The Gun Guy - Full Show - 9/6/25

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of
a free state, the right of the people to keep
in their arms shall not be infringed. This is the
Second Amendment, and this is the Gun Guy a boom
boom boom boom.

Speaker 2 (00:19):
Bang bang bang bang boom boom boom boom bang bang.

Speaker 1 (00:25):
Bo Guy Ralford on ninety three WYBC.

Speaker 3 (00:30):
Welcome afternoon, and welcome to the Gun Guy Show here
on ninety three WYBC with thrilled you with us beautiful, beautiful,
beautiful Saturday afternoon. I'll tell you what. I had every
intention of going out and busting some clays. I'm shooting
in a fundraiser for Salvation Army. I've talked about it
here on the show. If you haven't signed up, if

(00:50):
you just google clays for a cause, Salvation Army, September eleventh.
I believe there are still just a few spots that's
available that's going to be out at Indiana Gun Club.
It's kind of my home club where I learned how
to shoot sporting clays not so long ago. I was late.
I was a late bloomer. I don't know if I've

(01:11):
actually bloomed any but I was a late adapter anyway
of finding that sport. Fell in love with it right away.
I can't get enough of it now. I just don't
get the opportunity to shoot as much as I wish.
But if you like to come out, you don't have
to have any experience, I mean none. My first tournament
of any kind, it was three days after I even
understood what sporting clays meant, what the sport even evolved.

(01:34):
I went out and shot in a political fundraiser, adding
again a gun club. And I've been a shotgun instructor
for a long time, but my shooting was all defensive
shotgun had no idea about sporting club. I literally didn't
know what it was. I had asked the gentleman Judge Poindexter,
Brian Poindexter from Carmel, a great gentleman, great judge asked

(01:55):
me to come shoot on his team, and I said, well, sure, absolutely,
but what the hell are sporting clays And he explained
to me what they were. Actually took me out that
afternoon and kind of showed me how the sport works,
and I completely fell in love with the first time
I saw one of those one of those clays, one
of those targets just evaporate and it took me a
couple but by the time I hit one squarely and

(02:17):
it just turned into orange dust. I was hooked from
that moment on. But if you haven't signed up yet,
check it out. Clays for a Cause Salvation Army raising
money for at risk and underprivileged kids to attend a
camp that is owned and created and run by Salvation

(02:37):
Army out in the Brookville area. It's a beautiful place
where kids can go and have a safe space, enjoy
the summer weather. And they need our funding. They need
our help for this place to operate and to give
those kids that opportunity. So check that out a Claye
for a Cause. You can just google it and it'll
come right up and at any rate. I wanted to

(02:59):
get out and practice a little bit today, but then
college football kind of took over and I wasn't able
to pry myself away from the TV that my wife
and I had. We out out on the deck out
in the back of my house. We pulled a TV
out there and enjoying some football on a beautiful afternoon,
got to watch IU as expected dominate Kannesaw State. And

(03:22):
then about that time, even before that game was over.
It's time to head downtown, get ready for radio. But
hope you enjoyed that. A lot in the news on
the Second Amendment front, and a lot of it's interesting,
some of it's concerning. But what I've gotten a lot
of posts about, I mean messages, people sending me links.

(03:46):
A lot of people are commenting on this idea that
the Department of Justice is considering making anyone who is
quote unquote transgender, making them a prohibited person under federal law,

(04:06):
which currently the way the law reads and the way
the law operates, if you've been adjudicated to be mentally defective,
that's the term in the federal statute. You want to
look this up and google, it'll come right up. It's
eighteen USC ninety two G four. And this is kind
of the list of prohibited possessors. And you know, G

(04:29):
one is if you're a felon, actually defined as you've
been convicted of a crime punishable by over one year,
which is how we define felonies, and and and the list,
you know, conviction for a misdemeanor crime, a domestic violence
that's listed. A whole bunch of other things are listed
that make you a prohibited possessor. This is under the
Gun Control Act of nineteen sixty eight as amended by

(04:53):
the Brady Bell and then later there was something called
the Lattenberg Amendment, and that's what gave us this list
of federal prohibitors. But one of them is if you
been adjudicated to be mentally defective. What's mentally defective mean? Typically,
and historically, that's meant that you were involuntarily committed to
a mental institution based on a finding that you're a

(05:15):
danger to yourself for others. And listen, we all understand
what's motivating this, what's getting the Trump administration to look
at this, and why the Trump administration is apparently directed
the Department of Justice to seriously consider making anyone who's
quote unquote transgender a prohibited person. That is, they have
lost their Second Amendment rights may not own a gun

(05:40):
under this federal statutes basically because they've been adjudicated to
be mentally defective. Well, does that really work well the
ATF as it tends to do. And this is what
gets the ATF in trouble and what the courts have
largely largely pulled back on forced the ATF to draw

(06:01):
a lot of it's rule making. It looks at the
statutes that it operates under and that it enforces, and
then it promulgates rules. I mean, that's what gave us
the bump stock ban was a rule passed by ATF.
That's what gave us the so called stabilizer brace pistol

(06:22):
stabilizer brace ban, that was an ATF rule, and any
number of others. Those aren't acts of Congress. Those are
rules passed by ATF. And there's always questions One is constitutional?
Two is it consistent with the statute passed by Congress
that the ATF is regulating under. And there have been

