this to the audience, as this has been kind of brushed over. There’s been multiple mass shootings, but there was one that caught my eye. They are trying to effectively bury in the stories. Like, I don’t even see it that much coming the news. The mass shooting in Canada! Every single one of the Left’s arguments on how to stop a mass shooting, everything that they push for, demonstrated in Canada failed. The Left always argues that stricter gun laws will prevent a mass shooting. If it saves one life. Even though 2.7 million lives are saved with self-defense uses of a firearm. If it saves one life. They always argue the accessibility of firearms – that’s what leads to mass shootings. Teddy Nappen 01:15 So, I want to kind of lean into this story where nine people were shot and killed, 27 were injured in the mass shooting in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia. (https://www.junonews.com/p/exclusive-family-confirms-identity) It was a man identifying as a woman, which, you know, that’s one of the other reasons why they’re burying the story. It doesn’t fit the narrative of the straight, white, right wing conservative as the shooter. So, obviously we can’t talk about it. You hear from the North District Commander Ken Floyd of the gun person. Yeah, person. Always good to not misgender the school shooter. He murdered his mother, but also shot his step brother as well. Don’t bring up that fact. Also, a troubled house life, and the school that he shot up, of course, he was thrown out of the school. Police had been called to the home multiple times. They had multiple instances with this individual who had reported mental health problems. Huh, interesting. Teddy Nappen 02:21 Oh, and it gets better. So, the suspect had a firearm license, which, by the way, in Canada, you cannot possess a firearm for self-defense – only hunting. Keep that in mind. Supposedly, the guns recovered were a long gun and a “modified handgun”. They don’t go into details as to what was modified. So, the suspect, the shooter, the man identifying as a woman, I’m going to repeat that, the suspect had dropped out of the Tumbler Ridge Secondary School four years ago and was not a student at the time. So, police had attended the suspect’s residence multiple times in the past several years, dealing with mental health occurrences. Hmm, wonder why? When he started identifying as a woman? You know, that usually leads to that 42% suicide rate. The only group that is close to that rate is paranoid schizophrenics. But you know, facts are transphobic and homophobic, apparently. This included one of the attendants where, two years ago, the firearms were seized under criminal code. He was Red Flagged! Oh, he had multiple mental health instances. So, obviously we’ve got to seize his guns. The very argument by the Left to stop mass shootings. But, of course, because the man identified as a woman, then of course, well, we can’t, we don’t want to be transphobic. Let’s give him, oh, sorry, her back his firearms. Teddy Nappen 03:53 And, of course, suspect was born a biological male and then started transitioning six years ago. So, six years ago, he started transitioning and identified as a woman. Two years ago, the firearms are seized, so then he can say, oh, sorry, I think I’m a woman, so give me back my firearms, even though the police have come multiple times for multiple mental health incidents. Other than that, though, let’s give him back his guns. So, right there we have a clear demonstration of the fact that his firearms were seized and then he got, you know, Red Flagged. They actually have it. I pulled the law under their Public Safety website emergency prohibition order. (https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cntrng-crm/frrms/rd-flg-lws-en.aspx) A judge issues the order if they believe the individual poses a risk to themselves or others. When the order was issued, firearms, and firearm license and other documents and other weapons may be removed up to 30 days, and you have a hearing date. He goes to the hearing date and says, I want my guns back. And here they are given back and then does the shooting. The level. It’s just so disgusting. The system works every time. He got the guns back, and then boom, goes right into a mass shooting. Teddy Nappen 05:12 By the way, Canada is one of the most strictest places you could find for a f

  Episode 277-Three-Round Burst of GOFU’s Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 11 Gun Lawyer — Episode 277 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS GOFUs, New Jersey gun laws, vampire rule, sensitive places, unlawful possession, pretrial detention, federal injunction, carry permit, gun transport, Second Amendment, gun rights, legal advice, gun ownership, gun regulations, gun safety, gun culture. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:17 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:19 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:21 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, you know our show here, one of the things that is very, very famous about our show are GOFUs. And GOFUs, as my listeners know, are Gun Owner Fuck Ups. The idea with GOFUs is these are real cases, actual things that happened. They are expensive lessons that people learn, and that you, the listener, get to learn for free. And of course, we always do the GOFU at the end of the show, whatever this week’s GOFU may be. But suddenly I’ve been pounded with GOFUs, and they’re very important. And I said, you know what? We’re going to do a three round burst here of some really important GOFUs, including what I want to begin with by telling you about this actual case. It illustrates just how insane New Jersey is and what every law-abiding gun owner could, in fact, face. Evan Nappen 01:32 Of course, I’m not using any names, but this is an actual situation that occurred. And some things, looking at the situation that the, and not just necessarily a mistake that the gun owner did, but something that hit me as extremely important for every New Jersey gun owner to make sure they do. There’s a very simple thing that is very important that could be critical between whether or not they hold you in jail or release you. We’re going to get to that from this story so you’ll learn this secret, so that you don’t end up in this GOFU situation. Spending days or weeks incarcerated for nothing, because that’s what the Gulag does, as you know. This is a case that wraps it all up into that. Evan Nappen 02:39 So, here’s this guy who comes into New Jersey, and he’s at a mall. Now, as you may know, the mall is not, in and of itself, a sensitive place, right? Those of us who have familiarized ourself, which hopefully all of you have, with these “sensitive places”. A mall is not, per se, a sensitive place. Now, there can be rules regarding malls where they say, hey, no guns in the mall. We don’t want guns, you know. And any Page – 2 – of 11 private property, whether open to the public or not, can have a prohibition privately saying we don’t want any guns here. In the same way they could say, we don’t want any dogs. We don’t want any bare feet. You know, things like that. The property owner has certain control. But if there is such a sign, if there is such a statement by a property owner, then if you come on to that property and they don’t want you on that property for a reason such as that. They can’t say, hey, we don’t allow minorities on our property. You know, they can’t. You can’t have racial discrimination in a place open to the public. But you can have other restrictions. Evan Nappen 04:07 Now, I happen to personally think that firearms should be viewed as a civil right and in the same category as discrimination, because it is a civil right. But that’s not currently how the law is. So, if a private entity prohibits gun, says no guns, then if you still go on that property and you’re specifically told to leave and don’t, then you’re what’s known as a defiant trespasser. So, what we’re talking about is trespassing, but trespassing is not a sensitive place violation. Sensitive place violations are specific gun law violations that create a certain place that becomes a prohibited area under the law to carry a gun, even if you have a permit to carry. So, this person is in the mall and apparently gets approached by mall security, who has allegedly dogs that can sniff gunpowder. Believe it or not, they’re out there. Apparently, he’s approached and they say, we think you have a gun. Please leave. And he does. No problem. He was asked to leave, and he leaves. Evan Nappen 05:30 After leaving, while in his car, driving, he gets stopped by police. More than even one because, oh, there’s a gun, right? Because, obviously, security called it in, I guess, at some point, and he was stopped. He is stopped for violating, in their minds, the sensitive place prohibition under Section 24 under Chapter 58 of the sensitive places. And what is that? What is that sensitive place that they believe he’s in violation of? Oh, New Jersey’s version of the vampire rule. The vampire rule is that you need permissio

  Episode 276-NJ’s New Felony Dingus Law Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 14 Gun Lawyer — Episode 276 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey felony law, accidental discharge, Second Amendment, gun rights, reckless conduct, felony dingus, legal consequences, gun ownership, national reciprocity, pro-gun advocacy, government involvement, legal defense, gun laws, gun ownership statistics, gun control. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:17 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:19 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:20 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. New Jersey now officially has the felony Dingus law. That’s right, folks. It has to do with the criminalization of accidents. That’s it. They’ve been criminalized in New Jersey. Now let me explain why it’s the Dingus law. The reason I call it the Dingus law is that a number of years ago I was in Missouri. It was at the James Farm, Jesse and Frank James Farm. It was a great museum there. It’s a pretty cool place to visit if you’re into western history. You know, Jesse James and such is way up there of one of the fun topics to learn about. As a matter of fact, their famous bank robbery is still the record haul for any bank robbery in the U.S., ever. It was done by James and his gang. In terms of the amount of money stolen, in terms of the value of that money today, versus then, it is the record amount ever stolen. Evan Nappen 01:41 But the thing that’s interesting to me about what happened when I was at that museum is I’m looking at all kinds of things about historical facts about Jesse James and his life and all. I’m reading some things, and it talked about “Dingus” at certain times. You know, talking about things that were going on between him and his men. And I’m like, Dingus, who’s Dingus? So, I asked one of the museum folks there, hey, who is this Dingus that they’re talking about? He goes, oh, that’s Jesse James. What do you mean Jesse James is Dingus? Who called him, you know, Dingus and lived, right? He’s like, no, no, no, no, no. His men did. His men did. What? Why? Well, you see, Jesse was apparently playing around with his gun, practicing spinning or screwing around with it, or who knows what, and he accidentally shot two of his fingers off. It was in front of his men. He shot his fingers off, two of them, and Jesse James would never use profanity. He may have been a stone cold killer, but he would not ever use profanity. So, when he shot his two fingers off, he said, Dingus! Now, I don’t know about you, but if I shot my fingers off, I’d say something a lot more than Dingus. But I guess his men fell off their horses Page – 2 – of 14 laughing, you know, and they nicknamed him Dingus. And I guess if you were one of his men, you could bust his balls and call him Dingus and get away with it. Evan Nappen 03:36 But we call accidental discharges in my office “Dingus” cases in honor of Jesse James, of course. So, any accidental discharge is a Dingus case. Now, I once had a guy that shot himself in the hand with a Glock. And so that, of course, was a Dingus case. This was a number of years ago, and they tried to take away his firearms and his ability to be licensed under that. It wasn’t criminalized, but they did try to disenfranchise him of his gun rights. We fought it hard, and we were able to win and save his gun rights and his gun. About a year later, he shot himself in the hand again with a Sig. So, do you know what he was? He was a Double Dingus. That’s right. Evan Nappen 04:40 Anyway, this new Dingus law, and look, accidents can happen. You can drive your car and have an accident. Accidents happen. But this Dingus law that New Jersey has passed is a felony Dingus law. It now turns accidents into a New Jersey felony. A felony level offense. It’s very important that you understand this, because now it is actually law in New Jersey, and you have to know your rights. You have to stand on your rights. Or you not only risk losing your Second Amendment rights, but you also risk becoming a felon, going to State Prison, and having your life essentially destroyed over this. Because becoming a convicted felon can dramatically affect your career, and your ability to earn a living. Your existence becomes one of a second class citizen, and not just in terms of gun rights. Evan Nappen 05:52 So, I want to do a deep dive here into the felony Dingus law that New Jersey has now made law. And I want to make it clear so that you, my dear listeners, know what to do to protect yourself and hear it straight from me as to what you must do and how you must act. Because it will be difficult for some of you to do what I’m saying. It strikes to a certain degree against what might be your first reaction, but you have to do th

  Episode 275-Pretti’s Law Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 275 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, Minnesota protest, Firearm Policy Coalition, natural rights, government officials, political opportunity, federal law, carry rights, red flag laws, gun rights, law enforcement, public carry, constitutional rights, gun policy, political reaction. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Speaker 1, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:18 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:20 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:21 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, we’ve been following the events in Minnesota, and I’m sure you have as well. And, you know, this is troubling. It’s created quite an interesting political situation, and it’s kind of strange to see sides shifting. Yet, it appears that this may, in fact, be a political opportunity to help the Second Amendment get strengthened. Let me tell you where I’m going with this. Take a look here at the Firearm Policy Coalition’s recent statement. (https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-statement-rights-are-not-privileges) I don’t know if you’re familiar with the FPC, but they do a lot of great work in litigating through the court system, Second Amendment challenges. As a national group, they do good work, and they put out a statement that I thought was very interesting. It’ll lay the groundwork as we get a little bit more into depth about where I see some potential here that should be taken, frankly, advantage of in this interesting moment in time. Evan Nappen 01:50 So, what the FPC wrote in their statement is this. “Recent events in Minnesota underscore a recurring and deeply troubling theme: Government officials and commentators treating natural rights as privileges.” Now that’s an important statement right there about treating rights as privileges. As they mentioned in the article, the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth, is merely codification of pre-existing rights. They don’t create the rights. The Supreme Court has long recognized that the right to keep and bear arms is not a right granted by the Constitution. The Constitution simply is a guarantee of those rights and puts limits on Government, not the people. That’s why, if someone ever asked you, what rights are you given by the Constitution? The answer is none! Because those rights pre-exist the Constitution. The Constitution is there as a guarantor, guaranteeing those rights against the Government. And it puts limits on the Government to ensure that our rights stay respected. It doesn’t grant us rights. Only God granted us our rights, or natural law has granted those rights. Fundamental, fundamental natural laws. That’s what we’re talking about when it comes to actual rights. Page – 2 – of 9 Evan Nappen 03:18 So, this gets distorted politically by politicians who apparently seem to forget that. And here we end up in Minnesota, where this individual, (Alex) Pretti, came to this protest with a gun. The FPC points out that the mere presence of a firearm does not erase a person’s rights. It doesn’t turn lawful conduct into wrongdoing. It does not make someone fair game to be arrested or killed for the Government’s convenience. The Government does not get to flip the legal or moral burden. The fact that one is armed is not a license for the Government to shoot you! Nor is a right to bear arms a license for any person to use unjust force. And that is very strong and very true. This is where this situation now where Pretti ended up getting shot and killed by ICE for essentially bringing his gun to the protest. There’s a lot of dispute now over whether he used it, drew it, or whether he’s being disarmed, whether there was, I mean, there. All that’s out there. Evan Nappen 04:43 But my point isn’t whether Pretti, as a matter of fact, I don’t even support Pretti’s political view here. I’m all for ICE. I’m not. I don’t want to see our country with illegal immigrants but that’s my view. That’s my opinion. Okay, that’s fine. And Pretti had his opinion. He has a First Amendment right, and he has a Second Amendment right. The problem is reaction to the exercise of his Second Amendment right. When you take a look at what happened here, it’s somewhat disturbing that those folks that are supposed to be understanding what the Second Amendment means take an anti-Second Amendment group’s view. So, Politico had an article. It’s “Gun Rights groups blast Trump over Minnesota response”. (https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/27/gun-rights-groups-blast-trump-over-minnesota-response-00748217) And in fact, they did. Evan Nappen 05:47 Let me show you what has happened, where the tables and the issue has turned here. It’

  Episode 274- State Police RPO Cover-Up Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Gun Lawyer Transcript – Episode 274 SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:17 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:19 and I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:21 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, our good friend, John Petrolino, who writes about many, many important topics, particularly as well concerning New Jersey, has an article that was in Bearing Arms. And I want to talk about what he’s raised here. The article’s title is “New Jersey State Police Tight Lipped Over Retired Police Permits”. (https://bearingarms.com/john-petrolino/2026/01/21/new-jersey-statepolice-tight-lipped-over-retired-police-permits-n1231288) So, what John has done is he’s used the New Jersey form of OPRA (Open Public Records Act), the Freedom of Information Act, asking the authorities in New Jersey for the number of permits issued to retired police officers. Evan Nappen 01:15 You may recall the then Attorney General Platkin did put up that dashboard and released the data of public statistics regarding carry permits, the number of permits issued. There’s been over 92,000 approved applications for carry permits in New Jersey, and of those approvals, 64,000 are non-expired permits. Now it’s interesting that the State puts out that data, but they don’t put out the data as to the RPO permits. The Retired Police Officer permits, and we want to find out how many folks carry that are not law enforcement, right? That are civilian. And let’s face it, Retired Police Officers are still civilians, even though they were formerly law enforcement. Originally carry was outside of being law enforcement and outside of New Jersey’s insane carry permit system back then, where you had to show “justifiable need”, which, as you may recall, meant showing of urgent necessity. This meant showing that a gun was necessary for you to defend yourself from death or serious bodily injury and that carrying a handgun was the only means that could do it. I mean, it was a standard that was so extreme that basically, if you’ve been shot and killed, you then qualified for a New Jersey carry permit. Evan Nappen 03:08 Now that went away thanks to the Bruen decision, and New Jersey jumped from less than 600 carry permits to now 64,000 valid permits and 92,000 valid, approved permits. But it does not include the RPOs. Now, RPOs had the ability to carry before Bruen, and during that time period when regular old civilians who weren’t retired law enforcement could not defend themselves with a firearm and carry in that manner, right? They were deemed to have to be victims instead of defenders. But now, for some reason, the State Police and such will not release the number of RPO permits. We’re not asking for names. John went forward here, and he didn’t ask for names. He didn’t ask for anything. He just wants to know how many? How many of the RPO permits are out there as well. This should be looked at in the aggregate with all the other carry permits that are out there, and yet that doesn’t happen. Page of 1 8 Evan Nappen 04:25 In December of 2025, John sent a request for the number of RPO permits, and it was denied. And the request was denied weirdly and strangely for reasons that just don’t make any sense. And I’m going to tell you. It makes you wonder, why is there a cover up? The reason they denied it, the reason the State Police have put in writing for the denial. Well, get a load of this. “Improper and Overbroad” was the main reason. Can you believe that the information is supposedly improper and overbroad? Why would wanting to know a statistical fact such as the number of RBO permits be considered overbroad? And why would it be considered in any way improper? It is strictly information. It is based on a record. It absolutely should be released. Evan Nappen 05:52 How come they are releasing the numbers for civilian carry permits, right? The 92,000. How come that’s not “improper and overbroad”? No, the Attorney General does it. Go ahead. Why? Tell me. Why do you think? Teddy Nappen 06:10 So, going back to because John also, if I recall, broke the story about denials where, what was it? Blacks were five times more likely to be denied to their carry. Evan Nappen 06:22 Yes, institutionalized racism. That exists in New Jersey. Teddy Nappen 06:31 So, add into the fact that you have the, well, here’s the trick. The Left have always been anti-police. That is a fact. They were the ones that wanted to defund the police. They were the ones for that. So, now we have the first factor of showing the absolute racism of the gun laws. But also the fact that they were supporting the only carry which, by the way, how much you want to bet they were all for the RPOs under all the Democrat G

