Source.

A 22-year old man from Becker, Minn., is facing two felonies for possessing privately made firearms lacking serial numbers in a case his mother called a gross abuse of Minnesota law.

Sara Forgues, the mother of Matthew “Walker” Anderson, spoke with Alpha News regarding her son’s distressing legal battle. The case has concerning implications for gun owners across Minnesota, she said.

According to Forgues, in May 2022, Anderson and a friend were target shooting on private property in Sherburne County. The incident prompted a complaint from a neighbor, leading to the intervention of local sheriff’s deputies.

The neighbor alleged that a bullet had struck his house, but Forgues said no evidence was found to support this claim.

The charging documents provide few details about the incident, saying that the neighbor “heard glass shatter” on the lower level of his home. Discovering a broken sliding glass door, “he believed [to be] from a gunshot,” the neighbor called the police.

Anderson fully cooperated with the deputy who arrived to inspect the shooting range. He and his friend agreed to show the deputy their firearms, which included Anderson’s privately made firearms that did not have serial numbers.

He was then detained for several hours and the firearms were confiscated. Anderson was told by the deputies that he would be charged with two felonies for possessing firearms without serial numbers.

Forgues explained that after they looked into the statute the deputies cited, they believed the charges would be dropped. The statute outlines felony charges for removing a serial number from a firearm or possessing a “firearm that is not identified by a serial number.”

However, Anderson’s attorney notes in legal filings that the federal law referenced in the state statute does not consider his privately made firearms to be firearms that require a serial number.

“Under the plain meaning of the statute, the rifles made and possessed by Anderson were not ‘firearms’ as contemplated in [the federal law] and thus no serial number was required,” his attorney said in court documents. “Federal law does not require serial numbers to be placed on personally manufactured firearms created for private use.”

Additionally, if state law actually does ban Anderson’s privately made firearms with no serial numbers, then it should be ruled unconstitutional, his attorney argued.

“Commercially manufactured or imported firearms were not required to have serial numbers until 1968 and personally manufactured firearms still do not require a serial number under federal law. There is no historical tradition or authority to ban possession of rifles and shotguns that are in common use and circulation that are suitable for civilian purposes and target shooting simply for not having a number engraved on the metal,” he said.

Rob Doar, senior vice president of government affairs with the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, said the legal issues are nuanced, but “essentially the prosecutor is taking a bad reading of poorly drafted legislation.”

“In a nutshell, 609.667 prohibits the possession of firearms that do not have a serial number. It defines a serial number by referencing federal law, the National Firearms Act,” Doar told Alpha News. “The clear intent of the statute is to prohibit possession of unserialized firearms that fall within the National Firearms Act regulations, for example, automatic weapons and short barrel rifles. Because these weapons are required to be registered at the federal level, they must possess a serial number. The federal government does not prohibit the manufacture of firearms for personal use, and creates zero requirements for serializing personally manufactured firearms.

“It cannot possibly be construed to extend beyond those types of firearms, because before 1968 firearms were not required to even have serial numbers, but there’s been no question that those are still legal to own today. In fact, the Minnesota DNR auctions off serial-less firearms every year,” he added.

Well, Minnesota.  Is anyone surprised?

The prosecutor is taking a bad reading of poorly drafted legislation.  You think?

Basically, the prosecutor is a bad and unscrupulous lawyer (but I repeat myself) and is using a clearly unconstitutional law to score political points at the expense of an innocent man.  We’ve seen this before (case in point, Kyle Rittenhouse).  There are many other thousands of such cases.

But via reddit/Firearms, consider this wise decision by Judge Joseph Goodwin, U.S. District Judge in WV.

Assume, for example, that a law-abiding citizen purchases a firearm from a sporting goods store. At the time of the sale, that firearm complies with the commercial regulation that it bear a serial number. The law-abiding citizen takes the firearm home and removes the serial number. He has no ill intent and never takes any otherwise unlawful action with the firearm. Contrary to the Government’s argument that Section 922(k) does not amount to an “infringement” on the law-abiding citizen’s Second Amendment right, the practical application is that while the law-abiding citizen’s possession of the firearm was originally legal, it became illegal only because the serial number was removed. He could be prosecuted federally for his possession of it. That is the definition of an infringement on one’s right to possess a firearm.

The case against the innocent man from Minnesota will be dropped, or it will be appealed through the channels and eventually overturned, with the inferior courts spanked at some point in the process.