(06:48):
there have been ATF rules that have been set aside,
found illegal, found unenforceable, and or found unconstitutional under both arguments.
The pistol stabilize ban what a lot of us called it,
basically meaning if you put a pistol stabilizer brace on
your your ar pistol or similar a k pistol shotgun

(07:12):
that wasn't really a shotgun because it was a non
shotgun that wasn't designed to be fired from the shoulder,
et cetera, et cetera. ATF rule that said, oh, well,
you have to register those as short broiled rifles or
short brailed shotguns. And if you don't look at it,
ten years in federal prison that was set aside based
on a determination that they didn't follow the rules. That

(07:33):
is a set forth in that what's called the administrative
procedures act on how they pass regulations that have to
be consistent with and not change, not alter the words
of Congress as passed by Congress and the actual statute
involved here. So what apparently the administration is now considering

(07:54):
is a rule that says, well, we think you fall
within the mentally defective category of prohibited persons if you're
a transgender and this comes about because of another rule
passed by ATF. You can find this if you're interested.
You want to pull up your Google exercise, your Google FEO,

(08:17):
as several of my friends liked us to call it,
twenty seven CFI and that stands for Code of Federal
Regulations CFR. Code of Federal Regulations twenty seven CFR four
seventy eight point one point one. There you go, pull
it up. What it says, you're also considered to be
mentally defective if you've been determined to quote unquote to

(08:40):
have a mental illness end quote that someone, including some bureaucrat,
has determined means you cannot manage your own affairs, and that,
as far as as as as I know, and I
follow this very very closely, there's never been exam in

(09:00):
terms of its constitutionality or whether it's even consistent with
a statute which says adjudicated to be mentally defective. And
that's an important point. So after the Minneapolis mass shooting,
school shooting, church shooting, it was both kids are sitting

(09:21):
in church as part of attending a Catholic school on
the same grounds, and a person who was transgender was
a biological male living as a female, claiming to be

(09:42):
a female and wrote a manifesto, So we know a
lot about this person's motivation. Decided to shoot up this
church as a bunch of little kids were in there
praying and worshiping about as despicable and act as you
can possibly imagine, and this prompted I've seen a lot
of memes after I've seen a lot of posts on

(10:04):
social media, and some I just don't think are at
all accurate. I saw a meme that said something like
the last six school shooters have all been transgender, and
it started listening them off, and it listed shootings. I
don't know if it was school shoots and mass shootings,
but they listed like the Denver theater shooting. I followed

(10:27):
that very closely. I've never seen any indication that person
was quote unquote transgender. They were certainly odd, had purple hair,
as I recall, and and and and and there were
several and I looked at each of them and said,
hold on, and and did a little work on the
on the Google food to go back to that term.
And I couldn't confirm that several on these lists were
actually quote unquote transgender. And and part of this is

(10:50):
because we don't really have a good definition. Have they
ever dressed up in the clothing of the opposite sex?
If they you know, if they're male, they weren't you know,
make up. We associate with females, I warned, wigs again,
dressed like them. I mean, how are we defining this?
I don't know, but a lot of people have contacted
me and said, hey, guy, how do you feel about this.

(11:13):
We're going to ban transgenders from possessing firearms in this
country potentially. Now, there's not been any final determination on this.
The Department of Justice apparently just announced they're considering this.
I think they have their finger in the air a
little bit, trying to determine the direction of the wind,
the political wins, and I'm sure they've got lawyers examining

(11:37):
the legality of this. I'll tell you what it's quarter
after a little after, we'll take a break here, we'll
come back. I'll tell you exactly how I feel about
potentially creating this huge category. Now about huge, I mean,
the transgenders are a relatively small percentage of the United
States population. That really isn't the point, and that's not

(11:58):
to me even relevant in the legal analysis of whether
this is constitutional or not or whether it's consistent with
Administrative Procedures Act, because it's consistent with the statute that
the ATF is regulating under. But set those aside, just
how do I feel about it. Assume for the sake
of the discussion, it would be constitutional, which I highly doubt,

(12:20):
and that it's consistent with federal law generally on the
propagation of rules by an administrative agency in the executive branch.
We come back, I'll take exactly how I feel about it,
and i'd love to get your thoughts as well. Give
us a call. As always love when our listeners joined
the conversation. Three one seven two three nine ninety three
ninety three three one seven two three nine ninety three

(12:42):
ninety three, give us a call, join the discussion. We'll
be back with my views on this point when we
come back. Soas Guy Ralford on The Gun Guy Show
on ninety three WYBC.

Speaker 1 (12:56):
Second, this is the Gun Guy with Guy Ralph one WYDC.

Speaker 3 (13:03):
And welcome back on Guy Ralford on The Gun Guy
Show on ninety three WIBC. So, as I mentioned in
the first segment, Trump administration is reportedly looking at banning transgenders. However,
that group is defined from possessing firearms and listen, this

(13:25):
kind of vague term of adjudicated to be mentally defective,
and now through rule making ATF has ostensibly expanded that
to include if you've been determined to have a mental illness.
To use that to say, well, if you don't understand
what gender you are, you must have a mental illness. Well,

(13:48):
that part of it I don't strongly disagree with. I
have used those terms myself, gender dysphoria, that is confusion
on what the hell gender you are is a recognized
mental illness. That part of it, don't have a problem with.
My problem is with is with the ATF rule to

(14:08):
begin with, because it's not consistent with the Federal statute,
and to the extent the Federal statute is too damn
broad and ambiguous anyway, it may very likely be unconstitutional
not only under the Second Amendment, but also on the
Fourteenth Amendment, which requires those statutes that define crimes. Because
keep in mind, if you fall into one of these