  Episode 273-Warning: Critical Gun Law Alert Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 273 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey gun laws, accidental discharge, criminalization, reckless discharge, felony consequences, gun ownership rights, self-defense, insurance coverage, Second Amendment, gun safety, gun dealers, international disarmament, gun control, gun owner education, legal challenges. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:17 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:19 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:20 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, folks, the New Jersey legislature has done it again. They have passed some atrocious gun laws, and I need to make all of you aware of one, particularly, that is very much a threat. It is something that’s going to affect many, many gun owners, and it is not being talked about in the general media, of course, because of how they write these laws in such a sneaky, underhanded way. But this law is going to impact all of us, frankly. And the potential is there, under this law, to not only take away gun owners’ rights to have guns, but to turn us all into felons at any time, simply based on an accident. That’s right, an accident. Evan Nappen 01:31 Because what New Jersey legislature’s both houses have passed, and I expect, very shortly, the governor will sign, is Assembly Bill, 4976. (https://pub.njleg.gov/Bills/2024/A5000/4976_R2.PDF) And what this bill does is it criminalizes Accidental Discharges (ADs). Now, an accidental discharge is when your gun goes off, accidentally, either by what some folks call an uncommanded discharge or an accidental discharge. But it is something that can happen, and although we have to always be very careful, circumstances can be such that a mistake can be made. I mean, we’re all human, and mistakes can happen. And unfortunately, you know, I see it in the practice, and I get accidental discharge cases all the time where individuals make a mistake and a gun goes off unintended. It happens. Now sometimes it happens because of the actual mechanical flaws to a firearm and that can be because of a gun’s design. It can even be due to circumstances where a firearm can go off from the slightest touch. Evan Nappen 03:08 Now you may not be aware of this, but years and years ago, I know of a case where an individual had a shotgun that this fellow had kept loaded. One of those single shot, top-breaker type shotguns. You know, like the old kind of like the toppers, the H and R Toppers, and what have you, similar to that. It Page – 1 – of 11may even have been one. I don’t know. But it’s one of those old single shot shotguns. And for probably 50 years, that gun had remained loaded with a shell in it. At one point, there were folks that were causing all kinds of problems in this guy’s yard, and he wanted to scare them off. He didn’t want to shoot them, and he put the gun out of, pointed the gun out the window, and boom. It went off, and he never pulled the trigger. He absolutely never pulled the trigger. There was no hit to the primer of the shell when it went off. And what has happened was, in this particular design of the gun, the firing pin had been pushing against the primer because the hammer was down and it didn’t have a firing pin block. And for like 50 years, this gun sat there, sensitizing the primer so that the slightest touch, you know, just the right jolt, without having to actually pull the trigger, made it go off. So, a gun can actually even do that under those extraordinary circumstances. Evan Nappen 04:57 But normally, an accidental discharge or uncommanded discharge that we encounter is because somebody believed, honestly believed, their gun was unloaded. And it ends up, of course, that it wasn’t. Now this can happen because somebody thought they checked it and maybe even did check. But then, with a magazine in and the slide going forward, a round loads, but they didn’t realize that it loaded, because they checked that it was unloaded. And sure enough, there’s a round there. I mean, I’ve seen every combination of error that could happen and a discharge can occur. And, of course, we know the rules, always point in a safe direction, etc. Make sure your gun is unloaded. Double, triple check to make sure that the chamber is empty. That there’s no magazine, and there’s no live ammo. I mean, all those things that we do. But accidents can happen, just like in a motor vehicle. We drive as safe as we possibly can, but people still have accidents. And what New Jersey has done in this bill is essentially criminalize an accident so that individuals will be looking at what is, in all likelihood, felony level charges. And they structured this bill in just a sneaky, evil, devious way. It’s going to have great impact, and it’s

  Episode 272- Jersey Spreads the Oppression Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment rights, New Jersey gun laws, national firearm licensing, anti-gun oppression, domestic violence restraining order, federal firearms licensing act, gun control measures, gun rights suppression, gun violence prevention, gun rights advocacy, gun rights litigation, gun rights education, gun rights resources, gun rights history, gun rights updates. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:20 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, New Jersey is spreading the oppression. New Jersey is like a cancer when it comes to Second Amendment rights, and it has to metastasize. This is really one of the primary reasons that Gun Lawyer, our show here, has reach that is further than just New Jersey, even though we focus a lot on New Jersey. But New Jersey is where we see the experimenting done at the cost of our rights, where we see the oppression in full force and effect. And we see their newest machinations coming from the Left wing, anti-Second Amendment, anti-American, think tanks getting their origins in New Jersey. Then spreading and then spreading, with an attempt to spread it to all of America. Evan Nappen 01:26 So, of course, we have New Jersey senators, strictly New Jersey senators here, that are now pushing a national gun licensing scheme, which is national Second Amendment rights oppression, to force the entire country into the agenda of disarmament via New Jersey style. And it is why you have to, we have to, keep the fight up here in New Jersey, which is the front line of the battle. We need to get our politics here changed, because the cancer has to stop. Evan Nappen 02:13 And here’s what they’re proposing right now. Granted, it’s not likely to pass in the current climate right now with Republicans in control, barely, but in control of both houses, and with President Trump at the helm. But it is something that tells you where the Democrats will go should they ever regain power again, and this is showing you just how far they will go to oppress our Second Amendment rights. I mean, it’s apparently not bad enough that the Democrats are so-called Democrat socialists, you know, communist light. But even just in terms of the Constitution that they are supposedly sworn to uphold, it is demonstrated as to be a false oath by them over and over again. Page – 1 – of 13 Evan Nappen 03:14 So, here is the current push, and by the way, this is from an article from Bearing Arms, and it’s by Tommy Knighton. It says, “NJ’s Senators Push National Gun Licensing Bill”. (https://bearingarms.com/tomknighton/2026/01/04/njs-senators-push-national-gun-licensing-bill- n1231085) So, who are the culprits here? Who are those oppressors out of New Jersey? Well, of course, it’s Senator (Corey) Booker and Senator (Andy) Kim. They’ve introduced this legislation, and they’re calling it the Federal Firearm Licensing Act (FFLA). Now, don’t confuse the title. Teddy Nappen 03:43 Doesn’t Cory Booker ever stop talking. Evan Nappen 03:46 Yeah. Don’t confuse this Federal Firearms Licensing Act with the way we traditionally think of an FFL as being a dealer. No, no, no. What they’re doing here, and maybe it’s part of their attempt to fool the public, I don’t know. But it would mandate that every American obtain a Federal Firearms License before purchasing or receiving any firearm. So, if you want to purchase or receive a firearm in America, you’re going to have to get an FFL. Now, this obviously isn’t a dealer FFL. It’s just a private person wanting to exercise Second Amendment rights FFL. This is apparently one of the most comprehensive federal gun control measures, what I prefer to call Second Amendment oppression measures, requiring and establishing a nationwide licensing system. Putting numerous new requirements on every American. Evan Nappen 04:59 Under this proposed legislation, you would need to complete a mandatory firearms training safety that includes both written and hands-on instruction before qualifying for a license. And this is a license just to obtain a firearm. This isn’t to carry a firearm. The Attorney General will then conduct background checks on every applicant, and the FBI would perform regular compliance checks to monitor license holders. So, you’re going to be constantly monitored by the FBI, as well as having to go through this. Each license will expire after five years, requiring gun owners to renew their permission to purchase firearms. And, of course, if the license expires and you don’t renew it, you’re losing your guns and your gun rights. And this is what the oppressionists, what New Jersey’s senators,

  Episode 271- New Year – New Challenges Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 271 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, New Jersey, gun oppression, Bruen decision, carry permits, violent crime, John Petrolino, high capacity magazines, gun training, NRA classes, self-defense, gun laws, gun rights, gun ownership, legal battles, gun journalist. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2, Evan Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:16 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:18 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, I want to thank all of my listeners and supporters, because on The Gundies Award for Podcast of the Year, I’m proud to tell you that Gun Lawyer has made the top five. And so, as one of the top five nominees, we are now in the running to see whether or not we win the Podcast of the Year. But I’m very honored to have made the top five, and I appreciate all of you that took the time to vote for Gun Lawyer. It’s a great way of getting a statement out there about what we believe in and what we fight for here. You know, our show does have a lot to do with what’s going on with New Jersey, because New Jersey is, as you know, the worst state in the country when it comes to oppression of our Second Amendment rights. And by bringing more and more attention to it, we shine that disinfectant of truth out there. So, this is important, and we want to keep up the keep the pressure. Teddy Nappen 01:44 Do you know what we should do for when we for the awards, we don’t go to accept it. We instead send a couple people who are recently released from the Gun Owner Gulag to accept the award. Yeah, like Marlon Brando sent Evan Nappen 02:00 Yeah, right. We’ll send someone from the Gulag to accept the award. I spent three months just to get out, even though I was innocent of all charges. You know, it’s just insane what New Jersey is doing. We’ll be reporting on the new laws that the Governor has yet to sign, but it appears that he will sign further oppression of our Second Amendment rights in New Jersey. And what you have to be aware of so you can protect yourself, because it is really just the extreme government action focused on attacking the Constitution. I mean, that’s what New Jersey is doing. It’s a fact. They try to contrive every conceivable angle to further deteriorate a Constitutional right. Instead of doing everything they can to Page – 1 – of 10 try to protect it, they do everything they can to try to diminish it. That’s the evil of what the New Jersey government is all about, and that’s really what it is. Evan Nappen 03:18 It is anti-rights, anti-Constitution. They are oppressors, and good people suffer. Good, law-abiding citizens suffer. This isn’t an academic exercise. Real people go to jail. Real people have their lives destroyed. Real people have their careers destroyed, their freedom taken and their families destroyed, over this garbage that New Jersey does in turning law-abiding citizens into criminals. I see it every day in the practice of New Jersey gun law. And the purpose of gun law, Gun Lawyer, of this radio show, is to bring attention to this. To help you, the listener, protect yourself from the evil oppression that is New Jersey. And they will, without any care, destroy you if they can, to promote their agenda, their agenda of destroying guns and gun owners. And this is what I see. Okay? This isn’t just hyperbole. It isn’t some made up fantasy. It is literally what I see happening to individuals as I practice in the, in this very area of New Jersey gun law. And it shows you when you have states that are following this agenda, how they destroy good people. So, you’ve got to be careful, especially in New Jersey. But do not give up. Maintain the fight. Stay vigilant. It’s critical. In the big picture, we are winning. New Jersey is going to get its head handed to it. I’m confident in the court decisions that we’ll be seeing. We will succeed. But in the meantime, it’s a battle. I want to see the least amount of casualties on our side in this battle, but it’s a battle nonetheless. Evan Nappen 05:24 And on that point recently, there was an article by one of my favorite writers, Dean Weingarten, who posted this in AmmoLand. He makes a very interesting point about what happened to the homicide rate after the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision. (https://www.ammoland.com/2025/12/what-happened-to-the- homicide-rate-after-the-supreme-courts-bruen-decision/) So, you know, we have this great Second Amendment decision in Bruen that establishes our right to self-defense outside the home and that actually finally enables the carry permits to have to be issued by the anti-gun oppression states like New Jersey that were using the trick of “justifiable need” to stop l

  Episode 270- Securing Your 2026 Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 270 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Security evaluation, electronic security, physical security, camera surveillance, alarm systems, firearm safety, mental state, personal protection, dog security, property defense, legal implications, pet rights, self-defense, gun laws, New Jersey gun law. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:14 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:16 and I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:18 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, 2026 is just about upon us, and what’s really great to do at the beginning of the year is to take a look at your own security for yourself and your family as we start this new year. And as you know, it’s dangerous out there and you know, we’re gun owners, and we believe in defense and self-defense. There are things we need to do that include guns, but also don’t include guns when it comes to evaluating your own personal security, which is something that we all should be very concerned about. So, when you want to think about your security, particularly in your home and through your life, there are two ways to divide security. You have what is electronic security and then what we might call physical security. Evan Nappen 01:25 So, electronic security would include lighting, alarm systems, and cameras. That kind of security falls into, you know, surveillance and warnings and illumination and really is reliant upon electronic security. In terms of physical security, we have gun safes and other safes, dogs. Dogs are a form of physical security. Locks, good locks, good bars on windows where it may be needed. And of course, our firearms are the last resort of our physical security. And the idea is to have an excellent combination of both physical and electronic security. You want to cover all the bases to give you a full security umbrella. And, of course, combined into all this is your mental state, and for that, I would highly recommend Jeff Cooper’s “The Principles of Personal Protection”. You’ll gain insight into your daily life and what you need to do to have awareness and those principles. Evan Nappen 02:58 But these areas of electronic and physical security are very critical, especially today. Also, you know, electronic security, a lot of it, combines computers and our cell phones, too, as well. And so, with what’s available today, it’s kind of amazing, because it is very reasonable to have camera surveillance. I Page – 1 – of 10mean, you know, a number of decades ago, if you wanted to have cameras on your property, protecting your home, etc, it was tens of thousands of dollars. It was basically not within reach of average people to have that kind of surveillance. But now, with the advent of the internet and with these smaller, amazingly effective cameras, you know, particularly Ring and other companies, you can absolutely have great, actually, camera surveillance better than decades ago with the equipment that existed then, and for just a fraction, a fraction of the price. I mean, every person should have at least a Ring doorbell or some equivalent to that, so that you know who’s coming to your door. It films motion and those individuals that may approach, and not just individuals, but also animals, cars, and other things. This is a really great advance in modern-day technology, not just in what it does, but in the amazing, reasonable cost that you can get it done and accomplished for. Evan Nappen 04:58 Of course, there are other cameras that can work into your floodlights. Floodlights that also record and are motion driven and part of the system, the alarm system itself, which is great. Very easy to self install and put in a Ring alarm system. And they work very well. And you know, not to have an alarm system in your house with the availability of just a Ring alarm system or something else for electronic, you know, other brands too, that are out there, Simply Safe and others, is really a serious mistake, because you can get yourself and your family electronic protection at a very reasonable cost today. I mean, look, decades ago, you had to hire a professional alarm company. They had to hard wire, and they had to do all the switches, all that. What they have available today is amazing and very effective. It can give you that added peace of mind, and you can combine it with the cameras, both inside cameras outside cameras and other motion detectors. Evan Nappen 06:07 All kinds of things are out there that you can do yourself pretty darn easily and give yourself the protection. You want to combine that protection with good lighting. Lighting is also very important. Lighting helps discourage theft and other bad people. It illuminates them, and also the camera records them. It can also give you advance warning of individuals that come into your perimeter by both

  Episode 269- The Nightmare Before Christmas Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 269 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, New Jersey Democrats, gun laws, machine gun conversion devices, digital instructions, firearm components, gun owner gulag, cash bail, pre-trial detention, carry killer bill, sensitive places, gun rights, constitutional rights, gun lawyer. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, the New Jersey Democrats are going to give gun owners a Nightmare Before Christmas. What they are doing is pushing a package of Second Amendment oppression upon us, and they decided that the perfect time to do it is right before Christmas. On Monday, December 22, the Senate will be having a voting session. They’re going to be looking at bills that we’re going to talk about right now, and you need to take action. You know, you need to let the legislators know that you oppose this. Hopefully you belong to the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. If not, you need to join. That’s anjrpc.org. They send out the news releases where you can immediately take action and let the legislature know your feelings on their oppression of our Second Amendment rights as they continue to attack them. Evan Nappen 01:33 Now, we have some very problematic laws that they’re going to be trying to jam through, and I want to make sure that you’re aware of what they are and what they mean. So, we have what is A-4974, and its companion in the Senate is S-3893. (https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2024/S3893) This bill establishes criminal penalties for sale and possession of machine gun conversion devices. Now, of course, these things are already banned. They’re already banned under federal law and state law, but New Jersey just can’t ban something enough, right? So, they’re just duplicating here even more bans upon bans. This is supposedly addressing so-called Glock triggers, but New Jersey usually finds a way to expand it to all kinds of other nonsense. We’ve seen these things lead off into false charges over devices that are not designed to convert to machine guns, but instead designed to simply improve accuracy and a trigger or those kind of things. So, these things are just problematic, and they’re just putting bans on top of bans. And they just want to make sure their name is on a piece of law where they’re “doing something about it”. You know, to sell red meat to their base. So, we have that to deal with. Page – 1 – of 10Evan Nappen 03:16 Additionally, we have A-4975 and the Senate companion bill is S-3894. (https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2024/A3894) This bill establishes a crime of possessing digital instructions to illegally manufacture firearms and firearm components. Now, keep in mind, back in 2018 Murphy signed a law banning the use and sale these digital files already, but this bill is even worse. The mere possession of the files will result in incredibly harsh penalties, even if you unknowingly possess them on a long forgotten computer, etc. So, New Jersey is turning firearm information, pure firearm digital information, into the equivalent of possessing child pornography. Simple possession of the digital file itself. Evan Nappen 04:20 It doesn’t matter that you never had any intention to actually build a firearm, but this gun information is itself being turned into contraband. Now, of course, this brings in First Amendment issues as well as Second Amendment issues, and I’m sure this will as well be subject to challenge. But nonetheless, it puts gun owners at risk that utilize internet and such for downloads of different things. Strictly for informational purposes. Even though you had no intent to 3D print a gun or not, or to use it with a CNC machine to make guns or even gun parts. So, this bill is another oppression of Second Amendment rights, and this time an oppression of First Amendment rights. But since when do Democrats care about rights? So, you need to oppose this as well. Evan Nappen 05:25 There is another bill, Assembly 4978, and the Senate companion is 3897. (https://pub.njleg.gov/Bills/2024/S4000/3897_I1.HTM) Now, this bill requires the Attorney General to report data regarding shootings that did not result in bodily injury. This type of data accumulation is used so then they can twist it into political fodder to further pass other Second Amendment oppression laws. This is their game. So, this is a step in, you know, focusing on the potential discharge law, making accidents into crimes, and using it to become automatic licensing disqualifiers, what become essentially per se felonies. This is how their evil works. This is what they do. This is their machinations, and this is the beginnings of