The prosecutor is advised to forget all about this and apologize for the trouble he caused.

On the larger issue of serial numbers, you’re aware why they case so much, yes?  You can’t have universal background checks without serial numbers.  The controllers are nothing is not and relentless good tacticians.

We have to be just as good and relentless.

Prior: The American Tradition of Self-Made Arms

Source.

A hunter in Montana killed a grizzly bear in self-defense last week, officials with Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks report. The hunter was targeting black bears on a remote parcel of private land in the Madison Range backcountry when he was charged by the grizzly. He shot and killed the oncoming grizzly bear with a pistol on June 5 and notified MFWP that same day.

[ … ]

Looking beyond the northern Rockies, Alaska Wildlife Troopers reported another self-defense killing, this one involving a brown bear, over the weekend. Saturday’s incident involved 34-year-old Nicholas Abraham, who was hunting hares in the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge when he was attacked by a brown bear sow with two cubs. Abraham shot and killed the bear with a .44 handgun and then drove himself to a hospital where he was treated for minor injuries.

I had seen these two reports over other news outlets, and in none of them was the specific handgun and/or caliber mentioned for the first incident.

At least we know the round used in the second incident – .44 magnum.

This one is good.

But it doesn’t hold a candle to the excessive display of drama with this dog, apparently all for the purpose of getting attention.

We were going to do some horse riding one morning years ago (work riding), and when trying to catch and saddle one gelding, he played lame.  Or at least we thought he “played” lame.  More and more time went into trying to figure out what was going on, including hoof inspections, talking about getting a Ferrier out to look at him, and so on.

Finally, we consulted the more experienced, most seasoned horseman I knew, and he felt the horse was really lame, or at least had some bruising, and we shouldn’t ride him that day.  There were other horses to choose from.

We let him go, at which point to galloped off at full speed without so much as a limp.  We’d been had by a better actor than the two dogs above.

Part One

“7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him. 8 And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him. 9 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper?” – Genesis 4:7-9

We know the story of Cain and his brother Able, the first sons of Adam. God had respect for Able and his sacrificial offering and not for Cain. Cain became jealous and killed his brother, for which Cain was cursed, yet received mercy; God spared his life. Cain missed the covenant offer of God, as has, seemingly, every modern Christian who speaks of this passage.

There’s more to the simple story than those things the New Religion has taught us. And modernity, at the hand of its leaders, has done a very effective work of evil to purposefully destroy the family tribal unit. Look carefully at verse seven; there are three phrases. The first is straightforward: “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?” When not distracted by the second, within the third, we find an incredible covenant offer from the Almighty to Cain, that of the elder brother toward his younger, pointing to the Fifth Commandment (Exodus 20:12) to come and ultimately to Christ. “And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.”

The older brother’s responsibility is set forth; an immutable truth of our nature made in God’s own image is evident. The younger brother’s desire is toward his older brother, and so rule by authority is indicated, informal in the family structure but quite evident in nature, that older brothers have a serious responsibility. (So, too, do men and women more mature in their faith have duties toward the babe in Christ.) Their preferred inheritance position, the right of the firstborn (Deuteronomy 21:15-17), is not only grace from God but appears contingent upon doing rightly toward God that not only the father and mother may well train the younger brother and all children.

It’s a blessing to see a family well raised, whose children are toward the first male, accepting his station over them in prayer and support that as the parents age, he may be the head, well pleasing in God’s sight. There are several examples in Scripture where the older son is unrighteous, and the younger gets the blessings. These are set forth, in part, as instruction by exception, a warning against disobedience to God’s design purposes for the family. The Left has so demolished the family design of God that these assertions may sound odd to the American ear.

The first two phrases in verse seven are the covenant blessings and curses. “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.”

Within each covenant of God are blessings offered for well-doing and curses forwarned for sin against Him, a little instructed fact in the modern American churches that you would be well to heed and obey; study and teach your church and young.

Even as parents age, the eldest brother, if he is right with God and in good standing among men, shall hold the leadership role and dominant position, which extends to all the families that each sibling will birth. If taught, understood, and accepted, this simple fact of God’s created order will permanently bind the more extensive family into a tribe. Don’t allow children to marry somebody that doesn’t love God, obey Him, and like their siblings! The more we study the Scriptures, the more we learn that modernity has many subtly crafted deceptions pointing men to “go their own way” and “do their own thing.”