(14:29):
prohibited possessor categories, and you nonetheless possess a firearm, you
look at it ten years in federal prison. So to say, well,
the statute that says if you've been adjudicated to be
mentally defective somehow applies to anyone who has any form
of mental illness, notwithstanding whether there's been any determination that

(14:52):
they're actually dangerous or not. And keep in mind, in
the Rahimi case out of the Supreme Court not so
long ago, which went against us in terms of Second
Amendment advocates, but a lot of us predicted this. I
called out this likely outcome and predicted it specifically. That is,

(15:15):
it was a guy who was under a domestic violence
order of protection and they'd gone through a hearing and
a judge that determined, yes, you're a credible threat to
this lady who wanted the domestic violence order of protection
issued against you in Texas. And based on that determination
by a judge that you're a credible threat to another person,
you can be deprived of your Second Amendment rights. And

(15:38):
that's not inconsistent with the Second Amendment. Now, I've seen
people describe that opinion to say, you can only be
deprived of your Second Amendment rights if there's been a
determination that you're a credible threat to another person. That's
not quite what the Supreme Court said. I'd be a
little happier if that's what they did say, But that's
not exactly what the opinion says. They say in this case,

(16:00):
he was determined to be a credible threat. On that basis,
he can be deprived of his right to possess a
firearm without violating the Second Amendment. I think that gives
us important guidance, and what I would argue in court
is that that's a very very important consideration in determining
what's constitutional and what's not. And then there's the whole

(16:23):
definition of mental illness. For instance, I get this call
all the time when you're filling out your application for
a licensed to carry handgun on the state police website.
There's a very broad question. It's designed to be very broad.
It says something like, you've ever been treated for any
mental illness. People call me and they say, man, I
don't want to lie on this application because well, for instance,

(16:49):
you know, in my teen years I was treated for
depression and I was prescribed to an antidepressant. Some people
call me and they said, they're still on antidepressant. In
my god, I've I haven't done this research, but what
percentage of this country is on some medication that can
be categorized as an antidepressant? It's huge. If somebody told

(17:13):
me there was eight to ten percent of the entire
US population on some form of antidepressant, I'm not telling
you that's the number. I'm telling you I would not
be surprised if it was the number. How many people
you know, how many people in your family. It's huge.
So people are very concerned. I said, well, gosh, you know,
either I was back in the past prescribing an antidepressenter,

(17:33):
I'm taking an antidepressant. Now, does that mean I can't
own a gun. And if I answer yes on that
question on the state police website for my application for
a licensed to carry handgun, am I going to get denied? Well,
the answer to the latter question is yes if you
don't provide some additional documentation. And typically what state police
are looking for is some documentation from a mental health

(17:57):
professional who has seen you, preferably lately, says they've looked
at you and you're not a threat to yourself for others.
They've seen no indication to date. And that's a standard
mental health professional professionals are used to dealing with because
there are ethical and legal obligations that kick off if
they do think you're a danger to yourself for others,
which we won't go into now. It's not really central

(18:21):
to this conversation, but they're used to dealing with that standard.
So somebody says, Yeah, I've seen guy for the last
six years and i've treated him for this or that condition,
and to date, i've seen no indication he's a danger
to himself for others. Do you upload that as part
of your application for Indiana license to carry a handgun
and you get your license. I've gone through that a

(18:43):
number of times people have called me and I handle
appeals from denials all the time, and the people down
State Police do a fabulous job on these and they're
a pleasure to work with. They are consummate professionals down there,
and they're a delight to work with. And I'll say
that about all the other people the legal field that
I have to deal with on Second Amendment issues, but
the state Police, they have good people working down there,

(19:08):
and we can work through those issues. So a person
may or may not depend on how broadly you define
mental illness. But they let's say they have been treated
for depression, they're currently taking an antidepressant. Have they been
treated for a mental illness that you decide? The honest
answer to that is yes, Should they still be denied

(19:29):
their Second Amendment rights?

Speaker 4 (19:30):
Hell?

Speaker 5 (19:30):
No?

Speaker 3 (19:32):
Do I think you have some form of mental illness
if you don't understand what the hell gender you are? Yes,
I think you do, And I've said that, I've said
it publicly. Does that mean I think anyone who considers
themselves to be quote unquote transgender? In other words, they
were born with male genitalia and a male DNA constituency.

(19:56):
In terms of chromosomes they have in their body. Do
I think if they if they if they identify it
as something different than what they are physically, do I
think they have some form of mental illness? I would
say yes. Aha, So guy thinks they should be deprived

(20:17):
of their Second Amendment rights? Oh hell no, separate question.
I frankly don't put it in a much different category.
Maybe some somewhat more severe. But in terms of danger
to society, danger to themselves, danger to others, would I
say simply because they've decided, yes, they were born male,
but they want to become or they are in fact

(20:38):
in their mind a female, or vice versa, they should
be deprived of their Second Amendment rights? Oh hell no.
Now that same person goes out on social media and
here now we're talking about some actual school shooters that
we've seen. When Nashville that person was actually transgender. Minneapolis, yes, transgender.