  Episode 268-Tresspassing on Our 2A Rights Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 268 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey gun rights, Assembly 6211, criminal trespass, sensitive places, carry killer bill, Supreme Court, trespass law, private property, research facilities, utility company property, school property, fourth degree crime, defiant trespasser, gun attorney, national reciprocity. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:16 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:18 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:20 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, the New Jersey gun rights oppressors are at it again. They have a bill that is apparently moving forward. It is Assembly No. 6211, and apparently they’re trying to jam it through before the end of the year here. (https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2024/A6211/bill- text?f=A6500&n=6211_I1) You know, it’s on the fast track, apparently. We’ll see. This bill is to make and criminalize the going into a place that you would otherwise be legally allowed to carry, but for giving a, putting up a sign that says “no carry”. Now, the Attorney General, as you may be aware, in New Jersey, is giving away these free signs. You know, prohibiting guns on premises, but the law regarding that falls into trespass. It’s not actually part of New Jersey’s “sensitive places” in the Carry Killer bill. Evan Nappen 01:34 Because in the Carry Killer bill, there was an extreme property ban that basically said about private property, that any private property you had to have a sign that gave you permission to have your gun. In other words, there needed to be a sign out on any private property you were going to go into with your gun. And that would include businesses and anywhere else that said, essentially, hey, we love guns. Bring in your gun, you know, in so many words. Now that was shot down by the court in the federal litigation, you know, which was brought to you by the State Association, the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. They challenged it in federal court in front of Judge (Renee Marie) Bump. And what happened was the judge basically ruled, and this is a current law in New Jersey, that when it comes to private property, if it’s open to the public, it’s not a prohibited area. You don’t have to get prior permission if it’s open to the public, unless it’s somehow otherwise a prohibited place. So, you know, if you want to walk into 7-11 with your gun, it’s open to the public, and they don’t need to have a sign that says guns are permitted. You’re good to go. And that’s how it currently is. Page – 1 – of 11 Evan Nappen 03:02 But as you may be aware, Hawaii passed a similar law, and it got upheld there. It didn’t get knocked out the way we did in New Jersey. They said, oh no, you need their prior permission. This law is now upheld there, and the Supreme Court of the United States has taken up that case. So, we’re going to get a SCOTUS ruling on the legality of that type of anti-gun and oppression-type law that they love to pass. We’re going to probably get some great, I’m hopeful, to get some great law out of the Supreme Court that we can use to fight other sensitive places. But what New Jersey is now doing, and this is something they try to do, they’ve done it in other areas, is they try to figure out sneaky end runs. Sneaky ways to oppress our rights. Sneaky ways to get around laws that protect our rights. Evan Nappen 04:11 So, you know, they’ve done it and attempted to do it with PLCAA, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, where they’re not, under federal law, dealers and manufacturers and stuff are supposed to be protected. But New Jersey created this whole consumer protection angle that they’re exploiting to try to get around that so they can try to litigate, you know, gun shops and manufacturers out of existence, using and abusing consumer protection laws. Well, now what they’re going to do here with this bill is abuse the trespass laws in such a manner. Because it’s not the classic “sensitive place” that was in Carry Killer bill, but instead, they’re amending the trespass law in New Jersey to pull this off. Evan Nappen 04:59 Here’s what they’re doing. It falls under N.J.S. 2C:18-3, which is New Jersey’s trespass law. And this is to create criminal trespassing while carrying a firearm. You see how they put criminal trespassing while carrying a firearm. But really what it’s doing is criminalizing carrying a firearm into private property that says no guns, which is contrary to essentially the sensitive place victory that we had. It probably is going to be further decimated by the Supreme Court in its discussion, but nonetheless, New Jersey now has the following offense.

  Episode 267-Vote for Gun Lawyer Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 267 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Gun Lawyer, podcast of the year, Gundies awards, Second Amendment, New Jersey gun laws, assault firearms, registration, inheritance, gun rights, Supreme Court, firearms instructor, tactical rabbi, gun rights oppression, voting prizes, gun lawyer nomination. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:16 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, folks, I’m proud to say that Gun Lawyer has been nominated for Podcast of the Year by The Gundies. And The Gundies, it’s a really cool awards program in which they look to honor various voices and those who are influencers and writers regarding our precious Second Amendment rights. This is an honor, and I’m very proud to be nominated. And what I’m doing now is I am shamelessly asking for your vote, because with The Gundies, it’s you who vote. If you go to thegundies.com, www.TheGundies.com, thegundies.com, you’ll see there are 19 different categories for different things — influencer, writer, all kinds of stuff. And on there is Podcast of the Year. Please go there and vote for Gun Lawyer for Podcast of the Year. Evan Nappen 01:42 And by doing that, not only will you help promote the show, but because we focus on these horrible problems, particularly with a centered focus on New Jersey, because New Jersey is just where the brunt of the Second Amendment oppression takes place. This will help bring greater awareness nationally to our cause, to our fight against gun rights oppression. So, we can win Podcast of the Year nationally and more people will pay attention to New Jersey and what Gun Lawyer has to say. And if you vote, you can actually win prizes. They give prizes to folks, you know, randomly, who vote. Voting closes December 15. Okay? You can vote one vote per category every day. So, vote for Gun Lawyer every day. Okay? You can do it once a day. Evan Nappen 02:47 If you vote in all 19 categories, if you pick in all 19 categories, and it’s all free, by the way, and if you watch a video at the bottom of the page, you earn an extra vote for every category that day. There are prizes. Every time you vote, you’re automatically entered to win. And the grand prize is an all expense paid trip to The Gundy Awards, which takes place in Las Vegas. And in each category, there are Page – 1 – of 11 sponsors that have prizes. So, this is exciting and fun, and, you know, it would mean something to me and Teddy, if you would be so kind as to jump on thegundies.com and vote for Gun Lawyer. Evan Nappen 03:31 I would also highly recommend our good friend, John Petrolino, for top 2A writer. You know, John is just great, and man, does he cover New Jersey and so many other things as well. He’s such an in-depth great reporter, and he’s brought so many of these great issues to the forefront. You know, we’ve talked about a lot of the great work that John has done. So, give John a vote in the top 2A writer category. And, of course, our good friends at WeShoot, they were also put out there for Firearms Instructor of the Year. And I would ask you to consider the Tactical Rabbi, that’s right, Tactical Rabbi for Firearms Instructor of the Year, and Bul Armory for the Most Innovative Brand of the Year. So, there’s four of the categories with some suggestions. And so, if you’re inclined to do so, please jump on this. We have till December 15, and hopefully this will be successful. It will be a lot of fun for you, and maybe you’ll even win some prizes by doing it. Teddy Nappen 04:49 I will also say to everyone voting for us, for Gun Lawyer, it is critical, because we need to give national awareness. I don’t think people outside of New Jersey realize the damage that the Gun Owner Gulag has created, and New Jersey is the petri dish. This is where they test all their crazy nonsense. Evan Nappen 05:13 New Jersey is a gun owners hell. Teddy Nappen 05:14 Correct. Evan Nappen 05:15 New Jersey is a gun owners hell. I wish The Gundy’s had an award for, you know, worst state. You know, greatest gun owner hell. New Jersey would win that every year. Teddy Nappen 05:26 Anti-gunner of the year. Anti-gunner. Evan Nappen 05:28 No. Gun rights oppressionists award. The Top Gun Rights oppressionist state. It is crazy, but this is actually a positive award. So, they look to get the voices and the folks out there that are all going to bat for our rights. And everybody who’s nominated, I want to congratulate all the nominees across the board. They’re all out there, spreading the word, fighting the lame-stream media, and trying to get past the agenda that the anti-gunners try to control and their lies that they put out to get us disenfranchised of our ri

  Episode 266-NJ Target-rich for DOJ Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 266 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, gun rights, Justice Department, civil rights, New Jersey, institutionalized racism, carry permits, mental health disqualifiers, unlawful possession, extreme risk protection orders, national reciprocity, gun laws, Second Amendment oppression, gun rights office, gun lawyer. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:16 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:18 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:20 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, here’s an exciting bit of news, and that is that the, and this is, by the way, from Reuters, the “US Justice Department plans gun rights office within Civil Rights unit”. (https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-justice-department-plans-gun-rights-office-within-civil- rights-unit-2025-11-25/) This is a long time in coming, my friends. According to the article, it says the Justice Department plans to expand gun rights protections with a new office in its civil rights division dedicated to enforcing the U.S. constitutional right to bear arms. The office is called the Second Amendment Rights Section, and expects to open on December 4, and it will be dedicated to investigating local laws or policies limiting gun rights. Oh, my God, New Jersey is a target-rich environment. I think this section could dedicate itself full time just to bringing civil rights charges against New Jersey. The article further states here that the section intends to execute the broad policy directions from a February executive order issued by President Trump directing Bondi to comb the entire U.S. government to assess any ongoing infringements of gun rights. So now they’re going to be looking even closer at localities. Evan Nappen 02:11 Now, apparently, very interestingly, earlier this year, by the way, there was a civil rights investigation launched by the DOJ against the LA Sheriff’s Department who were slow walking approvals for concealed carry permits, and gun rights groups launched a lawsuit over that department’s process fees and wait times. Well, good grief. If you want to see slow walking, just look at New Jersey. Look how long they get to take on issuing licenses for us to exercise our Constitutional rights. Now I’ve just come up with, right away, six key areas I’d love for the civil rights section to look at, and if they are listening, I’d be happy to speak for free, to advise in any capacity along these lines of my knowledge of New Page – 1 – of 11 Jersey gun law and what New Jerseyans have been suffering for years at the hands of the Second Amendment oppressionists. Evan Nappen 03:32 Let’s take a look at just a short list of maybe a half dozen issues that are out there in New Jersey that need to be investigated for civil rights violations. Number one, we have documented institutionalized racism. So, this blends the traditional civil rights investigations into racism with the new sections dedication to the Second Amendment. The actual data of the institutionalized racism is out there and provided by none other than the New Jersey Attorney General. In terms of carry licensing, in terms of gun licensing, the denial rate for blacks, utilizing what I call the all inclusive miscellaneous weasel clause, which is officially known as “public health, safety, and welfare”. This is the vague disqualifier found under our gun licensing law under N.J.S. 2C:58-3c., which is the standard applied to every gun license in New Jersey, whether it’s a Firearms ID Card, Pistol Purchase Permit or Permit to Carry a Handgun. And what is discovered here is that blacks are denied more than two and a half times to whites under that provision, folks. Evan Nappen 05:17 We’re not even talking any other disqualifiers where there are higher ratios of, you know, per se disqualifiers like felony convictions and all that. We’re not even including that institutionalized racism, which gets even to another level. We’re just talking about abuse of the arbitrary, subjective standard by issuing authorities in New Jersey to have data, demonstrable data, of racism. Here’s something that they can jump on to go after — public health, safety, and welfare. That arbitrary and subjective requirement needs to go. It is the key area of abuse. And yes, it’s applied disproportionately to minorities, but it also is applied arbitrarily to thousands of New Jersey gun owners who wish to lawfully exercise their Second Amendment rights. So, that is an excellent area for this civil rights division to examine. Evan Nappen 06:36 Additionally, New Jersey has disqualifiers that go beyond and questions that go beyond anything else out there, particularly under federal law. New Jersey asks, have you ever been treated or observed for any physical or mental

  Episode 265-Gun Control… Now With Wi-Fi Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 265 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Glock switches, Second Amendment, machine gun, V series, full auto, semi auto, NFA, AI technology, Wi Fi surveillance, gun control, carry permits, New Jersey, gun law, self defense, legalization. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:16 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:18 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:20 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, you may have been seeing in the news all the hyper activity about Glock switches. And, you know, for those of you who aren’t familiar with a Glock switch, it’s a device that can be easily 3D printed that can be put on the back of a Glock slide. This allows you, by flicking a switch, to make the semi-automatic Glock pistol into a fully-automatic Glock pistol. Now, just the switch itself, if you possess just the switch, is considered a machine gun, and you can face 10 years in federal prison and all of that fun. And not to mention the state law charges as well. But you see, the Second Amendment oppression gang has taken this issue of Glock switches, you know, things produced by essentially criminals who are printing these up, procuring them, and the actual criminals getting caught with Glocks having these Glock switches, and they’ve decided, hey, we can blame Glock for illegal conversions of their gun. Evan Nappen 01:54 So, this is their new gambit to go after, essentially, the modern polymer handguns of multiple types, even by going at their ability to be converted by use of a totally prohibited and illegal device that is used by criminals and created by criminals and criminally possessed and criminally sold. But somehow that is Glocks fault, you see. So, this is the twisted world that we live in. And Glock recently, as some of you may know, discontinued their models to come out with the new V Series. And the new V Series eliminates the slide the way it was constructed, so that the Glock switch can function in the back of that slide. Okay? They changed their design, in effect, to either try to subvert the litigation from the Second Amendment oppression folks, or to try to address this issue in a mechanical way. Whatever some people think they’re, they’re rolling over, but it’s probably more along the line of a corporate decision making based on what they’re facing. Whatever the basis or reason is, I don’t know. But the bottom line is, they’ve changed their models. They have the V system coming out, which cannot use these traditional Glock switches, and lo and behold, the V’s have just hit the market. They’re out there. And guess what is now out there for the V Series? That’s right, a new Glock switch. A new Glock switch that Page – 1 – of 12makes the V Series supposedly to rock and roll. So, you know, technology constantly gets defeated if you have criminals wanting to do so. And this is just going to be an endless game of what? Re- modification to a new type of switch to another new type? I mean, it just gets to the point of silliness. Teddy Nappen 04:14 It’s very funny, too, because the meme going around is life finds a way. Evan Nappen 04:21 Yeah, life finds a way. Teddy Nappen 04:23 Life finds a way. Evan Nappen 04:24 Well, here’s, but I have the solution to the entire Glock switch issue, to the whole issue of, you know, modifying firearms into full auto and all of that. It’s real simple. We need to just legalize full auto. I mean, it’s really simple. Then it wouldn’t be an issue. Then if you want to have a Glock that has a Glock switch, if you want to have a Glock 18 that’s factory switchable, fine. If you want to have one. You see, here’s the problem. You see, it has been constructed as an argument by the oppressionists going all the way back to the 1934 Machine Gun Act, the NFA, somehow distinguishing semi- automatic from fully-automatic. And we even see the pro 2A folks, you know, try to make that distinction. Say, look, you know, my semi-auto isn’t a machine gun. It’s semi-automatic. And the antis say, well, you know, it’s easily converted or whatever. Or semis can be just as bad. So, we need to ban semi-automatics. Evan Nappen 05:39 And then you fall into that trap. It’s a trap because, folks, let’s be honest. What’s the difference between fully-automatic and semi-automatic? It’s real simple. With semi-automatic, you pull the trigger for each shot. With fully-automatic, you hold the trigger and the shots all fire. Okay, big effing deal. You’re still shooting the same bullets. You’re still firing the same gun, and you’re still blasting them out. The only difference is you don’t have to pull the trigger for each shot. Oh, my God. Okay? It’s really a phony baloney difference. We

  Episode 264-Just How F’d up is New Jersey Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 264 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey gun laws, Second Amendment, gun ownership, permit system, disqualifiers, red flag laws, extreme risk protection order, duty to warn, sensitive places, gun seizure, gun rights, gun safety, gun legislation, gun advocacy, gun rights groups. SPEAKERS Speaker 1, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, not too long ago, I was on a trip and met some folks, not from New Jersey. They were from part of Free America, so to speak. I might call them Bennies. Well, I’m talking Free America, not even Bennies, but you know, places where they have Constitutional carry and where the Second Amendment is not focused for oppression, but, in fact, focused on trying to maximize and protect Second Amendment rights. And one of the things that was brought up to me by the other folks is, you know, they’ve heard New Jersey is bad on guns, right? The reputation of New Jersey has spread throughout America and actually beyond America, for that matter. And they wanted to know, in so many words, just how effed up is New Jersey. And I decided, you know, not only did I explain to them just how effed up New Jersey is, but I realized that this is something that really needs to be stated and talked about. Evan Nappen 01:48 I wanted to spend this part of the show on that very topic. Just how effed up New Jersey is. I mean, I know we live and deal with the BS of New Jersey and their Second Amendment oppression. And we constantly are talking about the issues that occur. But you know, for those that might not fully understand it or even see the big picture of just how effed up New Jersey is, I want to paint that. I want to lay that out here, and that’s what I’m going to do in the same way as these folks asked me that question. I wanted to fully explain it to them, because they really wanted to know in a more detailed understanding from somebody who has spent their adult life battling New Jersey’s Second Amendment oppression and dealing with the realities of a state that hates guns and hates gun owners. So, that’s the basic starting point. Page – 1 – of 13 Evan Nappen 02:55 But anyway, let’s talk about our issue, though, about guns. So, they hate guns, and they hate gun owners. They’ve done everything in their power to try to continue that hate and make it have force and effect on us. So, how do they do that? Well, first, they establish an attitude and an agenda. So, the attitude and the agenda is to disenfranchise as many people as they can from their gun rights. Set up a system to do that. Steal as many guns from people, as you can, based on any mechanism they can invent to take them. Go after the industry and the folks that are lawful dealers and suppliers. Make and turn gun owners in a projection of being crazy, of being killers, of being individuals that are a detriment and a danger to everyone and society. And so, they put that as their base, and they promote it in every possible way they can. Evan Nappen 02:55 You have to first understand that before you even talk about the specific areas of New Jersey and just how bad they are. You have to understand that there’s a baseline, and the baseline is New Jersey hates guns and New Jersey hates gun owners. And you have to accept that. Now, you may not believe it. You may try to say, no, no. They’re misguided, or they’re well intentioned and all. But, you know, I’ve come to really understand, folks, that that’s not the case. It is hatred based. It is based in hate. And much of the Left’s policies are based in hate. I mean, you see it. They’re hate driven people. I mean, they are. They’re hate driven and we, as conservatives and Republicans, actually try to be love driven, honestly. We try to love freedom and love our fellow humans. Try to love, you know, the unborn, try to love. We try to put out love, and the other side puts out hate primarily. And yet, they try to paint us as the haters, but that’s because they’re experts in projection. Evan Nappen 03:13 So, let’s start by taking a look at the gun laws themselves. The first thing they want to do is create a system where you have the most onerous requirements to even become a gun owner that they can possibly get away with. So, in order to do that, well, we’ll start with having permit and licensing systems. So, you know, we can always, oh, look, having a gun license is reasonable. Having a permit is reasonable. We just want to make sure people that have firearms are safe. And, you know, they sell the standard reasonableness to sell their extremism. Okay, so they do that. New Jersey has a permit system that is outrageous

