September 8, 2025 • 12 mins
Guy Relford, "The Gun Guy," joins to talk about the Trump administration looking to prohibit transgender people from owning guns, his latest win in court, and IPS student rally for gun safety.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
The only way to bag a classy lady is to
give her two tickets to the gun Show.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Monday Gun Day with the Gun Guy.
Speaker 3 (00:11):
Just watch up with the guns. They'll get your.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Guy, stop calling your arms gun.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
Mine is Nigel Jason Hammer is here also Jona's live
in studio The Gun Guy Guy Ralford, host of The
Gun Guy Show Saturdays. Here on ninety three WIBC Licensed
Firearms Instructor to a attorney, Guy, how are you man?
Speaker 2 (00:32):
I am great, and thanks as always to our sponsor
for Monday Gunday. That's Premiere Arms in Brownsburg with the
largest selection of new Uston historic firearms in the Midwest
and PA Jewelers located in the farmhouse right out front.
Check them out at thirty seven and fifty four so
South Green Street in Brownsburg or Premier Arms dot com.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
Speaking of being a two eight lawyer, you had I
saw on social media successful court case this week. If
you would brag on yourself, go ahead, Yeah, that was
just what it's gonna do is get you more customers.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Well, no, I appreciate you bringing that up.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
Nine Well you told us to Guy.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
I sent you guys a whole list of things we've
talked about and that was not on it, but I
saw that on your social media. Though No, I appreciate
that a lot. No, I want a red flatcase. And
and that's not really unusual agus red flat case. Well,
I understand why it was brought, but this is somebody
who's not dangerous. We were able to prove they were
not dangerous. The judge agreed with it. At the end
(01:29):
of the day, the prosecutor agreed with us, and so
we won the case. And that's great, I mean, and
and and that's fulfilling. And my client was, you know,
was ordered to get his guns back within five days.
And that all sounds good and feels good. But what
was significant about it. The reason I posted about it
is that the new law that that I wrote and
(01:51):
fought for in the General Assembly and passed not only
overwhelmingly but unanimously in the General Assembly, it just went
into effect July one. And that's the law that says,
if someone wins that initial red flagcase and they're determined
to not be dangerous, contrary to the allegations of the
state in bringing that case, then not only do they
(02:12):
get their guns back, and the judge enters in order
that says they're not dangerous. But now because of this
new law again just went into effect July one, Now
all the records of that are expunged, and and and
and and the judge is required, it's mandatory to enter
in order to expunge all those records, which means they're sealed,
they're not a public record, and that that red flagcase,
(02:33):
which we disproved in court, will not affect that person's
life going forward.
Speaker 3 (02:37):
So so people were getting these red flagcases dismissed, but
it would still show up on their backgrounds. Yes, and
even though they were dismissed and.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
In many cases frivolous, totally, totally.
Speaker 2 (02:51):
Or we went to he had a hearing, and we won,
and we proved they were they were not dangerous. And
it happened over and over and over again and for
several years, and I wrote, I wrote the same bill,
and we offered it in twenty twenty four. It didn't
get a hearing, it didn't get through, but it did
in twenty twenty five. And this is because for years,
exactly to your point, Niche and two years Jason, that
(03:11):
we would win these cases, and then I'd have people,
my clients call me a year later, going, you know,
I was just told I can't volunteer coach my kid's
volleyball team because they did a background check. And they said, well,
there was this red flagcase where someone accused you of
being dangerous and your guns were seized. Like, no, no, no,
I won that case. Yeah, but you know that looks
really bad. A lady called me and all upset she
(03:34):
couldn't be a bus driver anymore because they did a
background check. I said, no, we won that case. They
didn't care she couldn't be a bus driver. Another young
man wanted to go His lifelong dream was to be
a marine, and his recruiter ran a background check on him,
saw this red flagcase even though we won it, had
it dismissed, and said, you know you had your gun
seies from you. Don't feel good about you going into
(03:55):
the Marines and handling weapons. And those stories just broke
my heart after we won those cases, and so yeah,
so I wrote that bill and we fought for it,
we got it passed, and when that judge it was
it was fun for me. And actually the prosecutor laughed
because the judge said, well, I know there's this new laws.