(21:04):
Both of them had written things. We know the Minneapolis
well both, we know both. We've seen a lot more
of the manifesto quote unquote from the Minneapolis shooter than
we'd ever did in Nashville. For whatever reason, the officials
down there in Tennessee are keeping that very close to
the vest. But if there's some indication that, whether it's

(21:25):
based on that particular psychological or mental condition that causes
them confusion about what gender they are, or based on
whatever else is affecting them psychologically and mentally, that they
are in fact now a threat to others. Okay, you
have a psychological or mental condition, including a mental illness,

(21:48):
that's causing you to be a danger to others, and
there's an official determination of that. Adjudicated typically means, and
that's the wording in the federal statute, that typically means,
a judge, based on facts, based on evidentiary standards, based
on some legal criteria, has determined that you, in fact
meet the definition we're talking about. Somebody goes through that

(22:11):
process and there's a credible threat determined that now is
consistent with the Rohemi decision. Do I think everybody who
falls into that broad category of transgender, is it, by
definition because they're transgender, a threat to themselves or others?
A credible threat to themselves or others based simply on yeah,

(22:33):
I was born a man, but now I really think
I'm a woman. No, he'll know absolutely not. Now somebody goes, oh, well, guys,
on the pro transgender agenda here, he's a huge advocate
for transgenderism. Fast word. Well, look, make no mistake. Do

(22:54):
I think transgenders should be allowed to serve in our military.

Speaker 5 (22:57):
No.

Speaker 3 (22:57):
I think it's disruptive to the purpose of our military,
which is to be a fighting force to go kill
the enemy and win wars. I think when we went
all woke in the military, whether it was starting with
Clinton and proceeding through Obama and certainly continued under Biden,
it was inconsistent with the mission of our US military.

(23:19):
Do I think biological males should compete with females in sports?
Absolutely not.

Speaker 6 (23:26):
Hell no.

Speaker 3 (23:26):
And I've loved the legislation that we've seen in Indiana
and at the federal level that prohibits that one hundred percent,
no doubt about it. If you're a biological male, should
you be using the same restroom with my wife, or
my daughter or my granddaughters. Hell no, absolutely not. Let

(23:47):
me be one hundred percent clear on all of that.
Do I think just because you've decided you're a different
gender than God made you when you were born, that
you should be deprived of your constitutional rights? Into the
Second Amendment? Very clear on this point. Oh hell no,
it doesn't mean an illegal definition, and I don't think
it's constitutional. Now, I litigate these issues for a living,

(24:10):
including the constitutionality of statutes. Somebody comes to me, Let's say,
the Trump administration, this is this is how weird the
world can become. Sometimes. You know, they say what love
and war make for a strange bedfellows, well soak and
litigation and constitutional arguments, and you know what if this

(24:31):
thing were to go into effect, and I don't think
it will, I think the Trump administration will wise up.
I think they'll listen to groups like Gun Owners of
America and the Firearms Policy Coalition and then RA and
many others, and they many have come out already and
publicly weighed in on this. I think they'll see the

(24:51):
wisdom of turning their back on this, I will say
proposed rulemaking, because they just say they're examining it or
they're considering it. I think they'll wise up. But hypothetically,
if the Trump administration went down this road and adopted
this rule and across the board said no, you're transgender,

(25:12):
you denied the gender that God made you biologically when
you were born, then you have a mental illness and
you're mentally defective and you can no longer possess a
firearm under penalties of tenures in prison. You know what
I'll tell you right now, I would take that case,
and I have every confidence I would win that case.
I think i'd win it in the trial court. I
think I could win it here in the Seventh Circuit

(25:33):
Court of Appeals. It's our federal court, and I certainly
think i'd win into the Supreme Court. And I'm hopeful.
I mean, hey, I like having big cases and I
like litigating important issues. I'm hopeful of Trump administration sees
the folly and going down this road no pen intended
and doesn't take us there at all. But if they did,

(25:54):
I would oppose it. I would litigate it, and I
think i'd win on that issue. And right now I'm
way past the bottom of the yeah or so, we're
taking a break. This is Guy Ralford on The Gun
Guy Show on ninety three WYBC, the.

Speaker 1 (26:09):
Show about gun rights, gun safety, and responsible gun ownership.
This is the Gun Guy with Guy Ralford on wy.

Speaker 3 (26:18):
PC and welcome back. I'm Guy Ralford on The Gun
Guy Show on ninety three WIBC, and I'll tell you what.
Before we move on, let's go to the phone lines.
Mike has called in, and Mike, welcome to the Gun
Guy Show. Thanks for calling.

Speaker 5 (26:32):
Oh, thank you very much. Nice to speak with you.

Speaker 3 (26:35):
Absolutely Okay, what's got for us?

Speaker 5 (26:39):
Uh? Well, I've been hearing uh prom talking about the
transgender band for weapons, and I just don't think that's
gonna fly. And uh, I was thinking more on the
uh lines of uh you know, people that have to
take antidepressants, you know, so long off and those lines

(27:01):
of uh medications because all of them talk about serial
final tendencies and violent reactions, and you know, would that
be more of a way to maybe cure some of
this violence and shootings, much like the you know, the
marijuana laws. If you have a medical ID or a

(27:24):
medical uh you know medical marijuana card that uh, you
can't have a gun license because you're admitting.

Speaker 3 (27:33):
Yeah, you can't. You can't buy a gun. You can't
possess a gun, even in a state where it's been legal.

Speaker 6 (27:39):
Uh.