  Episode 263-The Recipe for Freedom Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 263 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, First Amendment, gun rights, UK gun laws, gunpowder recipe, terrorism, extended license, Serious Crime Prevention order, New Jersey gun laws, Black Books, improvised munitions, school shootings, armed teachers, gun control, gun owner rights. SPEAKERS Speaker 1, Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:14 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:16 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:17 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Folks, we need to get back to basics. When I talk about basics, I’m talking about our basic Constitutional rights. It’s really always important to step back and understand that the entire Bill of Rights is what protects us as gun owners. We love and cherish the Second Amendment, but all the Amendments go to work protecting us, and ultimately our gun rights as well. And directly tied in is, of course, our First Amendment rights. Freedom of speech. The ability to communicate, as we do on the show. Fourth Amendment, protecting our property, search and seizure from the Government. Fifth Amendment against self-crimination. Sixth Amendment, for example, right to an attorney. The very thing that Gun Lawyer is about. These are all critical and important. Evan Nappen 01:12 And every time I look and I see other countries that aren’t blessed with a Bill of Rights to the Constitution and you see the abuse that takes place, you just have to point it out. Because we are blessed to live in the United States and to have these rights. And to not only have these rights, but to utilize these rights. So, I just caught a story here that I want to share with you. This is from Bearing Arms, and it is about, the title is “UK Man Arrested for Possessing Gun Powder Recipe”. It’s by Tom Knighton. (https://bearingarms.com/tomknighton/2025/11/04/uk-man-arrested-for-possessing- gunpowder-recipe-n1230487) And you know, this article is based off an article that appeared in the UK Defense Journal by Craig Langford, and it was dated November 2. (https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/leeds-man-jailed-for-possessing-gunpowder-recipe/) Evan Nappen 02:08 Get a load of this, folks. The UK has gone so far out of control when it comes to no even illusion of having the rights that you and I take for granted every day. Here is just a great example of it, and right Page – 1 – of 10from this article. It says a 49 year old man from Leeds has been sentenced to three years and nine months in prison for possessing a handwritten recipe for gun powder. That’s right. Teddy Nappen 02:48 Was his name Guy Fawkes? Evan Nappen 02:51 That’s a good one, Teddy. But it was just a recipe for gun powder, and he was sentenced here, because he’s going to serve an additional four years on extended license. I guess it’s like a probation as well after or parole. I’m not a UK attorney. But then he will be subject to Serious Crime Prevention Order for five years. So, he has this other order hanging over his head as well, along with terrorism notification requirements for 10 years. Because he admitted, this guy, (Paul) Gilleard, admitted to possessing information likely to be useful, useful, to someone committing or preparing an act of terrorism Under Section 58 of the Terrorism Act. The document was discovered at his home during an intelligence-led search by West Yorkshire Police on May 28. Detective Chief Superintendent James Dunkerley, head of Counter Terrorism, in a statement, said officers were concerned to discover a handwritten recipe for black powder during a search of Gilleard’s home in May. A recipe, later verified by experts as potentially viable. Can you believe this, folks? And then the chief added, possessing information about the manufacture of explosives will always raise serious questions. And Gilleard has chosen not to explain or defend the presence of the recipe in his home. Instead, he pleaded guilty to possessing information useful to a person preparing for an act of terrorism. Can you believe this? Evan Nappen 04:49 I mean, look at the lack of rights in the UK. First of all, lack of rights concerning possession of information, folks. We have a First Amendment right. If you want to possess the recipe, the information on how to make gunpowder, you may do so in the U.S. You can go online right now, go to wiki How. It explains in detail how to make gunpowder. You can watch the damn Star Trek episode with Kirk, where he’s fighting that monster and actually makes gunpowder in the episode, remember that one? I mean, come on. The recipe for gunpowder is criminalized by having just the knowledge? It didn’t say he did anything. It didn’t say he was charged with using it or even attempting to use it. Just having the information, folks. Criminalizing information. Evan Nappen 05:51 You m

  Episode 262-The Ballot is Stronger than the Bullet Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 262 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey governor’s race, Second Amendment, gun rights, voting importance, anti-gun organizations, NRA rating, gun laws, self-defense, AI security issues, Glock discontinuation, firearm safety, gun ownership, election integrity, gun rights advocacy, firearm legislation. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:16 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:18 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:20 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, I’m happy to be back. Teddy Nappen 00:26 You’re alive. Evan Nappen 00:27 I’m alive. I had a nice getaway to Italy and other countries in the Mediterranean where I was able to walk where the ancients walked and enjoy that, that area. Man, I’ll tell you one thing they got right there is espresso. Oh, boy! Do they have espresso down right. I love that. But anyway, I also came back with a little cold, as you can tell. So, I’m gonna be talking a little bit funny today. Teddy Nappen 01:05 Apparelty, you smoked too many Cuban cigars. Evan Nappen 01:12 Well, gotta do what you gotta do. Luckily, it didn’t happen till I got back. So, yeah, we did go up to Mount Aetna there, and both the mountain and I were smoking. That was pretty good. You know, there’s a very interesting and mind expanding things that I’ll be talking about on the show, particularly regarding weapons and things happening from the ancients that apply to today. And I’m sure we’ll get into some of those things in later shows. But today, it’s very important, because the ballot is stronger than the bullet. And do you know who said that? I’ll tell you who said that. Abraham Lincoln said the ballot is stronger than the bullet, and he’s right, it is. We are now dealing with that very scenario in New Jersey, because we have this critical Governor’s race taking place between (Jack) Ciattarelli (R) and Page – 1 – of 10(Mikie) Sherril (D). And it couldn’t be any starker in the differences when it comes to the Second Amendment. Evan Nappen 01:12 Yeah, that didn’t help. That didn’t help. But hey. Teddy Nappen 01:14 Too many Cuban cigars. Evan Nappen 02:36 The Democrat, Sherrill, not surprisingly, is, of course, a Second Amendment oppressionist. You know, looking to oppress our rights to continue in the Murphy tradition of Second Amendment oppression. And on the other side, we have Ciattarelli, who is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. We can see a night and day difference. So, in case you didn’t know, it is critical to get out and vote. Please make sure that you vote. I know you hear it all the time and maybe get sick of hearing it. But I cannot emphasize how important this opportunity is. We now have a chance to turn New Jersey around. We’ve been suffering oppression under Murphy for years and now is an opportunity to turn that around. And let me tell you, we have a great shot at doing it. Evan Nappen 03:46 First of all, you need to know that Sherril, the Democrat, has been endorsed by every major anti-gun, you know, gun rights oppression organization, including Every Town for Gun Safety. Yeah, right. Moms Demand Action, Giffords pack, and the Brady pack, just to name some of the folks that are backing her candidacy. And that should tell you just about everything you need to know. She’s come out and made statements about folks carrying firearms. Finding it unconscionable in terms of untrained and unchecked individuals carrying. Well, that is hardly what New Jersey is. As a matter of fact, it’s the opposite. They are thoroughly and completely vetted and trained. In which, in order to even get a permit to carry, you have to pass CCARE and prove your proficiency and training along with knowledge of use of force. All of the above. So, she has no clue other than following the oppressionists’ agenda, and she has, not surprisingly, earned an “F” rating from the NRA Political Victory Fund. And NRA has declared her a gun ban extremist. Evan Nappen 05:33 And on the other side of the coin, we have Jack (Ciattarelli), generally, who is the opposite. And remember, it’s not just his position as Governor, but he also then can have his Attorney General. And we can get rid of Platkin and his crew of gun rights oppressionists that focus on litigating firearms out of existence and pursuing every cockamamie scheme they can come up with to try to limit our Constitutional rights. This is critical. You know, about four years ago or so, when Ciattarelli ran, he only lost by about 84,000 votes, and he is coming on strong now. He has tremendous momentum, and I believe that the gun rights issue will be one of the major things that can help put him over the top. If gun owners would not be apathetic and act

  Episode 261-Bang or Bong or Maybe Both? Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 261 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Supreme Court, marijuana, gun laws, Second Amendment, New Jersey, carry permit, sensitive places, federal court, gun violence, national reciprocity, red flag laws, mental health, gun rights, ammunition, online sales. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Teddy Nappen 00:15 I’m Teddy Nappen, and welcome to Gun Lawyer. Now, I promised everyone my father would be back, and sure enough, he was back. And because he was on vacation, obviously, he got sick, and of course, he lost his voice. So, unless we wanted him on here, and you know, coughing up a lung and him, you know, having this turned into an ASMR of him whispering Gun Law, let’s let him recover. Don’t worry. He’ll more than likely be back next week. Till then, let’s let him rest. But for now, we have some news to discuss. Teddy Nappen 00:59 So, the Supreme Court, this comes from the AP News, the Supreme Court is considering whether people who regularly smoke pot can legally own guns. This comes from an article written by Lindsay Whitehurst. (https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-marijuana-guns- e86c342bf248c7822722ad027980b72b) The Supreme Court said Monday that it will consider whether people who regularly smoke marijuana can legally own guns. Latest firearm case to come since, well, the Bruen decision. So, I want to highlight the impact, again, the hammer of Bruen, thanks to St. Justice Thomas, where we are slowly smashing and working our way through the various gun laws. And just to highlight the fact that, look, you can say what you will about marijuana, okay? It’s not the cure all, but it does have its benefits. And it’s just so prevalent, but you’ve got to focus on the fact this is about freedom and not allowing the federal Government to take away people’s rights. Because it’s all over the place, okay? And that comes up a lot, with a lot of clients. A lot of people are smoking weed. And as my father publishes and puts out there and has, very much, everyone uses it now as a coined term, “Bang or Bong. You can’t have both.” Teddy Nappen 02:17 Well, the Supreme Court heard that, and now they’re going to figure out, can you actually have it? So, President Donald Trump’s Administration has asked justice to revive the case of the Texas man charged with a felony because he alleged had a gun in his home and acknowledged he was regular pot user. The Justice Department appealed after a lower court largely struck down the law barring people who usually use any illicit illegal drugs from having guns. They argue that the broad law written puts millions of people at risk with the technical violation. Since at least 20% of Americans have tried pot, according to the Government health data, about half the states have legalized recreational marijuana, Page – 1 – of 6but it’s still illegal under federal law. Remember, that. It is still illegal under federal law. Okay? We need to just remove this as a federal issue, as a federal disqualifier, because it screws people out of their rights when it shouldn’t. It’s about allowing people, because we want as many people as they can, to be able to exercise their Second Amendment rights. Teddy Nappen 03:26 And, quite frankly, this should be removed. They should just remove marijuana as a federal disqualifier. If there’s any other way they want to carve it out. I’m happy to listen about it, but until then, this is a prevalent issue. It comes into play a lot for when people are looking to get mental health expungements. We were just having that from Dr. (John) Edeen, from that exact issue where we form a lot. If it comes up where you’re formalized your usage of marijuana, you’re screwed out of your gun rights. And that’s not right. That is not right. People should have access to their firearms. So, it’s very clearly a big issue, and we’ll see where the Supreme Court lines up on that. My hope is they strike it out, and we can move on from it. Teddy Nappen 04:18 I’d like to also talk about our friends here now at WeShoot. So, WeShoot is bursting with pride, as they are celebrating that Katie Rutherford has officially been named New Jersey State Champion in the highly competitive service pistol match. And she did it the true WeShoot fashion. Disciplined, determined and absolutely dialed in. So, congratulations to Katie on her win. WeShoot offers classes for the CCAR certification so you can get your New Jersey Permit to Carry. WeShoot is a range in Lakewood, New Jersey. They have a fantastic facility for great training and a great pro shop. They have all kinds of deals and specials. We love WeShoot. It’s where I go, where my father goes to shoot, and we got our certifications there. So, just go there and mention

  Episode 260- Doctors and Firearms Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 260 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Firearms, medical industry, suppressors, hearing protection, gun safety, mental health, New Jersey gun laws, Second Amendment, gun rights, trauma medicine, public health, gun ownership, ethical boundary violations, firearm training, gun legislation. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Speaker 1, Speaker 2, Dr. John Edeen Teddy Nappen 00:15 I’m Teddy Nappen, and welcome to Gun Lawyer. Again, my father is allowed to have a vacation, and don’t worry, he will be back. Instead, I am going to be interviewing a very interesting individual who will provide, I think, a very important take that is being overlooked when it comes to firearms and when it comes to the medical industry. Teddy Nappen 00:43 So, I’m looking to my guest here, Dr. John Edeen, and I believe it was a Edeen rhymes with mean, if I’m correct. Dr. John Edeen 00:54 Well, that’s right, absolutely. Teddy Nappen 00:56 Oh, good. So, yeah, if you would like to introduce yourself so that everyone can understand and like, what organization you have been a part of. Speaker 1 01:07 Sure, I’d be happy to do that. So, my name is John Edeen. I am a pediatric orthopedic surgeon, thus being mean to kids is what I do for a living. Ha, ha, ha. It’s pretty funny. I am the membership director for Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (DRGO), which is a Second Amendment foundation organization, and it was founded first in about 1994 by Tim Wheeler, who is an ear, nose and throat surgeon in California. (https://drgo.us/) He realized that there was a lot of bias in the medical literature, and also a lot of the academia locally in California, and he was one of the guys that was actually instrumental in getting the Dickey Amendment passed, which basically forbade the CDC from doing biased advocacy research against the Second Amendment. (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5993413/) Dr. John Edeen 02:06 And I’ve been with DRGO for about 12 years now. So, DRGO is an interesting organization because it’s, you know, doctors and other healthcare professionals, and we even have, believe it or not, a couple lawyers as part of DRGO. Dr. John Edeen 02:22 Yeah, I know. But we’ve done, we’ve done some amicus briefs for some of the, you know, pertinent cases that has some stuff to do with medical stuff. Just recently the ear, nose and throat society. I can’t remember the actual name of it, but they actually came out with a position statement supporting suppressors. And one of our members, Hayes Wanamaker, who’s also in the leadership of DRGO, actually spoke at the Gun Rights Policy Conference two weekends ago about this. He gave the kind of the scientific stuff, and there is a paper at our website, which is DRGO.us, which goes over a lot of that same information. And there’s, it’s really good intellectual ammunition, especially if you’re in a state where they’ve outlawed suppressors, and you’re trying to get that undone. Teddy Nappen 02:22 Ah, get them out of there. Dr. John Edeen 03:02 Because, you know, based on what happened with the Big Beautiful Bill, you know that the suppressor tax is going away, and so people are going to be buying suppressors left and right. But if you’re in a state that doesn’t allow you to have a suppressor, then you can use this to try to lobby. You use it as good information. Teddy Nappen 03:36 I’m incredibly thankful for that, because I find that a lot of people, if we arm them with a lot of this information, they can persuade a lot of people. Because look, if you talk to the average person, they think suppressor, like, what? You want one of that and you want, like, random shootings, like in John Wick? No, it actually has a very important value, because we don’t need to all be going deaf. Thank you. Dr. John Edeen 04:00 What was that? Teddy Nappen 04:03 Exactly! Dr. John Edeen 04:05 I mean, you have a bunch of shooters that are talking to each other. They’re, they’re like, half of the stuff you can’t hear, right? Because they can’t hear what the other guy’s saying because they have hearing loss. It’s just, it’s crazy. What is that? What did you just say? Huh? Teddy Nappen 04:21 Sorry, I’ve got range ears. Dr. John Edeen 04:24 Yeah, I tell you I’ve lost hearing. You know, all you have to do is be, you know, laying prone and with a rifle, and you bump your ear muffs, and all of a sudden you lose your seal. Next thing you know, your ears are ringing. And that ringing is your little hair cells in your cochlea dying. I want you to know that. That’s what that is. And one exposure to, I think it’s what 120 decibels or something like that, can cause permanent hearing loss. All that stuff is in our paper, and it’s worth having

  Episode 259-AG Stands for “Anti-Gun” Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 259 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Anti-gun movement, New Jersey, Attorney General Matthew Platkin, Safe Office, Bruen decision, gun rights, firearm enforcement, Butcher’s Gun World, legal swatting, ghost guns, New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Club, carry permit, New Jersey gun law, pork roll controversy, gun lawyer. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Teddy Nappen 00:15 I’m Teddy Nappen, and welcome to Gun Lawyer. My father is allowed to be on vacation and could not make it to the episode, but don’t worry, he’ll come back. I know we were going into details on the face of the anti-gun movement. We talked about who is truly the effective anti-gun, gun rights oppressionists of New Jersey. Everyone might just shout out, oh, Governor Murphy, obviously. I get that. However, there is one individual who has become the attack dog or spearhead of the anti-gun agenda in New Jersey and has been very effective at attacking our rights. Even now, as we have the Bruen decision, as we have many pro-gun avenues like Ford, where we’re getting far more wins than we could have ever imagined. The one individual who has been an absolute destroyer of our rights is Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin. Teddy Nappen 01:31 Now, we’ve talked about Platkin with his SAFE Office, the Statewide Affirmative Firearms Enforcement Office. It sounds really official. They have used this as a weaponization against our rights because they’ve already conceded the grounds of, okay, they can’t win legally in terms of Constitutionality. We’re winning on those fronts, slowly but surely. They can’t win on the voice of ideas, because the anti-gun arguments are immediately shut down. The only time they can ever even attempt to pull something out is whenever there’s a mass shooting and they try to blood dance. But with the Charlie Kirk assassination,, the ICE attack and then every single Left wing attack, the conversation has pivoted to mental health and highlighting those factors. So essentially, we’ve won in terms of the argument ideas. Teddy Nappen 02:30 So, they can’t win on Constitutionality. They can’t win in the open forum of ideas. What do they have left? Well, Platkin found his avenue. We talked about how the AG launched two suits. They were going after two gun shops, basically saying that they violated New Jersey’s law. This is actually on the AG’s website, and he’s bragging about it. (https://www.njoag.gov/ag-platkin-announces-victory-in-gun-store- case/) Like he’s not hiding it. This is what he is doing. Attorney General Matthew Platkin announces a significant victory against Butch’s Gun World, a Vineland gun store that sold over 1000 rounds of AR-15 ammunition and other gun-related products. Gun-related products. And what does that apply to? An accessory. A sling, a piece of metal. Like what is it. They just, whatever. Whatever catch-all term that they have, and without making any efforts to determine that they could lawfully possess a firearm, which, whatever. That’s not how the law is applied. But you know, what does that fall to the Attorney General. Page 1 of 6 Teddy Nappen 03:44 He goes into great detail on how he just brags about it, where the SAFE Office launched their attack in March of 2025 with two retailers. The one that settled where, essentially now the gun shop has to send all transactions, all transactions, any gun-related transactions they have to send to the office. So, you’re not only registering guns, you’re not only registering ammunition, you’re registering any gun-related products. This is the gun rights suppressor’s wet dream. Gathering their list of any and all things that are even related to guns. The one group settled. However, Butch’s Gun World actually tried to fight it. And I love this part of the article where Judge Robert Malestein of the New Jersey Superior Court, Chancellors Division, rejected Butch’s Gun World’s attempt to avoid liability. The ruling noted the facts of the case that Butch’s Gun World, established by SAFE undercover investigators, were not in dispute. Okay? Not in dispute. They’re disputing that what they had there was legal. Not that the undercovers are saying that it is illegal. And held that there was no evidence that Butch’s Gun World had established any controls regarding the sales of gun-related products. Teddy Nappen 05:12 What controls were they required? What controls are needed for that? There wasn’t anything needed for gun-related products. And this is my favorite part. The court therefore granted summary judgment in favor of the Attorney General, issued an injunction compelling Butcher’s Gun World to immediately comply with the Firearm Industry Public Safety Law. And what is t