In many sections and demonstrations, the Bible shows the truth of God’s desire for tribal blood unity. There is no replacement for the family.

The common application is not to let the sun go down when in conflict with your brother. Be the bigger man, even if you are justified, and seek reconciliation, knowing that the object is for Christ to be glorified whether your brother receives you again unto himself or not. Christ said; forgive seven times seventy. The New Religion would say forgive them in your heart and be done with it, but that’s not what the Bible says; go to your brother and by much prayer seek in earnest, true communion in Christ one with another again. (Matthew 5:23-24, 18:22, etc.) The context of this post is family, sin in the church among the brethren (Matthew 18:15-17) is a somewhat different aspect. Still, it may well apply, the end of which may be deep regret, for sin can surely destroy a family, church, tribe, or nation, and has by many examples in the holy Bible, history, and today as witnessed by our own eyes.

To extrapolate the covenant offer, we’re on firm Scriptural authority as evident in nature. The older brother has duties from birth. This God calls blessings. But the poorly trained, woefully, and even negligently prepared Christian older brother today may consider the benefit of ruling over his younger brother a burden. The younger’s heart desires to be loved, taught, and led by his older brother; he seeks his older brother’s approval. When young and old alike are inadequately trained, the family-tribe structure is broken for generations to come setting the younger siblings, men and women, adrift.

Remember that the trouble started over faithful service to God and obedience to His law-word. So what of Cain? His younger brother did well, so Cain became wroth with anger, killing his own brother and committing the first murder. Cain should have been filled with joy at the faith of Able. The Fifth Commandment, as with all the commandments of God, do not present in a vacuum. Many instances highlight it in the law and prophets and even by Christ, which we’ll see.

In verse nine, Cain uttered the famous and oft-debated question to God: Am I my brother’s keeper? The debate went on in the Old Testament days and is ongoing today as to how this applies, but the context of the discussion needs to be understood. Christ, having fulfilled the law of the Fifth Commandment, we now salute each other as brothers and sisters in Christ for this reason.

——-

Part Two

“33 And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren? 34 And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.” – Mark 3:33-35

If you study this section but leave out verse 35, you err. Jesus’ family came seeking to speak with Him. Far from rejecting his mother and siblings, Christ welcomes the brethren by obedience to the faith which is belief in the Father of all.

First, Jesus did not reject his family! If you’ve been taught this, as plainly as possible, we say flatly, that’s wrong. James (not the brother of John), also the son of Mary, became what would be the head of the church in Jerusalem by obedience to God through faith in Christ, his eldest brother. This would not have happened except with Christ’s blessing. Connect the dots to Cain and Able, for that was a point of Christ’s statement to the crowd who had been taught for dozens of generations about Cain’s transgression.

Secondly, God’s covenant purposes shown in Genesis four and Exodus 20 are not ended in the New Covenant but are being fulfilled in Christ Jesus. Of course, blood kin remains essential; Jesus in no way whatsoever ended the family but demands, by divine right, as the firstborn Son of God who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth (Revelation 1:5) that He be obeyed not only by bloodline but by faith in our one heavenly Father. Jesus is the first raised from the dead, and so too, those birthed anew by the Spirit (Romans 6) are born again to follow Christ now and also resurrected from the dead at His return.

Christ’s role as the eldest heir, with us brethren, requires our acceptance, according to His preeminent power. The mind of the older brother is that we are taught well in all things that pertain to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3). The good news is that Jesus isn’t Cain; the better you do in the faith, the more well-pleased He becomes; Cain’s error unto death becomes our benefit unto eternal life in Jesus Christ. Let the heart of the older siblings be likewise. By position, Christ is the firstborn Son, rightful heir to the throne, we being joint kingdom heirs with Him. Jesus Christ is the ultimate example that we should follow Him in faith.

Christianity is dependent on the person of Jesus Christ, and we should here insert, lest we fall into the New Religion ourselves or backtrack into the last century’s liberalism, that in no way is Jesus like unto sinful man. Quite the opposite; anything good in us is solely due to Christ’s sinlessness. He washed us from our sins so that one day, in eternity, we will be perfected, but unlike Jesus, we will always retain a moment of cleansing by faith in His power to save us from our sins. Though He is our eldest brother and Jesus calls us friends (if you keep His commandments), it’s not because He is like us, but because we are being remade into a son of God, yet only Jesus is holy and perfect without sin. We mustn’t regard Jesus as merely an example of a good man who pointed the way to have faith in God, but Jesus is the very object of the Christian faith, our Saviour and Redeemer.