Speaker 3 (27:39):
And even if you have a medical marijuana card or
your state allows the purchase of recreational marijuana to your point,
because it's still illegal at the federal level. And and listen, Mike,
you raise an interesting point, which is we start talking
about these psychotropic drugs, and that's the term I hear
a lot, And to be honest with you, you know,

(27:59):
not being a pharmacologist, pharmacist, whatever term you want to use,
I don't know exactly how broad that category is. And
and listen, a lot of people are are on you know,
mild antidepressants that that are just fine, that get along great,
that function wonderfully in society. I mean Prozac I think probably, uh,

(28:23):
you know, developed right here by your own beloved Deli
lily In in Indie and has made that company in
an awful lot of money over an awful lot of years.
But are you know, are you a danger to society
simply because a doctor has seen fit to prescribe prozac
to you? I'm one hundred percent sure that you're not

(28:44):
by definition, just because you've been prescribed and take that medication,
because millions and millions and millions of people have taken
an awful lot of prozac for an awful long time
and or never remotely violent and in fact get along
in society a lot better. Now, you do hear about
a lot of these shooters and a lot of these
are being adolescents who turned into school shooters or other

(29:05):
mass shooters, and they're and you mentioned zoloft, and listen,
I don't know enough about that particular drug to comment
with any form of intelligence and and and and insight,
But you do hear, I do hear about an awful
lot of the Denver shooter, you know, who shot up
the theater, uh during a viewing of A Dark Knight,

(29:26):
the Batman movie, and killed so many people in that
theater you talked about. And that guy was just a
zombie when they showed him, uh, you know, in the
courtroom where they showed him after being arrested. He just
wasn't there. He was on another planet. And and whether
that's purely mental illness because of the medications he was
on or some combination thereof, I do not know. And

(29:47):
a lot of these, a lot of these drugs. In fact,
I saw a great Tucker Carlson on this, a fabulous one.
My wife directed me to this, and we sat and
watched the whole thing, and I commended to your viewing.
Is there was just a great Tucker Carlson really talked
about known side effects of some of these psychotropic drugs
including violence, and and and and and and is there

(30:11):
something there? I would never just reject that and say no.
So I think I think Mike is onto something potentially smart.
And it's not because someone's just transgender, which is not
what Mike was suggesting at all. It's if you're on
particular drugs, should you at least be someone some under
some additional scrutiny or go through some additional testing to

(30:32):
determine if those drugs are really appropriate for you, Not
purely as a condition of possessing a gun. I don't
want to put those kind of restrictions on a Second
Amendment right, but to the extent there's some determination that
you are, in fact now a credible threat. Okay, now
you're you're getting clothes to wear. Some restriction on constitutional freedoms,

(30:53):
maybe legal and constitutional based on the Rahimi decision from
the Supreme Court, but this broad categorization that we're talking about,
at least that the Justice Department talked about, we're considering
if you're transgender, you can't possess a gun. We'll put
you in prison if you do. Hell no, And again

(31:14):
I'm not suggesting Mike was saying anything different than what
I am. And some of these drugs. Are they overprescribed? Yes?
Do they cause effects that could make people violent? Yes?
Have some of our worst mass shooters been on those
precise drugs? Yes? There are something we should be looking
at there. Oh hell yes. But that's not just because
someone decides a lot of times based on peer pressure,

(31:36):
based on not being accepted, you know, living the lifestyle
that they're currently living. And they see people celebrated on
magazine covers and winning awards and showing up on talk
shows and everybody's patting them on the back because they're
so brave because they've decided that they're in fact the
opposite sex, and all these people support them and prop

(31:56):
them up and then celebrate them. And can some kids
look at that and say, oh gosh, I want a
part of that. I want to go from being shunned
and ignored by my classmates or my peers and just
suddenly being hoisted up and praised and acknowledged and called
brave and a pioneer and all those things we see

(32:17):
associated with transgenderism. I can see kids want to do
that for purely the kinds of reasons that drive adolescent
behavior to begin with no, Why do I want to
suddenly label that personal? Oh there you go, You got
a mental illness that deprives you of your constitutional freedoms?
Oh hell no, absolutely not. And that's what we're talking about.
Let's wrap up that discussion. We're going to have a
very short segment. When we come back, we'll get into

(32:38):
our number two shift gears. Is Indiana really to blame
for Chicago crime?

Speaker 4 (32:44):
You know?

Speaker 3 (32:44):
With President Trump talking about sending National Guard into Chicago
like he has done in DC to stem crime, a
lot of people are saying, well, we don't need the
National Guard. We just need Indiana to stiffen up its
gun laws. Hey, and then that would just do away
with crime in Chicago. The gangs won't shoow each other anymore.

(33:05):
They're just all that evil. Indiana would fix its gun laws.
Any credence to that, to the numbers support that we'll
get into. We come back, certainly into our number two,
says Guy Ralford on The Gun Guy Show. Give us
a call, join the discussion. Three one seven two three
nine ninety three ninety three three one seven ninety three
ninety three, says Guy Ralford on The Gun Guy Show.

(33:26):
On ninety three WYBC.

Speaker 1 (33:33):
Your rights, your responsibilities, your guns. This is the Gun
Guy with Guy Relford on ninety three WYDC.

Speaker 3 (33:43):
And welcome back, as Uh as I indicate it. We've
got a very short segment. We got about a minute.
But well, Linda I think has called in and uh
has a comment. We'll welcome to the Gun Guy Show.