  Episode 258-How to Protect Your House of Worship Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 258 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Supreme Court case, Wolford vs. Lopez, sensitive places, New Jersey law, carry permit, church security, stun gun, pepper spray, gun violence, anthropomorphic traits, Second Amendment, gun rights, gun laws, gun storage, GOFOU. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, I received a letter that I want to talk about that has an important issue in these times. But before I even get to that, I just want to make an announcement. The Supreme Court of the United States just accepted a gun case. So, this is very exciting because we’re now going to get another Supreme Court decision. This case is the Wolford versus Lopez (U.S. Supreme Court Docket No. 24-1046) out of Hawaii, which will most likely impact New Jersey as well. (https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/wolford-v-lopez/) Because the key issue here is “sensitive places”, specifically, Hawaii’s sensitive place law that requires express permission from a property owner to carry a handgun on private property that is open to the public. Evan Nappen 01:15 Now, New Jersey has that same type of sensitive place. However, in New Jersey, we won on that one in the court challenge so far in which the requirement that originally stated you had to have permission before you went on any private property, whether open to the public or not. New Jersey split it and said, no, if it’s open to the public, you don’t need that prior permission or a sign hanging on the building that says, we love guns or, you know, come on in. But in Hawaii, the court upheld actually needing permission from a property owner for property that is open to the public. So, for example, in Hawaii, if you have a carry license, you can’t walk into a 7-11 with your gun unless you have expressed permission to go on that private property that’s open to the public. In New Jersey, that is not the case. In New Jersey, you can go into 7-11, but you can’t go into private property that is not open to the public. So, if you’re going to visit your friend, well, your friend better give you permission before you carry your gun there. Page – 1 – of 8 Evan Nappen 02:33 But what makes this exciting is that the Court, hopefully, in addressing this issue will give us a framework to evaluate other sensitive places, and it may very well have the impact of annihilating most, if not all, of New Jersey’s sensitive places, at least with a test to test their constitutionality. And by the way, the Hawaii challenge is broad and also in their sensitive places, banned guns on beaches, parks, and restaurants that serve alcohol, just like New Jersey has. So, we’ll see how far the Supreme Court goes in its analysis and if it sets up a framework for challenging sensitive place laws that we’re currently in the fight with the State of New Jersey. You know, our great state Association, the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol clubs, has the ongoing federal litigation challenging New Jersey’s Carry Killer bill, and this should be of great benefit in our fight for Second Amendment rights. Now. Teddy Nappen 03:46 Out of curiosity, if for the sake of argument, Saint Justice Thomas is listening to Gun Lawyer, what would be the best frame? Evan Nappen 03:58 Well, that is a very difficult question as to how they will structure the test. Now, one thing that would be just awesome is, but I don’t think it would fly necessarily, is they just say, hey, these are the only sensitive places that are sensitive places, and make it crystal clear that none of the others count. But I don’t think they’re going to do that. They’re probably going to try to structure some type of test and that’s something that we’re going to have to wait and see. I can’t even put forward a test at this time that would cut the bill, but that’s why the Supreme Court Justices get the big bucks. And let’s hope they put a test out there that is makes it pretty narrow as to where our rights get restricted. So, we’ll see how that works. Evan Nappen 04:52 But in a similar vein, we have a letter here, and this letter is from Chuck. And what Chuck says is, is it legal to carry and use a stun gun or pepper ball dispensing air gun? I have a concealed carry (permit) but am considering other options. We are in the process of a Church security assessment, and I was thinking this and pepper spray would be a good option, less expensive, requiring less training and risk, if used in a less than appropriate manner. As a note, I enjoy your podcast weekly, and I’m a U.S. Law Shield member. Thank you and Peace. Okay, Chuck, thanks. So,

  Episode 257-“86” the 4473 Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 257 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, gun laws, opposition research, non-binary, 4473 form, background check, gun violence, mental illness, gun rights, ATF, National Shooting Sports Foundation, straw purchases, gun control, sensitive places, New Jersey gun law. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, as many of you know, we do what is called oppo research, opposition research. We not only review continuously, just probably a dozen every day of various aggregate news sites and services related to firearms, both pro-Second Amendment rights, and, of course, those that are oppressors of our Second Amendment rights. And one of the key oppressors is Bloomturd’s organization “Everytown” and their mouthpiece, “The Trace”. However, The Trace, and I have to say often to their credit, does have stories that, although are completely slanted to supporting gun rights oppression, often reveal very important things that are not revealed on the pro-gun rights sites. Evan Nappen 01:25 It is very interesting, and that is what I want to talk about today, because the trace had a very important story. Of course, it shows the dichotomy on the left, and it demonstrates, of course, left hypocrisy and gun rights oppressor hypocrisy. But nonetheless, this is an article from The Trace by Will Van Sant, and the title is, “Buying a Gun Is About to Get More Complicated for Nonbinary People”. (https://www.thetrace.org/2025/09/gun-background-check-nonbinary-trump-atf/) Now, we’ve discussed this very sensitive and complicated issue of trans, what the oppressors like to call gun violence. So, how about trans gun violence? You want to add that to it? No, no. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Yeah, right. Because it has nothing to do with either of those two prefaces? It has to do with criminal violence, doesn’t it? But once they’ve stepped into this slippery slope and we start putting things into identifiable groups and using propaganda terms like gun violence, well this is what happens. Evan Nappen 02:40 And so, of course, now the left is getting their ox gored, yeah, which essentially is their entire trans agenda. And whether you are in favor of that agenda or against that agenda, it doesn’t matter in terms Page – 1 – of 12of this discussion. Because what we see is what is seriously the bigger picture, and that is our Second Amendment rights. And although the case can be made that there’s greater mental illness amongst trans, as I’ve talked about from the official studies through these Government agencies that look at it, that there is that factor, it still doesn’t mean that, as a group, anybody should end up prohibited. And of course, my personal Second Amendment belief is that nobody should be prohibited. As a matter of fact, if you want to get right down to it, I don’t think we should have any gun laws. That’s right. None. Other than for unlawful use. That’s right. Put it back the way it was meant to be under the Second Amendment. That’s it. Use a gun to commit a crime, to do something wrong, what we call a malum in se offense, something evil within itself. Then that is the crime. Anything else is a mallum prohibitum. Evan Nappen 04:05 Now I get it. I get it. Because we don’t live in that utopia of being able to go back to actual pure freedom, God forbid. So, we’re in this situation where there is an attempt to in our society that loves to sue all the time. We need to protect gun dealers. So, oddly and interestingly, the National Instant Check System (NICS) and essentially even the gun form itself. And, of course, PLCAA (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act). These are all designed to protect gun dealers. Now, on one hand, you should say, why should guns even be required to be licensed to be sold by dealers? I mean, that wasn’t something that was originally required. There were no gun dealers at the time of the Second Amendment that needed a license. Or at the time of the Civil War that needed a license. But we now have this reality that we deal with, and unfortunately, it’s grown to where, in effect, weaponization by either political party can take place. Evan Nappen 05:15 In reality, the 4473, which is the federal form that you fill out to buy a gun. There is no need for it at all. Okay? We should 86 the 4473 and let me tell you why. We have this so-called background check when you buy a gun from a dealer. Why do you have to fill out any form at all? Why can’t you just show your Government-approved identification, which is normally a driver’s license, and then run the NICS check. You’re either approved or d

  Episode 256-Can Hunting Cost Your 2A Rights? Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 256 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, hunting violations, New Jersey gun laws, license suspension, Fish and Game laws, public health safety welfare, civil penalties, 450 foot rule, prohibited person, domestic violence, red flag laws, gun seizures, Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, suppressors, gun storage. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, we have an issue I want to bring to my listeners’ attention, and it has to do with the impact that hunting can have on your Second Amendment rights. Teddy Nappen 00:42 Is it the long winded debate between rabbit season and duck season? Evan Nappen 00:46 Exactly, exactly. That’s what it is. And never get into a debate with Daffy Duck if you want to save your gun rights. No, what I’m talking about is the issue in which the Second Amendment oppressors try to use everything and anything they can to disenfranchise us of our gun rights if you end up having hunting violations. Now, not only in New Jersey, if you get two violations, you lose your hunting privileges. They like to call it privileges. Although I really think hunting is a right. Many states have actually enshrined hunting rights as a right in their Constitution. Of course, New Jersey hasn’t done that. But anyway, either way, if you end up with a violation of any of the myriad of ridiculous Fish and Game laws. Some are so petty and insane you can’t even believe they’re on the books. If you get two of those, you’re going to have a mandatory license suspension of hunting and fishing and trapping privileges. Evan Nappen 02:19 And that’s bad enough, but I think one of the ramifications that people don’t realize is that hunting violations can also cost you your ability to own and possess firearms and be licensed in New Jersey to have firearms. Here’s how it works. Here’s their Gambit. So, one of the disqualifiers in New Jersey Page – 1 – of 13 under the licensing law is called Public Health, Safety, and Welfare based on character and temperament. We call it public health safety welfare. I call it the all inclusive miscellaneous weasel clause, because that’s what it is. It’s a very subjective reason that is often abused by issuing authorities. And even abused to the point, as we’ve discussed, of being racist, in which blacks are denied their gun rights using that provision at a ratio of more than two to one than whites, just on that provision alone. But that’s not where the only area of abuse comes in. They will attempt, they being the Government, will attempt to use hunting violations, and we’ve had any number of cases where they do this against your ability to be licensed under New Jersey law. Evan Nappen 03:51 So, there are some particular hunting violations that they’re very hot to pull this on, pull this lever, and other ones in the aggregate, or just depending on whether the issuing authority has a hard on for you or whatever. They will attempt to use these things against you, and you want to be aware of that problem. One of the big ones that will really cost you and is a very serious hunting violation, but remember, you can have these minor, stupid ones, too, and they add up. They’ll say you’re irresponsible as a gun owner if you have too many of these, or if your hunting license is suspended because you got hit twice for having the wrong shade of orange that you’re wearing, you know? I mean, that’s one of the offenses. It doesn’t matter, because then they’re going to say, well, you’re not following the hunting laws properly, and therefore you’re not a responsible citizen. Evan Nappen 05:05 Now, we’ve usually, though the one, the big one, one of the big ones, anyway, is under Chapter 23 which is where the hunting and fishing regs are found. And it’s (N.J.S.) 23:7-3., and it’s causing injury to property of another. “A person who, while hunting, fishing, trapping, or taking wildlife, causes or assists in causing damage or injury to real or personal property of another, including pet animals . . .” You’re liable to a civil penalty not to exceed $2,000 and that’s paid to Fish and Game and goes to their hunters’ and anglers’ fund. So they love, Fish and Game, loves the Fish and Game laws because it puts money in their coffer. So, you know, you think you’re going to work it out some way, but that’s difficult, because they’re there with their hand out, wanting to take your money. And for the first offense, by the way, you have a suspension of all license certificates. That’s for everything.

  Episode 255-Jasmine isn’t wrong… This time. Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 255 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Police duty, Jasmine Crockett, Trump derangement syndrome, self-protection, Warren vs District of Columbia, gun rights, carry license, New Jersey gun law, Jeff Cooper, personal defense, alertness, ruthlessness, social media, firearm regulations, gun lawyer. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, you probably have heard of Jasmine Crockett, and I bet you rarely, if ever agree with anything she says. She’s got a serious case of TDS, which is Trump Derangement Syndrome, and she is usually off the wall on just about anything she’s ever saying. Except the one time now where we see that she’s made a statement, and the media is criticizing her. People are saying what? This is shocking. How could she say that? Well, do you know what she said? I’ll tell you what she said. She said that the police aren’t there to protect you. That’s right. And people went crazy. What do you mean? The police? You see their slogan “to serve and protect”, “serve and protect”. (https://bearingarms.com/tomknighton/2025/09/11/for-once-jasmine-crockett-gets-it-right-on-police- n1229866) Of course, they’re there to protect you. How could she be that stupid to say that police aren’t there to protect you. When in fact, she is legally 100% correct. That’s right. Police do not have a duty to protect you. Their job is essentially investigation, enforcement after the fact. Law enforcement isn’t to prevent crime. Law enforcement solves crime. This is what she said, and she is right. Evan Nappen 01:56 You may not believe it. You may think that’s crazy, but let me just tell you the law. And this is why, if she took her statement further, which she won’t, that is why we need a right enshrined. We need the ability. We need the means to protect ourselves because the police are not there to protect us. The old saying is, you know, “when seconds count, the police are minutes away”. Well, it’s more than that. When seconds count, it’s not the police job to show up at all. Now the police will try to, of course. I’m sure in all their hearts they would love to, and this is not to put police down. This is to make it clear to you something you may not be aware of, and that’s why Gun Lawyer is here. You may not be aware of the actual state of the law when it comes to the police as to whether or not they have a duty to provide protection. And the answer to that resoundingly, is a legal NO. Page – 1 – of 7 Evan Nappen 03:04 You can look at the case Warren versus District of Columbia, which is probably one of the most incredible examples of this very point. (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981) In Warren versus District Columbia, a 1981 decision decided by the district court, a district Columbia Court of Appeals, what the Court held there was that police were under no specific legal duty to provide protection to individuals. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia) And wait until you hear the facts and area of this case where the police had no duty to protect. It’s so bad. It’s so terrible, and the judges even felt it necessary to essentially apologize for making this decision that they had to make because it is the law. Here’s what the court said. After arguments notwithstanding, our sympathy for the appellants, who were tragic victims of despicable criminal acts, we affirm the judgments of dismissal. Evan Nappen 04:06 Listen to the fact pattern of what occurred to these folks. And why they sued and why they had no cause of action against the police for their negligence, because police have no duty to protect. So, I’ll give you the facts right now of this case. In the early morning of March 16, 1975, appellants, these are the people suing over their negligence and what they experience. Carolyn Warren, Joan Taliaferro, and Miriam Douglas were asleep in their rooming house on Lamont Street. They shared a room. Warren and Taliaferro shared a room on the third floor. Douglas shared a room on the second floor with her four-year-old daughter. The women were awakened by the sound of the back door being broken down by two men later identified as (Marvin) Kent and (James) Morse. The two men entered Douglas’s second floor room where Kent forced Douglas to sodomize him and Morse raped her. Warren and to Taliaferro heard Douglas’s screams from the floor above. Evan Nappen 05:03 Warren telephoned the police and told the officer on duty that the house was being burglarized and requested immediate assistance. The Department employee told her to remain quiet and assured that po

  Episode 254- Is A Trans Gun Ban A Good Idea? Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 254 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Gun ban, transgender individuals, NRA opposition, Second Amendment, New Jersey gun laws, mental health issues, Trump administration, 4473 form, non-binary category, National Instant Check System, gender dysphoria, gun rights, political ramifications, gun confiscation, compliance rates. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, I don’t know, maybe President Trump listens to Gun Lawyer. Because after our show last week, when we talked about gun bans for trans and explored that topic, it appears that the Trump administration is actually considering doing that. (https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/04/politics/transgender-firearms-justice-department-second-amendment) And I guess the question is, is that a good idea or not? Now, let me just say straight out that NRA, from their news release, stated they are against any type of sweeping ban on anyone. (https://x.com/NRA/status/1963993115410198964) Particularly noted there were transgender individuals. They are opposed to it, and I can absolutely understand from principle why we would want to oppose as being not oppressors, but those in favor of expanding and not restricting gun rights. Evan Nappen 01:30 But if President Trump and his administration pursue this, there are interesting political ramifications that I want to talk about. It may, in the long run, actually be pro-Second Amendment rights to enact a gun ban for trans. Believe it or not. Now, I don’t know. I don’t have a crystal ball, but there are factors to be considered in this. My initial reaction, of course, is the same as NRA’s and that is, I oppose any kind of gun ban, because that’s a Constitutional right. It is something that should not be prohibited to anyone, because I’m an extremist when it comes to gun rights. So, that’s my personal viewpoint. And people could take issue with that by saying, well, you would want anybody? Yeah, because I think the gun laws don’t work, and you’re not stopping anybody, in reality, other than good people. So, gun laws are basically useless. But that’s not our society that we live in, is it? Instead, we’ve embarked on having gun laws that are claimed to be reasonable, when in fact, we see that they’re quite unreasonable. Page – 1 – of 14 Evan Nappen 03:01 I deal with that every day, especially in New Jersey, which has abused that situation to an amazing degree. To such a degree of absurdity, to a degree that generally in America, people don’t understand just how bad it is in New Jersey. And New Jersey is proud of their tough gun laws. They’re proud of it. They even go and try to impose their will everywhere else when it comes to stopping law-abiding citizens from having guns. And of course, it’s all fueled by what? By the Left, by the Democrat Left. You know, there are some RHINOs that will jump on board now and then, but it’s essentially their position. The position of the Left is restrict guns, restrict gun rights, and be our oppressors. Okay? And we’ve had to deal with that fight. And so, what makes this very interesting is that they are now going to focus on what is a darling of the Left, and that is the transgender folks. You know, if you’re an illegal immigrant or transgender, then the Left bends over backwards for you in every way, and we’ve seen it. Whether it has to do with protecting violent criminals who are illegal immigrants or downplaying any time a trans commits a mass shooting. Putting out their propaganda that says, oh, you know, they’re really not, they’re really not any more dangerous. Evan Nappen 04:44 When we talked about that last, where we went deeper than the media propaganda on it to show, no, they actually is greater psychological issues for those that have the transgender dysphoria, that gender dysphoria. This is, you know, all part of the propaganda media. But what makes this interesting to me is now it might be, by way of what President Trump is considering, a way of putting the Left back on its heels. It may be something where ultimately the fight as to the Constitutionality of that very action could actually have a great effect on expanding and getting rid of so much of the extremism in New Jersey, because now it’s the Left’s ox being gored, and they don’t want that. They don’t like that. And so, now they get to choose. What is it? It’s like that meme where it has the guy sweating with the two red buttons, right? Gun control or supporting transgender? What is it that you like more? Right? You’ve got to pick, and they’re absolutely conflicted and can’t pick. Well, that

