1. Homepage
  2. @gunpolicy
Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) Instagram Profile Photo


Firearms Policy Coalition

We are the People’s team fighting for the Constitution & individual liberty. All the rights, all the time. Legal action, lobbying, grassroots. 501(c)4

Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) Instagram photos and videos

List of Instagram medias taken by Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy)

Help us fight back 👉⠀ ⠀ SACRAMENTO, CA and WASHINGTON, D.C. (June 24, 2019) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition announced the filing of an important joint amicus brief with the Cato Institute at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case in a man’s appeal from a conviction under a federal tax law relating to “machineguns”. The brief can be found at and⠀ ⠀ “Several years ago, Nick Bronsozian was charged with possession of an unregistered machinegun under a tax law statute. The provision in question, 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d), says that in order to have a machinegun registered, a tax must be paid on it,” explained amicus brief authors Ilya Shaprio and Matthew Larosiere at Cato’s eponymous Cato at Liberty blog, “[The Defendant-Appellant Mr.] Bronsozian didn’t pay his tax. Case closed. That’s what the government argued anyway, but the situation is more complicated than that.”⠀ ⠀ “A subsequently enacted law, 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), prevents the government from registering and accepting tax payments on new machineguns,” they continued. “So Bronsozian was charged and convicted of a felony for not paying a tax that the government would not allow him to pay. If that strikes you as odd, it’s probably because you’ve read the Constitution.”⠀ ⠀ “The Constitution established a government with powers that are few and defined. The taxing power gives the government the authority to implement taxes, not to lock people in cages for failing to pay a tax the government won't allow them to,” said Larosiere.⠀ ⠀ “We are honored to join the Cato Institute in this important effort to ensure that the government operates within the four corners of the Constitution,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This case shows how outrageous our government operates on a regular basis, but we will continue working to restore the limited government that our Founders established so that individual liberty may thrive.”⠀ ⠀ Help us fight back 👉

WASHINGTON, D.C. (June 18, 2019) -- Today, the Cato Institute and Firearms Policy Coalition announced their filing of an important amicus brief in the appeal of Aposhian v. Barr, a case challenging the federal bump-stock ban, at the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. The brief may be viewed at and⠀ ⠀ Cato and FPC argue in the brief that President Trump’s executive order banning bump stocks was arbitrary, capricious, and unconstitutional. As the court filing explains in detail, the Trump Administration disregarded the statutory definition of ‘machinegun’, a term used in both the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) and Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), in order to comply with a presidential mandate to re-classify legal “bump-stock-type devices” as illegal automatic weapons. Further, the brief argued the ATF’s reversal on what constitutes an automatic weapon was based on political expediency and not statutory ambiguity.⠀ ⠀ What’s more, they argued, the bump-stock ban expands the ATF’s authority to bring more firearms into the NFA’s purview, placing an un-knowable number of gun owners in criminal peril.⠀ ⠀ “In effect, there is now a Damoclean sword over law-abiding Americans,” explained Cato and FPC in the brief. “What was legal yesterday can be illegal tomorrow.” In other words, this case extends far beyond just bump stocks, and has the potential to affect the future legality of just about anything protected by the Second Amendment.⠀ ⠀ Read the rest at and get in the fight at 👈

⚠️⚠️Stand up and help us STOP New York's S 1413 👉

CA DOJ has submitted emergency regulations regarding the unique serial number application process for existing and new California residents. The regulations can be viewed at 👉 👈

Three years ago, 49 of our brothers and sisters lost their lives to an evil person who ed them in a gun-free zone. It was utterly and completely sickening. Heartbreaking. And frustratingly, likely preventable. We and those who worked in partnership with us, including the street artist Sabo and pro-2A members of the LGBTQ community, responded with a message of empowerment: . Irrational, hate-filled people cannot be reasoned with. Thus we must choose empowerment and the fundamental human right to protect innocent lives, our own and others, rather than give power to evil through disarmament. Never forget: Gun-free zones .

The California Department of Justice has submitted emergency regulations regarding identification requirements for firearms and ammunition eligibility checks. The regulations can be viewed at 👈

Here’s the @realdonaldtrump Administration’s views on and firearm suppressors (from brief to Supreme Court): “Moreover, this Court explained in Heller that the Second Amendment allows the prohibition of “dangerous and unusual weapons,” 554 U.S. at 627, and many courts have upheld restrictions on silencers on the alternative ground that silencers are dangerous and unusual.”

Stand up for your rights and property. Period. Or the government will gladly “5D chess” you into real tyranny, a cage, or a casket. 👉

We did, you know. It was never “just about bumpstocks”. (And now it’s suppressors.) That’s why we filed two bumpstock challenges in federal court. One of them, now headed up by the Firearms Policy Foundation, is heading to the Supreme Court. 👉 👉

@gunpolicy: “FPC’s position is that firearm components like suppressors are not only constitutionally protected instruments that should be completely accessible to all law-abiding people throughout the United States, they are important personal safety equipment. Once more we see President Trump speaking as if our government has only once branch, just like he did with his fiat ban on bump-stock devices. Our legal teams are working towards filing petitions for certiorari with the Supreme Court. We remain absolutely committed to restoring the Constitution’s limits on executive power and protecting the rights and property of the People.” At by @stephen.gutowski

DENVER, CO (June 5, 2019) -- Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF) announced the filing of an important brief before the Colorado Supreme Court in Sternberg v. Colorado, a case challenging the State’s ban on so-called “large-capacity” firearm magazines. The brief may be viewed at⠀ ⠀ Despite strong protections for the right to keep and bear arms in CO’s constitution, the State’s General Assembly enacted a ban on so-called “large-capacity magazines.” The law barred the sale, possession, and transfer of such magazines after July 1, 2013.⠀ ⠀ FPC and FPF’s brief, authored by attorney, historian, and FPC Legal Scholar Joseph Greenlee, was joined by Second Amendment Foundation and Millennial Policy Center. In the 28-page brief, the groups provide significant historical facts and context to persuasively counter the State’s false arguments made in defending the gun control scheme, such as the notion that Colorado’s constitutional framers had no concept of repeating rifles and ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 15 rounds.⠀ ⠀ “Bans on modern-day firearms are often rationalized by the argument that federal and state founders could not have envisioned today’s guns,” explained Greenlee. “Our brief shows that the framers of Colorado’s constitution were intimately familiar with firearms capable of firing more than 15 rounds, and that they intended to protect them through an exceptionally strong arms provision in the state constitution.”⠀ ⠀ “Firearms that could hold 15 or more rounds of ammunition pre-date even the founding of Colorado as a state,” FPC President Brandon Combs said. “Such firearms and magazines are constitutionally protected today, period. Time and technological evolution do not change the fundamental nature or the scope of constitutional rights against government infringement.”⠀ ⠀ Read the rest at and get in the fight at 👈

It’s true, you know. Fight for liberty 👉

English Turkish