We could note that Joseph, the husband of Mary and likely much older than her, though it’s not mentioned in Scripture, is likely dead by the time Jesus attains thirty years. But in any case, Jesus has no father but that which is above! Read what He said in Mark again; who is our father, the man who is from God by obedience to Christ! We know Jesus is God, but from the standpoint of His statement is speaking in the authority of the eldest Son.

The New Religion would state mealy-mouthed platitudes about how the Church can replace the family, but this is a lie straight from the pits of hell. (Neither can the State replace family.) Yes, faith in Christ may divide the unfit from the faithful; train your children with all seriousness, straight from the text of the Holy Bible, show the covenant foundation of the family and how sin, the greatest of which is a rejection of Christ, separates men from Father God and separates us from otherwise lost, yet beloved blood kin as well.

Fathers must take their role seriously as subordinate to the living God yet head of the family as its priest; without hyperbole, we contend that all civilization hangs in the balance. Open your holy Bible, get down on your knees, and implore the God of glory upon His throne, by the mercies of Christ Jesus, that He teaches you to do these things, to be steadfast day after day in training the generations to bring Him the glory.

Am I my brother’s keeper?

Third, the sons of perdition are not, emphatically and without backtracking, our brother. The workers of wickedness living in sin, though you might do good unto them from time to time as you ought, are not in the family of God, are not the sons of God, and are not the brothers of Christ; have ye no part whatsoever with them! “For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother.” Your duty to them is to show them the Scripture, how that Christ died for their sins and was buried, and how He rose again on the third day from the grave according to Scripture; that if they have faith in His payment to God for their sin, and would be converted by Christ, God will save them from the wrath of hell. If your church is full of unrepentant sinners, throw them out, or go find a real church. Again, do good to lost man as you will, especially if called by God for the purpose of assisting the broken so that they may hear of Christ.

You are, without doubt, the keeper of your brother in the faith and those by the blood that they too may be of one faith with all the saints of God.

Therefore, examine the perils of a flippant attitude toward God’s law word or misunderstanding God’s covenant nature, and know that only through faith can your family, local church, and nation be saved. God’s indelible covenant impressions shown in Scripture by offering blessings and curses abound in all we do, and none can fare well in violating the New Covenant in Christ’s blood.

The life of the Christian is not about what you can get from God but what you can give. You can have the cross of the blood covenant in Christ, as seen from heaven’s holy hill, affixed to your family crest, the power of the resurrected Christ through the sword of God, which is His word emanating from all that your tribe says and does that when the sons of men look upon your family line they would know there is a righteous, just, Holy Spirit filled people, seeing that God is real, His power emanating from the men and women who walk according to the potency of the mandate of heaven. A mighty generational work will be done in those that pray rightly – calling down the power of heaven that Holy God would fill them with all that honors His exalted name – that they might walk in the truth and not depart from it.

This is one of those posts that could go much longer, and the topic is by no means exhausted but thus ends our writing here. Though God appears to judge America now, do a multi-generational work of righteousness in faith that the Kingdom of God, which now is, may stand the test through your family.

——-

Prior Notes to the Rebuilders: Warnings From The Wall, Every Christian is a Christian Nationalist, Restitution is the Law of God, Reaping the Whirlwind, The Effect of Righteousness.

Joseph Greenlee.

Since the earliest colonial days, Americans have been busily manufacturing and repairing arms. In the colonies, the ability to defend one’s home and community, hunt, fight wars, and ultimately win American independence depended largely on the ability to produce arms. For the newly independent nation, arms production was critical to repel invasions and insurrections, and eventually, to western expansion. The skill was always valued and in demand, and many Americans made their own arms rather than depend on others. Americans continued producing their own arms in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, leading to some of the greatest technological breakthroughs in the history of firearms and ammunition. The freedom to build personal arms enabled innovations that allowed Americans to better defend themselves and their country than ever before. Meanwhile, restrictions on self-made arms have been rare throughout American history. All restrictions on arms built for personal use have emerged within the last decade, and from only a few states. While still uncommon, legislatures are increasingly targeting homemade arms due to the growing popularity of unfinished receivers and 3D-printed firearms.