  Episode 253-Gun Bans For Trans Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 253 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, trans shooter, New Jersey gun laws, mental health, transgender patients, psychiatric drugs, mass shootings, red flag laws, gun rights, gun control, Saturday Night Special, gun ownership, self-defense, gun laws, gun rights oppression. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen EvanNappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen, EvanNappen 00:19 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, I’m sure you’ve been watching the news as they talk about the trans shooter in Minnesota. It’s getting all kinds of publicity. And it is, of course, a chance for the Second Amendment rights oppressors to do a blood dance and to demand further infringements on our Second Amendment rights. As the old saying goes, let no tragedy go to waste. This is, of course, their standard MO. However, interestingly. Teddy Nappen 01:07 Where now the mayor doesn’t even want us to even mention the trans. Don’t focus on that. Only focus on the inanimate object. EvanNappen 01:16 Only on the gun. Yeah, not anything to do with motivation or the actual person. And so what I found interesting here, and it really is interesting, and something that you may not have seen this or heard this point made before, is, look, I’m hardly a fan of New Jersey’s gun rights suppression laws, and that’s probably an understatement, but one thing that I don’t think the left, in their zest to take away rights, realizes that New Jersey actually has gun laws that dramatically remove trans from being able to possess firearms. Now, of course, New Jersey doesn’t want to emphasize this, and this whole issue of trans and guns and mass shooting gets totally politicized. EvanNappen 02:16 So, if you google this, you’ll get all this Google stuff about, oh no, no, no, you can’t, that’s not a legitimate link. And there was only, you know, they tried to limit. Only a half a dozen of the mass shootings were done by trans, you know, or something, as opposed to so-called CIS males and all this crap. Well, let’s just step aside from the debate about whether the trans issue is an issue or not, and Page – 1 – of 12 instead, take an interesting look at what New Jersey does to ban trans from having guns. You may not have realized that New Jersey gun laws do this, but I want to explain to you exactly how they do it. And if the left is so hot on dispelling the myth of trans being mass shooters or having anything to do with that one, of course, they just want to blame the gun. Well, let’s take a look at how New Jersey operates in creating the trans gun ban. EvanNappen 03:26 So, remember New Jersey in their regulation of firearms, particularly under N.J.S. 2C:58-3c., you find the criteria for which you can be prohibited from having a firearm. And when it comes to mental health- type questions, New Jersey says, have you ever been treated or observed by any doctor or psychiatrist? So, if that’s the case, you’re going to have to tell them, and then you’re going to have to get a doctor’s letter that you’re safe for firearms. And that’s hard to do because doctors don’t want that liability, and even if they believe 100% that you’re safe with guns, they don’t really want to put their ass on the line for you. So, that’s one hurdle. The other is whether you, and remember, this was just recently passed by Murphy, by the way, in the Carry Killer bill, whether you’ve had not just an involuntary mental health commitment, but even a voluntary mental health commitment. So, those are two mechanisms to disqualify an individual from being able to exercise their Second Amendment rights in New Jersey. EvanNappen 04:40 And so, if we go to the NIH, the National Library of Medicine (NLM), they have a very interesting article called “Mental Health Diagnoses Among Transgender Patients In Clinical Setting: An All-Payer Electronic Health Record Study”. (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6830528/) That’s the name of this article. And remember, this article was not done with any focus regarding firearms. Instead, this article is written to try to point out just how much mental health problems transgender patients suffer in statistically significant increase in prevalence for all psychiatric diagnoses. Let’s take a look at just how much psychological problem exists in transgender versus what is the control population, not including the transgender. So, listen to this. Number one, approximately 58% of transgender patients had at least one DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical of Mental Disorders – Fifth Edition) diagnosis compared with 13.6 of cisgender patients. And of course, cisgender is what? What? In the old days, you may have called norma

  Episode 252-Adventures In Self-Defense Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 252 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS self-defense, home invasion, deadly force, criminal record, Illinois police, mother and baby, screwdriver, gloves, burglary, fear for life, carjacking, property vs life, defensive property, bear defense, Florida law SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 Hello and welcome to Gun Lawyer. I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:20 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:23 Teddy, I want to talk to you about a couple interesting self-defense cases that have seemed to come up simultaneously, and they raise issues that, you know, you need to learn from. It’s something that any one of us might imagine going through these scenarios, and you should really think about how you want to react and what you’re going to do and what you shouldn’t do. Because remember, once that bullet leaves the barrel, you can’t call it back. You’re going to have to deal with the consequences, and you want to make sure that you end up justified in your use of deadly force, which is what we commonly call self-defense. Evan Nappen 01:18 Yet, here’s a story, this is out of Blaze Media about a mother hiding from a home invader in a closet with her baby, and then she ends up shooting the thug in the head, police say. (http://www.jeroldlevine.com/criminalandweaponcases.html) So, this guy with a long criminal record apparently broke into the wrong home after discovering an armed mother. This is according to the Illinois Police. It occurred in Joliet and the Joliet PD said they responded to a residence on Hadrian Drive in the far west side of Joliet at about 10:30 p. They say they saw signs of forced entry at the home and found an unresponsive man on the second floor with gunshot injuries, and he was pronounced dead by paramedics. They also found a woman at the home with her baby, and the woman told the police that she hid in the closet of her bedroom with her child. At some point, the man came in the bedroom, and at that point, she shot him in the head. The police further say they found a screwdriver in the man’s possession, and he was wearing gloves at the time. Evan Nappen 03:04 By the way, his name is Hurd, and he had been convicted of burglaries in 2022 and 2023 as well as identity theft and burglary in another county. He was paroled in February 2024. How nice. So, this character ends up basically picking the wrong house, and apparently only the mother and the child Page – 1 – of 13 were the only people home at the time of the attempted robbery. So, here you have a home invasion. Arguably, he had a weapon. We don’t know if he threatened her with the weapon or not, but plainly, she was scared for her life. She barricaded herself and hid. She’s protecting her child. I cannot imagine that a prosecutor wants to put this case in front of a jury. I mean, seriously, a mother protecting her baby from some repeat offender breaking into the home. This is the kind of case where you see a lot of downsides if the state is even going to try to prosecute her, and it doesn’t say they are. Even though it’s in one of those blue cancer states of America, Illinois. Even in Illinois, I don’t think they want a jury with a mother and her baby hiding in fear in a closet, having to defend themselves against a break-in burglary with this guy. Teddy Nappen 04:52 So, did they describe the guy who she had shot? Like, who? Evan Nappen 04:56 Only that he had numerous priors and had been on parole and had his screwdriver in his pocket. Also, he was wearing gloves, so he wouldn’t, you know, obviously leave fingerprints. So, this is obviously a guy who’s a career criminal doing at least burglaries. It didn’t mention that he had violent convictions. But, nonetheless, maybe he never encountered anybody before. Teddy Nappen 05:28 They would have let him out even if he had violent convictions. Evan Nappen 05:30 Oh, well, of course, in that, in that, you know. Yeah, it’s always, let these folks out. And so, you know, I can see the justification. Although you know it might be able to be argued. We don’t know all the facts. That, you know, she’s gonna have to. What she’s gonna have to do, if she’s put to the task of having to do it. But I would think any decent attorney would be able to make this showing. That she was in absolute fear. Fear for her life. Fear for her baby’s life. Over this intruder who had forced entry come into her home, and prosecutors normally give more consideration when you’re defending your home than if you’re out on the street. Juries don’t have a lot of sympathy for people that break into homes. No less break into homes where you only have a mother and a baby hiding in fear. Teddy Nappen 06:33 Unfortunately, the biggest issue is

  Episode 251-Bullet Ban=Gun Safety Danger Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 251 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Hollow point bullet, gun safety, New Jersey law, self-defense, high penetration, gun inheritance, prohibited person, gun buyback, friendly fire, gun rights, suppressors, carry permit, private property, gun laws, public safety. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:18 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Teddy, New Jersey’s hollow point bullet law has to go. It has to go because it is a gun safety danger. You know how the gun rights oppressionists always talk about, oh, it’s gun safety. It’s a favorite. Teddy Nappen 00:46 Oh, yeah. They always tote that one. All the time. Evan Nappen 00:50 Well, the hollow point bullet, we’ll call it ban, although there are certain exemptions, but it basically operates as a ban. It needs to be repealed because it is in fact promoting a gun safety, public safety danger. The idiots that passed this law don’t understand what a hollow nose bullet is and what it does. So, a hollow nose bullet is merely a bullet with a hollow nose, a hole in the front. And what happens is, when the bullet hits its target, it will expand. By expanding, the energy of the bullet fully transfers to the target that it hits. Now, what it means is hollow nose bullets have less penetration, substantially less penetration, and deliver more or fuller energy transfer to the target. So, the idea, if you have to use your gun in self defense, is to end the threat. Stop the threat. That’s what you want to do. And so the hollow nose is very effective at putting the energy into the target and ending the threat. It is the preferred ammunition for self-defense purposes, but New Jersey prohibits it, except with narrow exceptions. And those exceptions include buying it at the store, bringing it to your home and using it for hunting, if legal. But you cannot legally carry hollow nose ammunition in your carry gun. Even though you have a permit to carry your handgun, you can’t have hollow nose bullets in it. Page – 1 – of 10 Evan Nappen 02:31 Now we’ve talked about certain alternatives that are polymer filled or that kind of thing that the State Police have recognized. (https://www.nj.gov/njsp/firearms/firearms-faqs.shtml – Question 20.) But the bottom line is New Jersey law bans hollow nose. Even if you use these State Police acceptable rounds, we, meaning you and me as representing you, particularly when you’re charged with hollow nose, we have to go through the whole routine of explaining why that bullet is not a hollow nose, why it’s separate, why it’s not under the definition, why legally, it’s distinguishable. And that is not only a pain in the ass, but it can lead you to be charged with possession of a hollow nose, be put in the Gun Owner Gulag over possession of a hollow nose. You’ll spend a week in jail innocent because of hollow nose. Then finally, hopefully, we get you out of the Gulag so we can actually fight the case and have the prosecutor toss it. I mean, it’s really bad. So, the best thing to do in New Jersey is not to carry hollow nose because the law prohibits it and restricts it. Even if you’re going to rely on the State Police exemptions, you know, talking about polymer filled, you know, Critical Duty, all that. Sure, it’s out there, and it’s legal. I get it, but you’re still running a risk. Because the folks that enforce the laws are so freaking stupid, and they don’t know the gun laws. They don’t know the exceptions. So, they just arrest now and ask questions later. Your best bet. Teddy Nappen 04:03 Especially if you have a key ring with a hollow nose bullet. Evan Nappen 04:07 Yeah, we’ve seen that all right. We actually had that case, yeah, a dummy round. But if you carry full metal jacket or high penetration ammunition, then that’s no problem. Because your full metal jacket, your high penetration rounds, such as super hard cast bullets, are not hollow nose. And you know, Underwood Ammo makes some great stuff, super hard cast. (https://underwoodammo.com/) I don’t know if you have ever checked it out? We call them cherry bombs. They are coated, super hard cast coated solids. And man, they penetrate. They’ll break bone, and they go through. They’re good for stopping large game as well as anything else. But the problem is, when you’re out in the street now, you’re mandated to penetrating ammo. So, you don’t want your bull to go through the bad guy, the person who is the actual threat of death or serious bodily injury that you’re justified in using deadly force upon. You don’t want the bull to go through the target and hit innocent bystanders, but New Jersey

  Episode 250-How To Get Rid Of Your Pets Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 250 Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 250 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Gun lawyer, Aalborg Zoo, animal donations, euthanasia, predators, tax deduction, logical fallacies, Mott and Bailey, Nirvana fallacy, gun safety, New Jersey gun laws, Colt Python, craftsmanship, modern firearms, gun rights. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2, Evan Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, Teddy, I found a great way to get rid of pets. Teddy Nappen 00:27 Ah. Evan Nappen 00:27 I just read about this. Teddy Nappen 00:28 Are we giving them to PETA so they can pass them on. Evan Nappen 00:31 No, no. PETA does not like this at all, what I’m going to tell you. Teddy Nappen 00:34 What? Evan Nappen 00:34 This is from international news, but I figure the listeners would greatly enjoy this, Teddy. (https://apnews.com/article/denmark-zoo-pet-donations-food-predators- 6e124050c269331600ec93b266de31ff) I think you will, too. Because what I found, and this is going directly to the website where anybody can go to, is the Aalborg Zoo in Denmark. (https://aalborgzoo.dk/en/zoo-parade/donation-of-animals-for-feed/) Page – 1 – of 13 Evan Nappen 00:58 And right on their webpage that they have, “Want to donate an animal for food?” “At Aalborg Zoo, it is our responsibility to ensure animals a healthy, natural and species-relevant diet. Therefore, we gratefully accept animal donations from both private individuals and businesses for euthanisation and slaughter at Aalborg Zoo.” They show a nice tiger right there eating a beautiful piece of meat of a pet, I am assuming, because. Teddy Nappen 01:36 One might say they weren’t lying about the tiger. Evan Nappen 01:39 They weren’t. As a matter of fact, they say, “Predators need whole prey – including fur, bones and organs – as it contributes to enrichment, nutrition and wellbeing. By allowing necessary kills to become part of the food chain, we avoid waste and instead create a meaningful farewell where the animal can benefit both garden predators and nature.” So, a meaningful farewell for your pet by letting a lion or tiger or some other predator consume it. Teddy Nappen 02:22 Here, I’ve got, I got an idea. Evan Nappen 02:23 Wait a minute. Listen to what the zoo accepts, man. Teddy Nappen 02:26 Fine. Fine. Evan Nappen 02:27 We accept. Teddy Nappen 02:28 All right. Evan Nappen 02:28 We accept, yeah . . . Here fluffy. Teddy Nappen 02:33 Here we go. Evan Nappen 02:34 You’re not gonna wake me up early in the morning anymore, begging for food. Teddy Nappen 02:41 It’s no longer that you are taking them to a farm. You’re taking them to a zoo. Page – 2 – of 13 Evan Nappen 02:46 Screw the glue factory. You’re going to the zoo. You’re going to the zoo. We accept. Okay, this is the zoo, now. Not me. Not me and Teddy. The zoo accepts both horses, horses now, and smaller prey animals, such as guinea pigs, rabbits and chickens. You know, giddy up and get your guinea pigs. Line them up. I guess maybe they’ll take gerbils and hamsters, too. I wonder if they’ll take squirrels. Man, I wish that they took squirrels. They wouldn’t be pets, but hell, take all the squirrels you want. They’re like, limb rats or tree rats. They call them. If you have an inquiry about other animals, you’re welcome to contact us. So, listen, folks. Teddy Nappen 03:33 Oh my God. Evan Nappen 03:34 Whatever animals you have, the Aalborg Zoo has open arms for feeding them to their predators, but please note they do not receive other predators, such as dogs and other cats. So, our dogs and cats are apparently safe from the Aalborg Zoo, but any other animal, including your horse, is acceptable. Wait, folks, don’t just donate your pet and walk away, because, get a load of this, ready? They have a waiting list for horse donations, a waiting list. And before you consider donating, guess what? They need the horse to be a maximum of 147 centimeters. The horse must be in a sound animal welfare condition for transport and not have been treated for illness. They only want fresh, healthy horses to send to the slaughter. The horse must have a horse passport. I don’t know what that’s about. Is that something TSA is now doing? Global Entry, pre-check and horse passport. I don’t know. Teddy Nappen 04:49 I’ve got a, I’ve got a way better ad for them. Evan Nappen 04:51 The horse will be delivered alive to the Aalborg Zoo, where it will be euthanised by trained staff and then slaughtered. The Aalborg Zoo receives the horse as a donation. And get a load of this, folks. As the owner of the horse, you can obtain a tax deduction for the value of your horse. It