Speaker 6 (33:56):
Hello, I am transgender. Won't this talk about Bannon guns?
It's just making me a little nervous for us people
like that who are really transgender. I'm not just I'm
living my life as a woman, and I thought, as
long as I could not to live do this. But
I'm about to kill myself before I did this, and

(34:19):
now I'm doing much better.

Speaker 3 (34:22):
Well, do you say you're doing much better? Do you
think if you had access to a gun you'd be
more likely to commit suicide based on what you've gone through?

Speaker 6 (34:30):
No, I'm saying a psychiatrist and psychologists and doing what
I need to do to take care of myself.

Speaker 3 (34:37):
All right. Do you think there's something about being transgender
that naturally makes you more of a risk to hurt
yourself or somebody other somebody else?

Speaker 6 (34:43):
No? No, But if those people that are doing who
are out there shooting people up. I want to actually
on hormones and trying to live their wife his life
as the right.

Speaker 3 (34:56):
And Melinda, I hate to cut you off and thanks
so much for calling and good luck to you. But
right now we're top of the hour. Gotta take a break.
This is Guy Ralford on The Gun Guy Show on
ninety three WYBC.

Speaker 1 (35:08):
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of
a free state, the right of the people to keep
in their arms shall not be infringed. This is the
Second Amendment, and this is the Gun Guy a.

Speaker 2 (35:23):
Boom boom boom boom bang bang bang bang boom boom
boom boom bang bang bo.

Speaker 1 (35:32):
Guy Ralford on ninety three WYBC.

Speaker 3 (35:37):
And welcome back for hour number two The Gun Guys
Show here on ninety three WIBC. Shout out to the
good folks on the YouTube feed, especially those that are
in the chat feature. Love the commentary there, Love most
of the commentary there, but it's always great to see
people participate there. There's not a lot of entertainment value,

(35:59):
I have to admit, and watching the show on video
just some old guy sitting in front of a microphone.
But the chat feature I think is something that people
enjoy and there's some interaction there. Sometimes people pose questions.
It's hard to keep up with during live radio, but
there's a lot of knowledgeable people on there and a

(36:20):
lot of people that post some good information, and I
always appreciate the following there on YouTube. Before I get
into some other topics, I had some memories come up
on Facebook, and then I don't know, have some come
up on my email. I'm sure not quite sure how
that happens through one drive. I think a cloud service

(36:42):
where I have stuff stored out on the cloud. But
I got a number of pictures that came up as
memories for September sixth in years past, fairly recently and
from twenty twenty one. Pictures came up from I think
this is one of the first time that we did
a night with WIBC and and listen if you haven't

(37:04):
heard of that, it's where and we've done three, I think,
but we'll we'll book a theater in downtown Indy. We've
done it a couple different places, a couple of beautiful theaters.
One is part of the historical Society over that I
don't remember the actual theater name, that's in there. But
each of the WIBC hosts, certainly the main host during

(37:28):
the week, Tony Katz and Hammer and Nigel, and then
those other people that are on mid morning. The name
always escapes me, but I'm kidding. Kendall and Casey, they
each of them come out and do a version of
their show, but do it in front of a live audience,

(37:49):
and there's a there's a there's a cocktail hour or
two beforehand, a little bit of time afterwards, so a
lot of mingling and we get to meet listeners and
there's some more dirvs and cocktails, and then we do
sort of a live version of each of the shows
and UH and and some other of the personalities like

(38:12):
Matt Bear. Matt Bear is always a favorite UH when
he comes out, you know, our our our awesome traffic
guy during the week and just an all around tremendous
human being who has a wonderful podcast by the way,
supporting sobriety.

Speaker 2 (38:29):
UH.

Speaker 3 (38:29):
You need to go out and find that it's about
those people that care about people that are going through,
uh recovering from different forms of addiction, whether that's from
alcohol or drugs or otherwise. And the people who care
about those recovering addicts. UH need support too. That's the

(38:49):
whole premise behind that podcast, and he and Ryan Hendrick
also here from WYBC, do that. But anyway, Matt Bear
is just a wonderful human being all the way around,
and he always gets a huge applause. Anyway, I don't
know about another a night with WABC that's been scheduled.
If I hear about one, I will throw it out
there because it's just so much fun. It's fun for me.

(39:12):
E though I've had my show now for ten years,
doesn't seem like it. I still kind of feel like
a rookie around here, since I just do the weekend
show and occasionally fill in on Hammer Nigel and then
of course do Monday Gun Day on Hammer Nigel. But
at any rate, it's a lot of fun to meet
listeners and have an evening where we can have some
cocktails and interact a little bit. And then the other

(39:33):
memory that came up, also from September sixth, from twenty
twenty two, was I was just wrapping up a defensive
car being course out at gunsight out in Paulton, Arizona,
and listen, my former sheriff I live in Boone County.
I live in Sionsville, so that's in Boone County obviously,
and my sheriff for several years was Ken Campbell, and

(39:56):
Ken Campbell just a wonderful, wonderful county sheriff. It is
also it was also at the time a guest instructor
and has been a wonderful firearms instructor for decades. But
he became a guest instructor out of Gun Site, which
is primarily based out in Paulden. They teach other places,
and after leaving law enforcement, he ended up being out

(40:16):
there first. He was the chief operating officer now the
chief executive officer at gun Site in Pauldon, Arizona. And
I'll tell you what, there is just no better place
to go train. I've been in a lot of places
around the country, and I've taken a lot of courses
around the country, and Gun Site is it, man, It's
definitely the top of the list. I think it's the
finest civilian firearms training facility on Earth. And listen, that's