So I think I'm required to see all these records,
aren't they? And I said, well, yes, your honor, you are,
(04:17):
and and he said, okay, well I haven't done one
of these before, he goes, I'll have to figure out
how to write that order. And I said, well, you're honor,
I'm happy to write that order. And he was just
kind of looking at me, like why is that, And
so I went ahead and said, because I wrote the
bill that resulted in that statue.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
And you say, like Ron Burgundy, I'm kind of a
big deal.
Speaker 2 (04:37):
Well, that's exactly what I was trying not to sound like.
But it was funny because the judge started laughing and
he goes he goes, he goes, h, you sound like
you might be the right guy to write that then,
and then the prosecutor just went, yeah, he is, you know,
and and actually we all laughed and we were all
in agreement on that. And so I wrote the order
I submitted, judge signed it within an hour after I
(04:58):
submitted it, and now those records are sealed and my
client can go on about his life. So it was
it was a fun day in court.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
I'm no Matt Locke here, okay, but it feels like
it's a good feeling when, like the other side in
this case, the prosecution looks over at you. He's good.
He's the guy.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Actually, this prosecutor Marion County just a very rational person.
And we actually worked the case out where we walked
in and and uh.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
And there are actually some rational put there.
Speaker 2 (05:30):
There absolutely are and uh and and in this case
we certainly had one. And I appreciated the fact that
he was able to look at evidence. We submitted to
him and said, you know what, I'm not even going
to contest your clients, you know, and say your client's dangerous.
And so we actually reached an agreement on it. So
it wasn't like I was Clarence Darrow in the courtroom.
(05:50):
We were able to work it out. The prosecutor agreed
my client wasn't dangerous, and and then we submitted in
order that got those records sealed, so that that was
a good day.
Speaker 1 (05:59):
On the subject of gun confiscation here, I heard you
talking about this on your show on Saturday. There is
this rumor going around that the Trump administration was looking
into prohibiting transgender individuals from owning a firearm, and they
were going to use some sort of mental excuse as
(06:20):
the way to be able to do that. I don't
know if this's ever had any actual legs to it,
but that rumor ran wild. I heard you talking about
it this weekend.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
No, unfortunately does have some legs potentially, because this is
how the Obama administration, even going back to Clinton and
then certainly under Biden, this is how veterans who just
got a PTSD diagnosis with no determination that they were
any kind of a danger to themselves or others or
(06:49):
actually sent letters to say you can't possess firearms. You're
a prohibitive possessor. And this is under a federal state.
And by the way, social Security recipients and both they
or veteran under the Veterans administration, if they had designated
a finuciary to receive their benefits for them, it's like, well,
you must be mentally defective, because there's a federal statute
(07:11):
among the people who cannot possess a firearm. Under federal law,
if you have a felony, you can't possess firearm. If
you were dishonorably discharged from the military, you can't possess firearm.
Several other categories one of them is if you've been
adjudicated to be mentally defective. And that's kind of odd language,
perhaps offensive language and the federal statue, but that's what
it says. Well, the ATF has looked at that and said, well,
(07:32):
that means either you've been committed to a mental institution
or you've been determined to have a mental illness. We
can say that you've been adjudicated to be mentally defective.
That's just the ATF. That's not Congress, right, And we
fought that, and we fought that, and we fought that.
We fought it when they were trying to deprive veterans
of their two A rights. We fought it when they're
(07:53):
trying to deprive social Security recipients. And I will fight
it exactly as enthusiastically because look, did we just have
a mass shooting in Minneapolis where there was a transgender
person who committed it? Yes, we did. We had another
confirmed case of a transgender shooting up the Nashville Christian School,
right correct, Very similar cases others, And I've seen these memes, oh, well,
(08:14):
you know the last seven mass shooters or school shooters
were all transgender. No, that's not been confirmed. Some of
those means are not correct. However, we have a couple
of documented cases. Should we be looking hard at this
issue and making sure that people are truly a danger
might potentially need to be separated from their firearms? Yes?