  Episode 249-Anti 2A Reversing Course? Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 249 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Gun laws, Second Amendment, felons’ rights, rights restoration, anti-gun movement, racial disparity, knife rights, Delaware switchblade ban, illegal alien police officer, Maine gun laws, UK knife laws, self- defense, compliance letter, gun ownership, New Jersey gun law. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Hey, Teddy, did you catch The Trace? Now, you know The Trace is, of course, the mouthpiece for the anti-Second Amendment. Let’s just call them suppressionists. The rights suppression movement. Teddy Nappen 00:40 We can just call them what they are, which is a bunch of closeted hoplosexuals. Evan Nappen 00:44 Well, they are. And the thing is, The Trace is, of course, where we do opposition research. You’ve always got to see what’s going on with them. But I have to admit, they actually surprised me with one of their latest articles. This is from The Trace, and it says allowing people with felony convictions to seek to have their rights restored may, in fact, help with the enforcement of gun laws. (https://www.thetrace.org/2025/07/gun-rights-felony-laws-trump-doj-bruen/) In other words, they are now putting out that, essentially, President Trump’s efforts to restore the Relief From Disabilities, which has been unavailable for 33 years now for good people to get their rights back, you know, that they are now taking a position, apparently, at least putting it out there, the idea that this might actually help enforce and protect gun laws. Now, how can that be? How can they now be quasi in favor of rights restoration? It’s an interesting article, although it does contain a coverup in the article, and I want to get into that coverup. Page – 1 – of 15Teddy Nappen 02:16 If I were to guess, without even reading the article, just to go off a guess. This is them trying to, from I believe it was the previous article where they were fully aware of the racist history of gun laws. So, now they’re trying to cover themselves. Evan Nappen 02:33 Au contraire. They do not admit to gun laws being racist. They haven’t so far. Teddy Nappen 02:38 Oh, sorry. Evan Nappen 02:38 They haven’t gone that far, because that would be a legitimate basis for them to maybe even have an epiphany. Teddy Nappen 02:44 That would require common sense. Evan Nappen 02:46 There is virtually a six to one conviction race ratio of blacks to whites, Teddy. But they didn’t do that. Teddy Nappen 02:53 Of course not. Evan Nappen 02:53 That would be too much. No, no. Yeah. What they’re saying is that, you know, they’re in fear of the impact of the trifecta of the Supreme Court cases – Heller, McDonald and Bruen. And as these challenges to the gun laws are more and more successful, they’re in fear that going after the prohibition of felons having guns, where you have an absolute prohibitor, of which the ability to get your rights restored under federal law had been precluded for these 33 years, thanks to Charles Schumer in 1992 who defunded the program, even though the law has still been on the books, but no one can take advantage of it. They realize that, hey, that’s actually making them potentially vulnerable to having the law completely overturned. So, they’re now taking a, you know, somewhat here, putting out the position that this could actually be beneficial to saving a gun prohibition. Evan Nappen 04:07 But the gun prohibition they’re looking to save is that of felons not having guns. And what’s interesting about that is there are some folks in even the pro-Second Amendment rights community that don’t want felons to have guns because they are not aware of, in effect, the incredible broad stroke of when you just stop all felons from having guns. There are many felons that are non-violent felons, that were one- time offenders, that have proven themselves to be good people, law-abiding citizens that aren’t violent, that are no way a danger, and they’re still precluded from their rights. And there is that horrible disparity between whites and blacks that needs to be addressed. And remember, with that kind of prohibition going on with gun possession, it’s not just the ability for individuals to have guns, but it’s for those Page – 2 – of 15people being denied this right to also work in professions where firearm possession is required, like police work or military, etc. So, you not only get precluded from being able to defend yourself, from being able to exercise your Second Amendment right for your pure enjoyment or to go hunting, but also to get better jobs. And so that would be great, but they don’t talk

  Episode 248-Open Letter to President Trump Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 248 Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 248 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Cashless bail, President Trump, gun rights, Second Amendment, New Jersey, firearm offenses, suppressors, NFA taxes, ammunition pricing, law enforcement, gun safety, legal challenges, gun laws, gun ownership, gun legislation. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 and I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, President Trump has announced, amongst so many things, he’s hard to keep up with. I will admit that. He’s announced that he wants to end cashless bail particularly after the criminal migrant shot the border officer in New York. Cashless bail is a huge problem. This was put forward by the Soros progressive crowd, and President Trump is absolutely right. But I want to give today on the show, an open letter to President Trump about cashless bail. Not because I, in any way, am critical of him wanting to get rid of cashless bail. I completely support getting rid of cashless bail. But there’s another reason that I want President Trump to know as to why cashless bail has to go. Evan Nappen 01:32 And you see what President Trump talks about, and this is from an article in the Washington Times, July 22, by Matt Delaney, where he states that President Trump has called for an end of the cashless bail after two illegal immigrants with numerous arrests shot an off-duty border officer in New York City during a failed stickup. (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2025/jul/22/trump-wants-cashless-bail- ended-criminal-migrants-shoot-border/) And what President Trump said is that the worst criminals are flooding our streets and endangering even our great law enforcement officers. It’s a complete disaster. This must be ended immediately, and he’s right about that. Cashless bail acts like a revolving door for genuine bad guys, the rapists, the murderers, and with a particular focus on letting the illegal immigrants out, you know, of course. And anything that the progressive left supports, any criminals that they like, they love, to have the cashless bail. So, they can bring them in and let him go again to further commit havoc on America. And that is the plan with cashless bail. Evan Nappen 02:47 Because what cashless bail does is it removes traditional bail. That means if you get arrested, a judge decides whether to let you out or not. There’s a great deal of leniency and manipulation that takes place Page – 1 – of 11in these things, and these really terrible people that are danger to society end up getting released. And this situation that President Trump is referring to is one of so many examples of this. By the way, this was followed up by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and she also complained about this and how sanctuary policies, in addition to this stuff, causes a problem. And of course, in New York Mayor Adams, who is a Democrat, he is, to his credit, opposing the state bail laws and allowing these migrants out. Evan Nappen 03:51 So, this is definitely an important issue. But the reason for my open letter to President Trump is that what isn’t being talked about, which is critical to being discussed when it comes to cashless bail, is how cashless bails are used. Not just to release these heinous criminals back onto our streets, but also used in the opposite way, to imprison otherwise law-abiding gun owners on technical firearm offenses. New Jersey has cashless bail, and it is used in this way. It is used as the Gun Owner Gulag. And since gun owners are not favored, since the Second Amendment is hated, since there is a Second Amendment oppression that runs through the system, taking place when you. If somebody is charged with a gun offense, they are now subject to the opposite, to all the propaganda being put forward about the evil of firearms and why a person would have a gun, and all that happy crap and that is used to try to keep that person imprisoned until their trial. It could be years before the person is released. Evan Nappen 05:31 And right now, as we speak, as many of you are aware, because we talked about it on the show, New Jersey has a bill that passed already one of the houses and was about to pass the second house and about to go to the Governor’s desk. Now, luckily, it’s been delayed over the recess, but it’s going to haunt us and come back again for sure. And what it does is it states that anybody charged with any firearm offense at all, there will be a presumption against release, in which that person will have to stay imprisoned with no bail, just the opposite, and it will affect so many gun owners that are not guilty of anything. We’re talking about false charges on assault firearms that I see all the time. We’re t

  Episode 247-Fee Reductions Gaining Ground Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 247 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, carry permit fees, New Jersey, gun rights, NRA ILA, Citizens Committee, gun control, adolescent firearm deaths, National Shooting Sports Foundation, JAMA Pediatrics, self- defense, transporting firearms, school property ban, gun laws, gun rights oppression. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2, Evan Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:16 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:18 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, you know, we live in a tough environment, in New Jersey, where the gun rights oppressors are constantly going at us and the fight seems to be eternal. However, in one area, we are making positive gains, and every little bit counts. This is important because this affects us in the big picture as well. And what I’m talking about was reported a few shows ago from our good friend, John Petrolino, who had talked about Englishtown reducing permit fees by doing refunds on carry permit fees. As you may know, the Carry Killer bill, which was put forward in the kicking and screaming hissy fit by Murphy and the Democrats after the great Bruen decision, making it so permits have to be shall issue and issued by states. One of the provisions in there was to raise the two-year carry permit fee to a whopping $200. But in so doing, the legislation that passed allocated that 75% of that fee, $150, goes to the municipality that processes the carry permit application. Evan Nappen 01:50 As you may recall, the town of Englishtown that apparently and obviously respects the Second Amendment, on their own, passed a town ordinance to refund residents their portion of the $200 fee. So,$150 was refunded back to applicants because the fee is excessive, and it is detrimental to our exercise of Second Amendment rights, which was, of course, the intention of the Second Amendment oppressors in passing the law. I’m happy to report, and this is from an article by our good friend, Cam Edwards, at the great pro-gun news site called BearingArms. (https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2025/07/17/third-new-jersey-town-votes-to-return-concealed- carry-fees-to-gun-owners-n1229293) Evan Nappen 02:52 A third New Jersey town has now voted to return concealed carry fees. So, first we had Englishtown do it, and then with support of Second Amendment groups like the NRA-ILA and Citizens Committee, there Page – 1 – of 10 was this push that is ongoing, and Franklin Township followed Englishtown in refunding fees. And now the Citizens Committee reports, and that’s quoted in the article as follows. “We’re delighted that officials in Dumont, a borough in Bergen County, have adopted Resolution 2025-216 to eliminate the municipal portion of the permit fee.” “State lawmakers set the high permit fee in an effort to discourage average citizens from applying for carry permits. We have joined forces with our friends at NRA/ILA and NJFOS in an effort to provide relief, and we’re happy to say it’s beginning to work.” And that is encouraging. This is the beginning of a movement to get positive action regarding the exercise of our Second Amendment rights. Evan Nappen 04:22 This is very important because not only does it make it more reasonable in terms of pricing, but it also is going to help out in the challenge to the excessive fees which is currently going on. There’ll be other challenges as well, and the fact that towns themselves are objecting to this and helping their own residents is just fantastic. So, we can do this town by town. Every town that joins is another statement in support of the Second Amendment. So, my congratulations to Englishtown, Franklin, and Dumont. The march is continuing to defending our Second Amendment rights and our right to defend ourselves and not be victims of crime, but rather defenders against those who wish to do ourselves and our loved ones harm. So, this is a great step forward. Now I also . . . go ahead. Teddy Nappen 05:38 I was going to ask. I’ve never once heard of a Government authority refusing money. Evan Nappen 05:45 Isn’t that even, just that alone is so refreshing that it’s mind boggling. That they would return any money, right? Evan Nappen 05:53 Right! No one does that. What are you crazy? And of course, when the Second Amendment oppressors passed the law, they thought that no town would ever turn away money. But they are wrong, and now it actually gives a platform for towns to express their support of our rights. So, it’s actually having a reverse effect, and it’s great to see. Teddy Nappen 05:53 That’s right out of that in the Cinderella Man, when the boxer goes to the welfare office and gives them back money. Like it’s . . . Evan Nappen 06:32 Now here’s another interesting news bit that I want to

  Episode 246- Your Tax $ Fund NJ Propaganda Mill Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 246 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey anti-gun rights, Soros center, gun violence research, taxpayer funding, gun rights suppression, Biden administration, gun laws, flare guns, carry killer law, gun safes, gun boxes, gun control, Second Amendment, gun rights organizations, gun legislation. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2, Evan Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:16 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:18 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, New Jersey has funded their anti-gun rights propaganda center, what I call the acronym of SOROS, which is the State Office of Rights Oppression and Suppression. And what this office does is exactly that. It is funded by you, the taxpayer, and it was part of the $58.8 billion spending package that the New Jersey legislature enacted, which includes $3 million of your taxpayer dollars to fund the so-called, what the oppressionists call, the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center. This is the propaganda arm, and it is the center that is dedicated to taking away and limiting in any way they can come up with the rights, the Constitutional rights, concerning the keep and bear arms amendment that we so cherish. Evan Nappen 01:40 So, the budget including the $3 million was signed into law by (Governor) Murphy on June 30th. Now there was a whole hoopla, because originally they were actually going to cut a million dollars from this, but the legislators themselves went and said, oh no, no, we can’t do that. We can’t do that. We still have to spend the full $3 million taxpayer dollars on the SOROS center. So, The Trace, believe it or not, The Trace is essentially an anti-gun rights national organization, think tank. They are the folks that are the opposite, if you will, of the gun rights organizations that fight vigorously to defend our rights. We make sure that we read and do what’s called “opposition research”. And it was The Trace that actually brought this out, of course, in a very positive way. The Trace was pleased as punch that New Jersey has done it. In an article from TheTrace.org, it says, as a matter of fact, the article, you can read it yourself, is “Major Gun Violence Research Hub Escapes Crippling Funding Cuts”. (https://www.thetrace.org/2025/07/new-jersey-gun-violence-research-funding/) Page – 1 – of 10 Evan Nappen 03:06 Yes, that’s right. New Jersey has done just that. In a statement to The Trace on July 1, 2025, it says, a spokesperson for Murphy said the governor was pleased to continue funding the center. “From day one, our Administration has remained steadfast in our efforts to create a stronger, fairer, and safer New Jersey . . .” At the expense, of course, of what? Our rights. So, that’s what they do. It doesn’t accomplish their goals at all in terms of what the governor stated, but it sure does fund the anti-rights suppression movement. The spokesman further said to The Trace, “Through the several policies, laws, and initiatives implemented over the past seven and a half years, we have recognized historic lows in gun violence across the state.” Evan Nappen 04:04 Yeah, like that has anything to do with The Trace or gun laws. Of course, it has nothing to do with it. As a matter of fact, gun crime itself and those statistics deal exclusively with what does and doesn’t get reported. And as they say, statistics are like prisoners of war. They can be tortured to say anything you want. Furthermore, the article states “New Jersey remains a model for how other states can take meaningful action to reduce gun violence, said New Jersey Assemblyman Craig Coughlin, a Democrat. This funding reflects our ongoing commitment to public safety and saving lives.” Yeah, ongoing commitment to funding the suppression of our gun rights and to have a propaganda mill able to do that very thing at the expense of you, the taxpayer, the law-abiding gun owner, who pays taxes to New Jersey. That’s where your money’s going, folks. That’s the state that we live in. Evan Nappen 05:14 So, this is also important nationally. As I’m sure you should be aware, President Trump has cut funding for all kinds of anti-gun rights suppression activity, including to various agencies that would also go and attempt to fund other Soros-type agencies, you know, where they are going at our rights. And the idea here, with New Jersey being this state funder, is to try to convince other states, of course, to do their own state office of rights oppression and suppression. So, New Jersey is leading the way in the propaganda research area of trying to use these things. They then take these studies and use them to further the agenda legislatively and also in terms of litigation. This is the function of these groups, and wha

  Episode 245- Important Gun Law Updates Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 245 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey gun laws, gun rights, legislative battle, gun bills, summer recess, gun possession penalties, National Firearms Act, Hearing Protection Act, suppressors, short barrel rifles, constitutionality challenge, gun permit denials, institutionalized racism, gun rights suppression, Second Amendment. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, I have some important updates to let our beloved listeners know about, both state and federal. As you know, we’ve been deep in the fight in New Jersey over the absurd next batch of gun rights oppression being pushed by Murphy and the Democrats, and we’ve reviewed on the show just how serious and awful these bills are. Well, I actually have some good news to report, at least good news for now, and that is that those gun bills have been stalled as the New Jersey legislature has entered summer recess. So, folks, your important work of contacting legislators, of belonging to the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, and responding to the emails. By clicking the buttons and letting the legislators know and making the phone calls, the pressure has been effective. We are stalling this. Evan Nappen 01:27 Now, of course, it doesn’t kill it. They’ll be back after the recess, and the fight continues because our liberty requires eternal vigilance, as has often been stated. And it’s true, but we can take a moment to be thankful that our efforts have, at the moment, paid off in delaying these atrocities from being placed into law, and that includes the Gulag bills. It also includes the raising of gun possession penalties to the equivalent of murder charges. It includes making a gun accident a felony, a universal felony, virtual and then subjecting you to the Gulag on top of that, etc. The whole package of horrible oppression has been stalled. So, keep up the good work and stay tuned for more updates on the New Jersey battlefront as the fight continues. Teddy Nappen 02:34 One might. Page – 1 – of 16 Evan Nappen 02:35 Let me give you. Teddy Nappen 02:36 One might recommend we should endeavor to persevere. Evan Nappen 02:39 Yeah, yeah, endeavor to persevere, as stated on the famous or in the famous Clint Eastwood movie. But our perseverance is critical to the protection of our rights. I don’t know if at some point we’ll have to take the next steps that the Native Americans took in that movie. But anyway, until then, the fight is on. So, this is what we have to do at the moment. We’re doing good work, and it’s paying off. Make sure that you’re a member of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. That’s ANJRPC.org. They are the state gun rights group, our umbrella organization of gun clubs throughout New Jersey. And as an individual member, you’ll be sent the email alerts as to the shenanigans taking place in Trenton, and you’ll be provided with action that you can very easily take to make a difference. You can fight. You’re not powerless. Join the Association. There’s power in numbers, and you can make a big difference. Please make sure you belong to ANJRPC. You’ll be glad you did, and you’ll know that you’re part of the solution and the great gun rights defender group of New Jersey. Evan Nappen 04:11 Now let’s switch to federal law. So, you may have been following the big, beautiful bill, and we’ve talked about how there was efforts to relieve us of the oppression, since 1934, under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The bill, if you follow the big, beautiful bill, started in the House in which there was the HPA, the Hearing Protection Act, was put forward because the NFA is a tax law. The National Firearms Act is based in the power of taxation. The original house bill removed the $200 tax, but we wanted it to go further. In the Senate, the Senate bill not only removed the tax and attacked the NFA on silencers, but also included SBRs, short barrel rifles, SBSs, short barrel shotguns and AOW, any other weapons. Not only eliminating the taxes, but also eliminating and repealing those laws themselves. Evan Nappen 05:32 The Senate version, though passed, was then subject to what is called the “Byrd Bath”. The “Byrd Bath” is where a single unelected bureaucrat known as the Parliamentarian, who has been in that position for over a decade and is a Democrat, big shock, removed from the Senate bill the NFA provisions on the SHORT (Stop Harassing Owners of Rifles Today) Act, which is the SBRs, SBSs, and AOW law and the suppressor laws. The Parliamentarian removed it, saying that it exceeded dealing with taxation, which is a croc