(40:40):
not because they pay me to promote him or anything
like that. I just love to go out there and train.
But I had a great group picture that came up
in my memories, and I to tell you that course
completely whipped my ass. That course was rough. It was
a car being course. So I'm taking it with an ar.
Most people are take taking it with ars. There. I

(41:02):
think there was maybe an AK or two, and we
had some bullpups out there as well, but primarily ars.
And I got to tell you, you know, whenever you're
doing a course like this, they always have the so
called alternative shooting positions. Right, so you're gonna shoot from prone, right,
we're flat out on the ground, and you're gonna shoot
from kneeling, squatting, sitting, and then there's a whole bunch

(41:26):
of transitioning between the different positions. It's like, okay, you're
gonna prop down prone and fire so many shots and
then come up to kneeling and then squatting and then
you know, come up to standing and shoot a number
of targets. Or there was a more or less an
obstacle course we had to run where we had to

(41:48):
crawl down into one where you had to crawl through
like almost like a dog cage kind of thing, and
get out the other end of it and shoot from
that position and crawl back out of the thing and
squat down and shoot from behind a stump or tree
branch and a whole bunch of things. And it was
fabulous training. It was absolutely fabulous training. I think I
was the oldest one in this course by a good
fifteen or twenty year. It may have been somebody else

(42:10):
in their forties. I don't know that anybody else there
was in their sixties as I was at the time.
But I gotta tell you, so I ran everything. I
did every drill, and I would tell them I go,
this may not be real fast and it may not
be real pretty, but I'm gonna get it done. And
the beginning of the week I was keeping up pretty
well on the whole physical thing. My big problems knees.

(42:32):
You know, I played football for I don't know what
fourteen years and had a couple of knee surgeries, and
my knees have not done well over the years, and
I won't bemoan that anymore. But if my knees would
have cooperated, I have a hell of a lot better time.
But I still had just a fabulous training experience out there,
as I always do, and it was funny as I
was leaving, and it was funny because I was wearing shorts.

(42:55):
And Ken Campbell, of the CEO, came up. And we've
been friends for a long time, says before he went
out permanently to Arizona. And he came up and I
was I was kind of rubbing one knee and he
looked at it. He goes, He goes, dude, I think
your knees are bigger around than your thighs are right now,
because my piece were all swollen. And I thought, you know,

(43:16):
that doesn't say good things about my knees or my thighs.
My knees were swollen up like balloons, and and but
that none of that detracts from the fabulous experience out there,
and I don't mean it that way. And and Ken
reminded me that at at Gunsight they have now what
they call they're seasoned, not senior, but seasoned, the citizen courses,

(43:39):
and it's it's the same course. They don't do the
same testing at the end. You don't necessarily get the
same designations like expert and that kind of thing. You
can get out of running their regular courses where you're
doing every drill. The way is designed to be taught
out there, but it's it's without the ups and downs.
It's out without the you know, getting on the ground

(44:00):
getting up from the ground about ten million times, which
we did in my car. Being course at least have
felt that way. So now they have the seasoned citizen
court courses out there they've had for a few years,
where it's all the same training, but without the ups
and downs. And I thought, man, that's a concession I
don't necessarily want to make. I mean, I mean, yeah,

(44:20):
hell yeah, I mean I'm getting ready here. In November,
I'll turn sixty eight years old. I bought two years
from seventy. Yikes, there's no way that's not seasoned, whatever
definition you want to apply to that. But damn, I've
been in denial on the age thing for a long time,
and I hate to admit I still can't go out
there and do everything the younger people can do. So

(44:41):
I think I'm going to take at least one more
of the rifle classes out there where I'm doing every
damn thing. And as soon as I if I ever
have to bow out of a drill or I just
can't physically do it, then all right, I may move
on and admit the handicap that is old age. But
in the meantime I didn't really even tend to go
into this, and in the meantime I found myself making

(45:03):
fun of myself a little bit. But what a great memory.
And listen, there's no there's no compensation coming back towards
me for this. I just love training out there, and
the picture brought back a lot of great memories, a
lot of really good people in my course, and really
great instructors. Our lead instructor are range masters. They called
him out there for this carbing class, gentleman named Walt,

(45:25):
and for the life of me, I can't remember Walt's
last name right now. As I said, I didn't really
it tend to go down this road on the show.
But Walt was like a six time long distance rifle champion,
world world champion in terms of precision shooting, and he
also teaches their precision shooting courses out there as well
as range master for those and my goodness, six time

(45:46):
world champion. This guy is a marksman like nobody's business.
And oh, by the way, I think wall is at
least my age. Yeah, he's one way or the other.
He may be older than me, maybe a little younger,
but I bet we were within three or four years
of each other, and what was doing every damn thing.
He was popping on the ground, popping right back up
like a damn gymnast. So so age is not is

(46:07):
not necessarily an excuse for me. But it was just
great experience. So forgive the departure there. I'm reminiscing. I'm
looking at the picture I posted on Facebook. Just think
about what a great experience it was. If you get
an opportunity, please do that. Right now, we're taking a
break at the quarter role. We'll come back. I'll talk
about the allegation that I don't know. I've heard this
all this week. Week and a half, National Guard troops

(46:30):
going to Chicago. Oh heck no, we just need to
change Indiana's gun laws and that'll fix the crime problem
in Chicago. Any credibility behind that, That's what we'll get
into when we come back. This Guy Ralford on The
Gun Guy Show on ninety three WYBC.