Can we can go across the board. And if you're
just someone who you know, you're born a boy and
(08:37):
you've decided you want to be a girl, and all
of a sudden you've lost your Second Amendment rights with
no examination whatsoever of whether you're a danger to yourself
or anybody else, oh hell no, I will litigate that
case and I will win it. If somebody would say,
oh yeah, guys pro trans now, No, I'm pro Second
Amendment no matter who you are.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
I trust Caitlyn Jenner to have a firearm more than
I trust some of these. It's downtown here, right.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
Exactly right. I mean, you know, you know somebody said, well,
gender dysphoria is a legitimate mental illness, and even who
a world health organization has designated gender dysphoria to be
a mental illness. Okay, but that's where the ATF deciding
that just having a mental illness makes you a prohibited possessor.
That's not those are not the words of Congress, and
they're they're expanding the words of Congress. I think you
(09:23):
need to be determined to be a danger to yourself
or others for that to be constitutional. And for instance,
how many millions of people in this country right now
are on some form of antidepressant lot?
Speaker 3 (09:34):
Yeah, lot, anti anxiety, anti depressing anxiety, I mean somebody?
Speaker 2 (09:40):
Yeah, I mean I've heard numbers like ten, fifteen to
twenty percent of the population. I have no idea what
number it is. But my point is just having some
form of mental illness, and no matter how mild, and
no matter how little it affects your functionality, and most importantly,
whether you're a danger to yourself or anyone else. I
mean to just designate a whole class of people as
(10:02):
prohibitive possessors. No, he'll no, I'll fight that. I'll litigate
that case. I'll win it.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
And it's the danger aspect. It's not you know what
sex you consider yourself, it's the danger aspects of it.
Are you mentally capable of having a firearm? And is
there any proof to back up the claims that you
might not be? Like with this Minnesota freak, there was
tons of frigs. There was a manifest though, there was
a YouTube channel. The Nashville shooter the same way, same thing,
(10:30):
go down to Parkland. It wasn't a transgender shooter, but
it was a nut with all the warning signs there.
Speaker 2 (10:35):
That's what we got to be focusing on, not just
taking broad categories of people and denying them their constitutional rights.
Hall No, absolutely disagree with that, And so I was
disappointed that Trump administration has done so many good things,
so many right decisions in terms of the two A.
And just recently they've filed briefs and pending cases saying, hey,
(10:56):
you know, the Supreme Court ought to take the seventh
it's assault weapon ban case. Just on and on. The
Trump administration has done good thing after a good thing
for the Second Amendment. But they are stepping on it
with this transgender thing. They're wrong, and I think they'll
either back off or they'll get proven wrong in court.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
Guy, we got about a minute left here. Your thoughts
on that rally we saw at the State House last week,
the IPS students, the gun safety rally ban assault weapons.
What did you think?
Speaker 2 (11:27):
You know, I surprised some people, I think when I
posted on this on social media over the weekend, which
is my first reaction to it was, Hey, you know what,
We've got young kids, high school kids for the most part,
who are now exercising their First Amendment rights. They're participating
in the political process, they're making their voices heard. They
(11:47):
came out all the way down to the State House. Yeah,
they got a day out of school. My first thought
was awesome, good for these kids. Man, they're participating in
the process. But immediately after that, my thought was, isn't
it a shame that these kids don't respect my rites
under the Second Amendment as much as I respect their
rights under the First.
Speaker 1 (12:03):
They could have learned something. I mean, I'm sure like
you or any one of the law abiding gun owners
at the State House would have came out and talk there.
Speaker 3 (12:10):
Was a gun safety aspect to this demonstration that I'm
off of that as.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
Well well, And there always is though, because but what
they say is to have guns safety quote unquote, we
need to ban you know. And there's this and that
comes from their teachers. I'm sure, well that's exactly what.
It's a combination of parents and teachers, and they both
support each other. But I would have loved to just
had some rhetorical conversations like can you define assault weapon?
(12:35):
You know, and just get into some statistics, but hey,
they're participating in the process, so God bless them.
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Where can we find you?
Speaker 2 (12:42):
Really? On Twitter? At guy Ralford is the best way
to give me a follow while you're on there at
guy Ralford.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
Guy, you're the best. Thanks guys, It's the Hammer and
Nigel Show.