[ … ]

Heller established several principles that support the right to build arms for personal use. First, under Heller, any analysis must start with the Second Amendment’s text, which protects the right to keep and bear arms and provides no reason to believe that people must buy the arms they wish to keep and bear. Second, Heller held that the Second Amendment protects the types of weapons that are commonly possessed for lawful purposes, regardless of how those arms are acquired. Third, Heller suggested, as lower courts have recognized, that the Second Amendment also protects the right to acquire arms, which includes building them personally. Fourth, history and tradition—which is used to inform the Amendment’s text under Heller—reveals that Americans have long enjoyed and depended on the unregulated right to build arms since the colonial days. In sum, the right to build arms for personal use is a right protected by the Second Amendment.

There’s a lot between the introduction and the conclusion statements and you’re welcome to read it at your leisure.  The founders would be appalled at the notion that the federal government has the right to regulate the making of arms.  They fought and some perished for the sake of living as free men, and that included the right to lack of interference in things that occupied them daily.

They would be even more appalled at the notion that unaccountable bureaucracies would have the authority to regulate such matters.  They said something about that, yes?  “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.”

They only have that authority based on police powers, the power of confiscation, and the power of taxation, also all things the founder opposed for the federal authority, and things they do not because they have that right, but because no one has stopped them.

Witness this first incident.  It was clear from the beginning that the man wasn’t carrying a firearm.  I’ll also make another observation.  This is one good reason why open carry should have been passed by the controller pols in Florida – return the right to openly carry a firearm and the idiot wouldn’t have had a reason to conduct the stop to begin with.

But on to the incident.  Fat boy got upset that the female cop didn’t get what she wanted out of the man, and so fabricated some unreasonable justification out of whole cloth to arrest him.  It was a capricious arrest, and they lacked the authority to do it.

The female cop, on the other hand, was a “mean girl,” or got bullied by mean girls in school, and takes it out on everyone she meets, I estimate.  She is carried away with her authority.

But here is the problem.  They will be retrained, they lost a few days without pay, and fat boy was demoted.  But other than that, there is nothing learned from this.  The Sheriff said they didn’t rely on their training.  That’s of course incorrect, as they know the law and where the lines are.  They just don’t care.  Without a change in hiring practices to emphasize moral virtue above all else, this will continue across the country, which means no one will have any respect for cops by the time this is all over.

Also witness in the second incident that the cops lied under oath.  You know that’s what happened.  There isn’t a cop in America who doesn’t understand “Terry Stop” and the limits on their authority to detain and arrest.  They just both lied and got away with it, again pointing to the lack of moral virtue in these people.

F&S.

Before getting into how to buy a suppressor, you need to understand the difference in types of ownership. You can own a suppressor either as an individual or as a trust. As an individual owner, you can use the suppressor and you can let others use the suppressor, but you must be with anyone else anytime they have the suppressor or are using it. If you don’t have any friends—and some of you don’t, I’ve seen your Facebook profiles—individual ownership is fine. Well, except when you die, because then your estate is left in possession of an unregistered NFA item. That’s a problem for whoever executes your will.

If you purchase a suppressor as a trust, any co-trustee can be in procession of and use the suppressor just as you would. Also, if you’re smart enough to designate a “beneficiary” then that person simply assumes the trust when you go to the great shooting range in the sky.

The article goes on to explain the relative ease of filling out paperwork these days.  Around here I know there are FFLs with kiosks which assist the buyer, and there are ways to get assistance with setting up trusts.  Every gun show has cards for lawyers in the area who want to charge money for setting up firearms trusts.

Do any readers own suppressors, and if so, what have you fund to be the best way to purchase and own them?

I find it difficult to dump that much money into something when that something could be a relatively nice firearm instead, and with use of electronic hearing protection, the noise problem goes away (for the most part, except for interference with your cheek weld).

Watch the video for yourself, but here’s what I think.  The officer turned around so quickly and charged back to the man (who said nothing but ‘God’), that I can conclude only one thing.  The cop got pissed off that someone didn’t bow down and lick his bootsand obey even unlawful orders.

He’s nothing but a bully.

Older video but interesting.

All three articles are available here: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3. The articles are detailed with graphics and data, providing excellent information for use in AR-related training if you can apply it. Each has a short related video. Video to Part One below.