  Episode 244-Gun Rights Oppressors Coming on Strong Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 244 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Gun rights, reconciliation bill, National Firearms Act, silencers, SBRs, SBSs, Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth McDonough, Senator Cornyn, Senator Thune, JD Vance, Second Amendment, knife laws, Supreme Court, nationwide injunctions. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 and I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:18 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, the gun rights oppressors are out in full force, and they’re setting us back. It’s a couple steps forward, and then a couple steps back. The battle rages. So, we had gotten into the reconciliation bill, the repeal on the National Firearms Act (NFA) of the, we’ll just call it ban, for lack of a better word, ban on silencers and the ban on SBRs (Short Barrel Rifles) and SBSs (Shot Barrel Shotguns) and AOWs (Any Other Weapons). The repeal was in the bill, but as a reconciliation bill, it only requires a simple majority in which we could avoid cloture, avoid filibuster. You know, that’s where the Democrats who aren’t in power invoke that so that 60 votes is needed in order to get something passed. In this way, the Democrat gun rights oppressors can still stop us from regaining our liberty. And so by putting it in a reconciliation bill, it was excellent, because we could avoid that. Evan Nappen 01:38 And reconciliation, though, is limited to tax matters. But the beauty of it is that the NFA is a tax law. The National Firearms Act was enacted based on the power of taxation. Yet, every reconciliation bill has to be evaluated by the Senate Parliamentarian, whose name is Elizabeth MacDonough. She is a Democrat who’s been there for well over a decade. And why they don’t can her ass, I have no idea. But she took the party line, and in doing what they call the “Byrd Bath” from Senator Byrd, she ripped out of the reconciliation bill the pro-Second Amendment rights language of the bill. So, that is really a shame. Now it’s not over yet, but we were on a fast track here to get liberty on those issues restored. But now, thanks to Democrats, again, we’re back where we were. Evan Nappen 02:55 So, at this point, what we’re hoping to see is a couple things. Number one is Senator (John) Cornyn has stated that he’s confident the bill can be amended to eliminate the NFA tax on suppressors, SBRs and all that. But just eliminating the tax may or may not eliminate the registration and that’s the onerous Page – 1 – of 11 part of the infliction on our Second Amendment rights. It’s not just about paying 200 bucks. It’s about the Government regulating, to the degree of discouragement, the acquisition of these items. So, I don’t know if Senator Cornyn’s plan will get us to the goal of the nullification, if you will, of these NFA provisions. Evan Nappen 03:56 The other attempt, is to get either Senator (John) Thune, who’s of course, the head of the Senate, or better yet, J.D. Vance, to override the ruling by the partisan parliamentarian. But that is somewhat more of a long shot and most likely not going to happen, because the Senate is afraid that if we do that now, that later, if power shifts in the Houses, the Democrats will try to ram through more anti-liberty, more to anti-gun, more anti-rights, more of their progressive insanity agenda, not just on guns and that the Parliamentarian’s ruling needs to be respected. Now, of course, it was always funny is the Republicans, you know, try to enforce and play by these rules, until the Democrats “f” them later, where they don’t play by these rules. So, to worry about the future with this is stupid, because if the Democrats do gain power, they’ll be the ones to actually not follow a Parliamentarian’s recommendations. Evan Nappen 05:23 We’ve seen them do this in the past. Because cloture, originally, you know that rule, that filibuster rule, applied universally, and it was the Democrats that changed it for judges and changed it for tax things so they could move their agenda. And, you know, when it suits them, they’re happy with it. But Republicans don’t seem to have the balls to do what’s right. And by the way, we have three and a half or more years with President Trump, and he’s turning the country around. So, to be worrying about our potential loss of power down the road is just ridiculous to make that the consideration when it comes to restoring our Second Amendment rights. But yet, here we are. Evan Nappen 06:13 So, the fight is on, and I would highly recommend that you join the fight. That you join the NRA (National Rifle Association) and GOA (Gun Owners of America) and FPC (Firearm Policy Coalition). I’m a member of every or

  Episode 243-Lock Up Gun Owners and Throw Away The Key Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 243 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey gun laws, pre-trial detention, gun owner Gulag, Senate Bill 3896, Senate Bill 1558, Senate Bill 3895, Senate Bill 3893, Senate Bill 3706, firearm possession, self-defense, reckless discharge, machine gun conversion, digital instructions, merchant codes, gun rights suppression. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:18 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, New Jersey has absolutely gone insane. Wait till I tell you about this. They intend to lock up every self-defender, everybody that carries a gun, even with a permit. They want to turn everybody, not only into criminals, but they want to lock up gun owners and throw away the key without any trial. It is absolutely nuts. Let’s get into it. Teddy Nappen 00:51 Sounds like another Tuesday in New Jersey, though. Evan Nappen 00:53 Well, I’ll tell you what, folks. This is something that on its face, many folks would not understand, but I’m going to make it. I’m going to clarify it. I’m going to make it so you will be able to understand the reality of what New Jersey is attempting to do to all of us. So, recently, a whole package of gun rights suppression laws have been pushed through the Senate, and these have been passed already by the House. They’re looking to fast track these bills to get them passed. Let me talk to you about these bills. Evan Nappen 01:43 Let’s start with the one that is the worst of the worst. They’re all terrible, but this one is just insanity plus. As many of you are aware, New Jersey has what I’ve often called and still call the Gun Owner Gulag. Now the Gun Owner Gulag is because New Jersey got rid of bail, cash bail, for crimes. In New Jersey, when you face a charge that is put on a warrant, as opposed to a summons, and remember just about every serious offense is put on a warrant, not a summons. With a summons, you’re simply given a notice to appear in court, and that’s it. But with a warrant, you’re arrested, and then you have to get released by a judge. The system for the release in New Jersey is called pre-trial detention, and it is now being abused to the max to destroy gun owners’ lives. Page – 1 – of 13 Evan Nappen 02:46 Let me explain what is going on. So, right now, as we speak, if you have any kind of firearm charge, you’re going to end up subject to the pre-trial detention system as to whether you get released. So, the way it works first is, if you are charged with a warrant charge, it doesn’t matter that you’re innocent, you’re going to be held for 48 hours. The prosecutor can decide anytime within that 48 hours, whether or not to seek pre-trial detention. Now, if the prosecutor chooses not to seek pre-trial detention, great! You’re going to be released, maybe with some conditions. There’s no more bail, and you’re going to be let go. However, when it comes to guns, they just about always, and now with these new laws, it’ll probably be always seek pre-trial detention. Now if they seek pre-trial detention, it means you’re going to have to have a hearing, and if the judge grants the State’s motion for pre-trial detention, you will be held until your trial. In jail with no bail. That’s how it works. Unless you get the matter somehow adjudicated prior to trial, where you end up pleading to something where you’re going to do time or whatever, or you get it adjudicated, because you win on some motion, months and months and months that you’ve been sitting there. But, short of that, you’re held without bail. So, the way it’s working right now is you have this pre-trial detention system. You have the 48 hours, and then you’re going to have the five days for the hearing. It’s critical that you have an attorney that knows what the hell they’re doing, because if you don’t get out, then you’re staying in. Okay? It’s bad. Evan Nappen 04:33 Now, currently, what happens is there is what’s called a PSA, Public Safety Assessment, that gets done. It’s two different assessments. One is whether you’re a flight risk. And that doesn’t mean whether you’re going to sprout wings and fly away. It means, are you going to come back to court? Now that was always the traditional reason for bail, to ensure that you come back to court. The second is a so- called, safety threat to the community, or any other label you want to give it. And when it comes to guns, all the anti-gun propaganda comes out about guns and the danger of guns, and why do you have a gun and everything under the sun that always makes us nauseous to hear when the antis go

Episode 242- Is Now the time to buy Ammo? Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Englishtown, permit fees, Second Amendment, New Jersey, gun lawyer, ammunition prices, ghost guns, gunsmithing, wellness check, gun confiscation, holster requirements, gun rights, NRA, gun legislation, firearm safety. SPEAKERS Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen EvanNappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. EvanNappen 00:18 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, I came across a really interesting article about something that took place in Englishtown, New Jersey. And this article is done by our dear friend, John Petrolino for BearingArms, and you’ll be able to find it there. (https://bearingarms.com/john-petrolino/2025/06/12/nj- town-resolves-that-excessive-permitting-fees-are-unconstitutional-n1228911) This is really an amazing thing, because I’ve never, never, seen this before. Teddy Nappen 00:52 Flea market opening up? EvanNappen 00:53 No, well, the Englishtown flea market is still there, but I would not recommend it. It has changed tremendously from the old days when I used to go every weekend with my dad when I was a kid. As my father said, it became more and more of less and less, and I think that’s what you’re seeing now. The most incredible selection of less. So, anyway, Englishtown, though, the town of Englishtown, did something extraordinary. They actually took action to reduce the excessive permitting fees that are unconstitutional that New Jersey pushed through by Murphy. As you may know, when you apply for your carry permit in New Jersey, there’s a $200 fee for getting a permit to exercise your Constitutional right. And that is just outrageous. If we charged such a thing to vote, it would be a poll tax and would be unconstitutional. But somehow, an excessive $200 fee is fine and dandy, because, well, you know, it’s just the Second Amendment, right? EvanNappen 02:22 So, this article goes on to explain that what Englishtown did, what the mayor, who deserves tremendous credit, and the town council, tremendous credit. Mayor Daniel Francisco and his council Page – 1 – of 10 passed a resolution, and I’ll read you what it says. It’s very short and directly to the point. Whereas, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:58-4, applicants for permits to carry a handgun are required to pay an application fee in the amount of $200 of which $150 is retained by the municipality, and $50 is forward to the Superintendent of State Police. Whereas, the Borough of Englishtown recognizes that the statutory fee structure imposes financial burdens on applicants and wishes to ease that burden for residents by offering refunds of the Borough’s retained portion of the application fee, and whereas, the Borough has determined that is in the public interest to establish an administrative process for refunding $150 municipal share of the application fee upon appropriate documentation. Look at that. This town will refund its applicants $150 of the excessive fees that Murphy put through so that to exercise your Second Amendment right in Englishtown, to defend yourself and your loved ones, is only a $50 permit. A $50 fee that goes to the State Police. Wouldn’t it be nice to see the State Police refund their fee as well. But somehow, I don’t think we’re going to see that, but this is an excellent move. EvanNappen 04:29 And, man, I’d love to see town after town in New Jersey create the refund practice that Englishtown has done. This should be something that everyone in your town should talk to your officials about refunding it, about not accepting the $150 fee. Apparently it passed four to one. And as Mayor Francisco says, this is about his council passing it, they should be applauded loudly for their fortitude and conviction. And I second that as well. Also, I’d like to point out that assisting in getting this through was, of course, many individuals in New Jersey that are active. National Second Amendment groups also showed up, including Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and the Second Amendment Foundation. Also, the New Jersey Firearms Owners Syndicate had great testimony by Joseph LoPorto and that made a major impact as well. The Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and the NRA were there, too. All showing their support. There was great unity here, and seeing this new movement that can be done town by town. So, great job to everyone who worked hard to see that go through, particularly their Mayor Francisco, who is a stand up guy for our rights. Teddy Nappen 06:39 Actually, I’m just kind of curious. It seems like Englishtown is an extremely pro-gun town, for New Jersey of all places. But in your experience and time, it’s kind of like unbreakable, where you have the one guy who’s completely like unbreakable. You have the glass. Who’s the most anti-gun t

Episode 241-Ten Tips to Stop NJ From Stealing Your Gun Rights Also Available OnSearchable Podcast TranscriptGun Lawyer– Episode 241 SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey gun laws, gun seizure, forfeiture, red flag law, duty to warn, gun safe, gun club membership, gun storage, expungement, gun rights, gun ownership, legal proceedings, gun theft, gun rights suppression, gun lawyer. SPEAKERS Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:18 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. New Jersey loves to steal your guns and steal your gun rights. They love to turn law-abiding citizens into criminals. They love to suppress our Second Amendment rights. What I want to talk about today is to give you 10 important tips on how to defeat New Jersey. Should you become a victim of a New Jersey gun theft, where New Jersey, the state of New Jersey, seizes your firearms and attempts to take away your gun rights and keep your guns by what they call forfeiture. The Nazis called it expropriation of property, but New Jersey calls it forfeiture. When these things happen, it can be extremely emotionally upsetting, because your privacy is invaded. Your home, your sanctuary, has been invaded. Your property has been seized and taken, and now you’re going to have to fight to regain your property and stop the Government from taking your rights. Evan Nappen 01:38 And these battles, if you will, can take place under different legal proceedings. New Jersey has quite a number of ways. One can be via a weapon forfeiture hearing after a domestic violence seizure. Another can be what’s commonly known as Red Flag, but in New Jersey it’s an ERPO, an Extreme Risk Protection Order, seizure and then you fight to get your guns back. Another is the so-called duty to warn where any medical professional, even nurses, social service, social workers. I mean, just to list ridiculous. They have an obligation to call the police if you make any statement to harm yourself or others. Even if it’s just a hyperbolic statement, or, you know, oh my god, had such a bad day, I could kill myself, or kill that guy, or whatever. Even though you didn’t actually mean. It doesn’t matter. It’s like making a bomb joke at the airport. Police come and take your guns. Now you get up to fight to get them back. They can also be seized pursuant to a search warrant where there’s alleged criminal activity, and whether there is or isn’t, it doesn’t matter. They get the warrant, and they take it. I’ve seen it even where the guns are just taken with no actual statutory authority whatsoever. They’ll just say, oh, it was a Page – 1 – of 11“community caretaking” function, for the safety of the public. You know, just some BS reason. But still, you’ll have to fight to get your rights back. Evan Nappen 02:59 And under New Jersey’s licensing law, they can bring a motion at any time to revoke your licenses. So, they usually throw that into the mix – the revocation of your Firearms ID Card, Carry Permit, pistol purchase permits, whatever you have. They’ll move to revoke them, and the battle is on for your rights and for your property. And what I want to do here is outline important things that you should think about and do in order to put yourself in the best possible position when it comes to fighting these types of actions in court. So, number one, you should be a member of a gun club. Being a member of multiple clubs, organizations, etc., that are sportsman organizations, is important, along with a gun range. Because by being a member of a club, a range, a group, an organization, it shows that your purpose was to partake in the shooting sports. You were a Club Member. You had these firearms for this reason, although that’s not a requirement in law. Because you’re allowed to have guns for any lawful reason you wish. But in the fight, we have to be able to present that you had it and that you were a member of these organizations or groups or clubs. A gun club can be very helpful in painting the factual picture about you to get your firearms and your rights returned. Evan Nappen 04:26 The other thing is how the guns were stored. So, your firearms should be stored in a gun safe. Nowadays, gun safes are easily acquired, and you can have a wide price range of gun safes. I mean, you can get a so-called gun safe that’s more of a gun locker, but it’s steel. It locks, and even that is a security cabinet for guns. It’s better than not having anything. If your guns were secured in a gun safe, that’s yet another thing to show that you were safely storing your firearms, and only you should have access to those guns. Not your wife. Nobody else in your household. It’s your guns. It’s your gun safe and only you had access. And this way we can put that forward. Only you

Episode 240-How Many Guns in the US? Also Available OnSearchable Podcast TranscriptGun Lawyer– Episode 240 SUMMARY KEYWORDS Firearm ownership, privately owned guns, anti-gun laws, Second Amendment, gun rights, firearm manufacturing, machete ban, youth marksmanship, toy guns, gun safety, gun laws, gun rights suppression, firearm training, gun legislation, gun ownership statistics. SPEAKERS Speaker 1, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:16 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:18 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, here’s a question that I’ve pondered, and I bet many of you have, too. Now we have some updated information to get an answer to it. And the question is, how many privately owned firearms are there in the United States? We’re talking privately owned, not even owned by, you know, the Government, the military, etc. How many privately owned firearms are in the United States? Teddy Nappen 00:50 Now, it’s the total number of the firearms? Evan Nappen 00:53 Total number of guns in the U.S. It is interesting to know this figure, especially when you start thinking about those that want to suppress our rights. So, this is an article from AmmoLand, and it’s by one of my favorite writers in AmmoLand, who is Dean Weingarten. (https://www.ammoland.com/2025/05/update-533-million-privately-owned-firearms-in-the-united-states/) He says is that there are approximately, are ready for this, 533 million firearms in private hands in the United States of America in 2025. That’s right over half a billion privately-owned guns in the U.S. So, just taking that number, just letting that sink in for a minute, it shows you the absolute futility of anti-gun rights laws, and the farce of thinking that a gun ban could work. What a joke. They can’t even round up the illegal aliens, which pale in numbers compared to the number of guns. Evan Nappen 02:15 I mean, these bans, apart from being an absolute violation of our rights and a violation of what is important for maintaining the security of ourselves and our families and our country, it is an incredible figure of such quantity that it is hard to really keep it in mind. I mean, think about it. Our current population is estimated to be like 343 million people. So, we have way more guns. We have almost 200 million more guns in private hands than we have people in the United States. It comes down to 1.55 firearms for every person in the United States. And that figure, by the way, which just warms my heart, is growing by 15 to 20 million every year. So, even with that many guns, you still don’t have enough guns. Okay? So, if someone ever wants to know, when do you have enough guns? America doesn’t have enough guns. We don’t have enough guns. There are never enough guns. Yeah, guns are just endlessly desired with good reason. Teddy Nappen 03:49 It actually kind of, you know, every time I hear them say, oh yeah, we could confiscate and, you know, round up all the firearms. They can’t even keep them out of jails. Evan Nappen 03:57 It’s such a joke. What a joke. Yeah, and, you know, the other thing that’s funny is, with 533 million privately-owned firearms in the United States, one of the things they don’t mention is that I think my wife believes that the vast majority of those guns are owned by me. But anyway, it is really a startling figure. I mean, I used to run with a number that was about 300 million. But that was old, old numbers. I mean, it is way up there. Apparently this was figured out based on data from the manufacturer, importation and exportation of firearms, and this is record, since World War II, talking about researchers that have put all this together. And it’s really, really interesting. Evan Nappen 05:01 The AmmoLand article, which I highly recommend you read, is called “Update: 533 Million Privately Owned Firearms in the United States”. It also talks about Gary Kleck, in his seminal work, which is “Point Blank Guns and Violence in America”. And, you know, this was one of the main other areas where there was a lot of research done that was very influential by Gary Kleck. And there’s really just, ultimately, the estimate, by the way, at the end of 2023 it was 513 million. So, we’re gaining quite a lot every year. And the estimate, by the way, was calculated by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a very legitimate organization, and they based it on NICs data, National Instant Check data, reported by the FBI. And by the way, calculating on that, it adds another 16.5 million in 2024. So, 533 million guns in America, that is in private hands. That really is an amazing number, and we have strength in numbers. Those numbers are the embodiment of what the Second Amendment means. The right to keep and bear arms is the foundation to our firearm ownership. And it’s not surprising that