The only way to bag a classy lady is to
give her two tickets to the gun Show.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Monday Gun Day with the Gun Guy.
Speaker 3 (00:11):
Just watch up with the guns. They'll get your.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Guy, stop calling your arms gun.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
Mine is Nigel Jason Hammer is here also Jona's live
in studio The Gun Guy Guy Ralford, host of The
Gun Guy Show Saturdays. Here on ninety three WIBC Licensed
Firearms Instructor to a attorney, Guy, how are you man?
Speaker 2 (00:32):
I am great, and thanks as always to our sponsor
for Monday Gunday. That's Premiere Arms in Brownsburg with the
largest selection of new Uston historic firearms in the Midwest
and PA Jewelers located in the farmhouse right out front.
Check them out at thirty seven and fifty four so
South Green Street in Brownsburg or Premier Arms dot com.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
Speaking of being a two eight lawyer, you had I
saw on social media successful court case this week. If
you would brag on yourself, go ahead, Yeah, that was
just what it's gonna do is get you more customers.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Well, no, I appreciate you bringing that up.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
Nine Well you told us to Guy.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
I sent you guys a whole list of things we've
talked about and that was not on it, but I
saw that on your social media. Though No, I appreciate
that a lot. No, I want a red flatcase. And
and that's not really unusual agus red flat case. Well,
I understand why it was brought, but this is somebody
who's not dangerous. We were able to prove they were
not dangerous. The judge agreed with it. At the end
(01:29):
of the day, the prosecutor agreed with us, and so
we won the case. And that's great, I mean, and
and and that's fulfilling. And my client was, you know,
was ordered to get his guns back within five days.
And that all sounds good and feels good. But what
was significant about it. The reason I posted about it
is that the new law that that I wrote and
(01:51):
fought for in the General Assembly and passed not only
overwhelmingly but unanimously in the General Assembly, it just went
into effect July one. And that's the law that says,
if someone wins that initial red flagcase and they're determined
to not be dangerous, contrary to the allegations of the
state in bringing that case, then not only do they
(02:12):
get their guns back, and the judge enters in order
that says they're not dangerous. But now because of this
new law again just went into effect July one, Now
all the records of that are expunged, and and and
and and the judge is required, it's mandatory to enter
in order to expunge all those records, which means they're sealed,
they're not a public record, and that that red flagcase,
(02:33):
which we disproved in court, will not affect that person's
life going forward.
Speaker 3 (02:37):
So so people were getting these red flagcases dismissed, but
it would still show up on their backgrounds. Yes, and
even though they were dismissed and.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
In many cases frivolous, totally, totally.
Speaker 2 (02:51):
Or we went to he had a hearing, and we won,
and we proved they were they were not dangerous. And
it happened over and over and over again and for
several years, and I wrote, I wrote the same bill,
and we offered it in twenty twenty four. It didn't
get a hearing, it didn't get through, but it did
in twenty twenty five. And this is because for years,
exactly to your point, Niche and two years Jason, that
(03:11):
we would win these cases, and then I'd have people,
my clients call me a year later, going, you know,
I was just told I can't volunteer coach my kid's
volleyball team because they did a background check. And they said, well,
there was this red flagcase where someone accused you of
being dangerous and your guns were seized. Like, no, no, no,
I won that case. Yeah, but you know that looks
really bad. A lady called me and all upset she
(03:34):
couldn't be a bus driver anymore because they did a
background check. I said, no, we won that case. They
didn't care she couldn't be a bus driver. Another young
man wanted to go His lifelong dream was to be
a marine, and his recruiter ran a background check on him,
saw this red flagcase even though we won it, had
it dismissed, and said, you know you had your gun
seies from you. Don't feel good about you going into
(03:55):
the Marines and handling weapons. And those stories just broke
my heart after we won those cases, and so yeah,
so I wrote that bill and we fought for it,
we got it passed, and when that judge it was
it was fun for me. And actually the prosecutor laughed
because the judge said, well, I know there's this new laws.
So I think I'm required to see all these records,
aren't they? And I said, well, yes, your honor, you are,
(04:17):
and and he said, okay, well I haven't done one
of these before, he goes, I'll have to figure out
how to write that order. And I said, well, you're honor,
I'm happy to write that order. And he was just
kind of looking at me, like why is that, And
so I went ahead and said, because I wrote the
bill that resulted in that statue.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
And you say, like Ron Burgundy, I'm kind of a
big deal.
Speaker 2 (04:37):
Well, that's exactly what I was trying not to sound like.
But it was funny because the judge started laughing and
he goes he goes, he goes, h, you sound like
you might be the right guy to write that then,
and then the prosecutor just went, yeah, he is, you know,
and and actually we all laughed and we were all
in agreement on that. And so I wrote the order
I submitted, judge signed it within an hour after I
(04:58):
submitted it, and now those records are sealed and my
client can go on about his life. So it was
it was a fun day in court.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
I'm no Matt Locke here, okay, but it feels like
it's a good feeling when, like the other side in
this case, the prosecution looks over at you. He's good.
He's the guy.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Actually, this prosecutor Marion County just a very rational person.
And we actually worked the case out where we walked
in and and uh.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
And there are actually some rational put there.
Speaker 2 (05:30):
There absolutely are and uh and and in this case
we certainly had one. And I appreciated the fact that
he was able to look at evidence. We submitted to
him and said, you know what, I'm not even going
to contest your clients, you know, and say your client's dangerous.
And so we actually reached an agreement on it. So
it wasn't like I was Clarence Darrow in the courtroom.
(05:50):
We were able to work it out. The prosecutor agreed
my client wasn't dangerous, and and then we submitted in
order that got those records sealed, so that that was
a good day.
Speaker 1 (05:59):
On the subject of gun confiscation here, I heard you
talking about this on your show on Saturday. There is
this rumor going around that the Trump administration was looking
into prohibiting transgender individuals from owning a firearm, and they
were going to use some sort of mental excuse as
(06:20):
the way to be able to do that. I don't
know if this's ever had any actual legs to it,
but that rumor ran wild. I heard you talking about
it this weekend.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
No, unfortunately does have some legs potentially, because this is
how the Obama administration, even going back to Clinton and
then certainly under Biden, this is how veterans who just
got a PTSD diagnosis with no determination that they were
any kind of a danger to themselves or others or
(06:49):
actually sent letters to say you can't possess firearms. You're
a prohibitive possessor. And this is under a federal state.
And by the way, social Security recipients and both they
or veteran under the Veterans administration, if they had designated
a finuciary to receive their benefits for them, it's like, well,
you must be mentally defective, because there's a federal statute
(07:11):
among the people who cannot possess a firearm. Under federal law,
if you have a felony, you can't possess firearm. If
you were dishonorably discharged from the military, you can't possess firearm.
Several other categories one of them is if you've been
adjudicated to be mentally defective. And that's kind of odd language,
perhaps offensive language and the federal statue, but that's what
it says. Well, the ATF has looked at that and said, well,
(07:32):
that means either you've been committed to a mental institution
or you've been determined to have a mental illness. We
can say that you've been adjudicated to be mentally defective.
That's just the ATF. That's not Congress, right, And we
fought that, and we fought that, and we fought that.
We fought it when they were trying to deprive veterans
of their two A rights. We fought it when they're
(07:53):
trying to deprive social Security recipients. And I will fight
it exactly as enthusiastically because look, did we just have
a mass shooting in Minneapolis where there was a transgender
person who committed it? Yes, we did. We had another
confirmed case of a transgender shooting up the Nashville Christian School,
right correct, Very similar cases others, And I've seen these memes, oh, well,
(08:14):
you know the last seven mass shooters or school shooters
were all transgender. No, that's not been confirmed. Some of
those means are not correct. However, we have a couple
of documented cases. Should we be looking hard at this
issue and making sure that people are truly a danger
might potentially need to be separated from their firearms? Yes?
Can we can go across the board. And if you're
just someone who you know, you're born a boy and
(08:37):
you've decided you want to be a girl, and all
of a sudden you've lost your Second Amendment rights with
no examination whatsoever of whether you're a danger to yourself
or anybody else, oh hell no, I will litigate that
case and I will win it. If somebody would say,
oh yeah, guys pro trans now, No, I'm pro Second
Amendment no matter who you are.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
I trust Caitlyn Jenner to have a firearm more than
I trust some of these. It's downtown here, right.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
Exactly right. I mean, you know, you know somebody said, well,
gender dysphoria is a legitimate mental illness, and even who
a world health organization has designated gender dysphoria to be
a mental illness. Okay, but that's where the ATF deciding
that just having a mental illness makes you a prohibited possessor.
That's not those are not the words of Congress, and
they're they're expanding the words of Congress. I think you
(09:23):
need to be determined to be a danger to yourself
or others for that to be constitutional. And for instance,
how many millions of people in this country right now
are on some form of antidepressant lot?
Speaker 3 (09:34):
Yeah, lot, anti anxiety, anti depressing anxiety, I mean somebody?
Speaker 2 (09:40):
Yeah, I mean I've heard numbers like ten, fifteen to
twenty percent of the population. I have no idea what
number it is. But my point is just having some
form of mental illness, and no matter how mild, and
no matter how little it affects your functionality, and most importantly,
whether you're a danger to yourself or anyone else. I
mean to just designate a whole class of people as
(10:02):
prohibitive possessors. No, he'll no, I'll fight that. I'll litigate
that case. I'll win it.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
And it's the danger aspect. It's not you know what
sex you consider yourself, it's the danger aspects of it.
Are you mentally capable of having a firearm? And is
there any proof to back up the claims that you
might not be? Like with this Minnesota freak, there was
tons of frigs. There was a manifest though, there was
a YouTube channel. The Nashville shooter the same way, same thing,
(10:30):
go down to Parkland. It wasn't a transgender shooter, but
it was a nut with all the warning signs there.
Speaker 2 (10:35):
That's what we got to be focusing on, not just
taking broad categories of people and denying them their constitutional rights.
Hall No, absolutely disagree with that, And so I was
disappointed that Trump administration has done so many good things,
so many right decisions in terms of the two A.
And just recently they've filed briefs and pending cases saying, hey,
(10:56):
you know, the Supreme Court ought to take the seventh
it's assault weapon ban case. Just on and on. The
Trump administration has done good thing after a good thing
for the Second Amendment. But they are stepping on it
with this transgender thing. They're wrong, and I think they'll
either back off or they'll get proven wrong in court.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
Guy, we got about a minute left here. Your thoughts
on that rally we saw at the State House last week,
the IPS students, the gun safety rally ban assault weapons.
What did you think?
Speaker 2 (11:27):
You know, I surprised some people, I think when I
posted on this on social media over the weekend, which
is my first reaction to it was, Hey, you know what,
We've got young kids, high school kids for the most part,
who are now exercising their First Amendment rights. They're participating
in the political process, they're making their voices heard. They
(11:47):
came out all the way down to the State House. Yeah,
they got a day out of school. My first thought
was awesome, good for these kids. Man, they're participating in
the process. But immediately after that, my thought was, isn't
it a shame that these kids don't respect my rites
under the Second Amendment as much as I respect their
rights under the First.
Speaker 1 (12:03):
They could have learned something. I mean, I'm sure like
you or any one of the law abiding gun owners
at the State House would have came out and talk there.
Speaker 3 (12:10):
Was a gun safety aspect to this demonstration that I'm
off of that as.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
Well well, And there always is though, because but what
they say is to have guns safety quote unquote, we
need to ban you know. And there's this and that
comes from their teachers. I'm sure, well that's exactly what.
It's a combination of parents and teachers, and they both
support each other. But I would have loved to just
had some rhetorical conversations like can you define assault weapon?
(12:35):
You know, and just get into some statistics, but hey,
they're participating in the process, so God bless them.
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Where can we find you?
Speaker 2 (12:42):
Really? On Twitter? At guy Ralford is the best way
to give me a follow while you're on there at
guy Ralford.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
Guy, you're the best. Thanks guys, It's the Hammer and
Nigel Show.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Herd with Colin Cowherd
The Herd with Colin Cowherd is a thought-provoking, opinionated, and topic-driven journey through the top sports stories of the day.