Speaker 1 (46:51):
Now you got a gun guy, Guy Ralford three WYPC.

Speaker 3 (46:58):
And welcome back. I'm Guy Ralford on the Gun I
Show on ninety three WIBC. So there's a common refrain
you heard, You've heard it for a lot of years.
Obama came out. In fact, I screamed at the TV
I was seeing. It was a it was a town
hall type of event where President Obama was speaking, and

(47:23):
he started talking about crime and the need for gun
control and all the same refrains we hear from liberal
politicians over and over. But he made an entirely false claim.
It was absolutely fictitious. He go out and find us
on the internet, so I remember it clear as bell.
It's out there. He made the claim that forty of

(47:45):
guns recovered from Chicago crime scenes came from Indiana. There
were originally purchased in Indiana, and said, there you go,
look at that. And if only Indiana didn't have such
lax gun loss that's the term, y'all always here lacks
gun laws, then we'd have much less crime in Chicago.
So it's not that gun control doesn't work, because you'll

(48:08):
hear a lot of people on the conservative side of
the equation, or the pro Second Amendment side of the equation,
where I am say, well, if gun control work, why
do these Democrat controlled cities and Democrat controlled states where
they have every they have the wish list, they have
the cornucopia of gun control laws California and Maryland, where

(48:32):
Baltimore is California, where in La is Chicago. In Illinois
has passed every conceivable law. If there's a law that
Mom's Demand Action wants to see on the books, they
have it in California, they have it in Illinois, have
it in Maryland, have it in New York, New Jersey, Hawaii, Washington, Oregon,

(48:53):
several others where liberals, because of the large cities within
those states, control the state legislatures. They've got the whole
wish list. So why do you see such out of
control crime? Look at the hell hole that Portland has
become here lately because they've just decided, well, I don't
know if you have purple hair otherwise or liberal Waco,

(49:14):
we just won't enforce any existing laws against you whatsoever.
And oh, by the way, law abiding citizens are completely
hamstrung and their ability to defend themselves. And so you
look at all of this, and the point of President
Obama in this town hall was, well, it's not the
fact that gun control doesn't work. Gun control works great.

(49:37):
It's just that there are these lacks gun controls in
adjoining states like Indiana, and people buy guns legally in Indiana,
and then they bring them to Illinois and Chicago specifically,
and they commit all these crimes. And so we just
need to fix Indiana gun laws in order to prevent
all this crime. And you're hearing that all the time
right now, whether it's from national politicians Tuck Schumer, et cetera,

(50:01):
or people lashing out against President Trump for even talking
about considering sending the National Guard in Chicago like he's
done in d C. And by the way, on that point,
just initially, it's a basic premise here. We need to
get our heads around, which is sending the National Guard
in to do any form of law enforcement quote unquote
into Chicago is a whole different deal than Washington, d C.

(50:23):
Why Because Washington, d C. Is federal territory, and what
President Trump has the authority to do and what's not
prohibited on federal territory in federal land is completely different
than what he's legally able to do in terms of
law enforcement using federal law enforcement, in this case, military personnel,

(50:47):
that's a whole different deal. We have posse comatatis. It's
actually not part of the Constitution, but it's been a
federal statute for a long long time says military can't
be used domestically certain exceptions, But to send them out
and say, well, now you're going to be the cops
in Chicago, and they're getting around that. They're saying no, no, no,
They're going to be there to protect federal personnel. They're

(51:09):
going to be there to protect federal property like courthouses
or ice offices or atf offices, not going to do
domestic law enforcement when that's not what we're using them force.
Will we pass muster under what's currently prohibited? I get
all that, but it's a whole different equation what he
can do in Chicago versus what he can do in DC,
what he can do in any other state or any
other city like Baltimore, which he's talked about as well.

(51:32):
But the point I want to make and all of
this is that Indiana starts being put under the spotlight
of the microscope in terms of criticizing our laws and
what are the actual numbers. It's interesting because Breitbart just
published the results from an analysis from the most recently

(51:53):
available numbers, which is twenty twenty three, and they looked
at atf gun recovery and trace data. So what are
we talking about here. When a gun is recovered at
a crime scene, whether it's by CPD Chicago Police Department,
whatever local law enforcement agency, they often call ATF for

(52:16):
a trace. And listen, if you own a gun store,
you work at a gun store, you get this call
all the time, or you get a visit from ATF.
Often it's just a phone call. They'll say, hey, we
need to trace on this gun, and and how does
that all happen? How does that all unfold? Well, here's
exactly how it happens. The gun's recovered at a crime scene.

(52:39):
Police there have the gun and they see it. It's
a glock. It's a model nineteen as a serial number
on it. Now, sometimes the serial number has been removed,
and there are things that can foil this whole process,
but typically there's there's the make, there's the model, there's
a serial number. Say call a manufacturer. They contact the
manufacturer and they say, I need a trace on this

(53:02):
glock nineteen with serial number x y Z one two
three and glock runs that and they say, we sold
it to such and such a distributor and such and
such a date. So they called the distributor and then
they get a hold of the distributor and they say,
what did you do with that gun? Well, I sold
that to Guy's gun store in Carmel, Indiana. Okay. That's

(53:25):
when the call to the gun store comes in. Okay, well,
you need to run a trace on this. Gun stores
are required to keep the forty four to seventy three forms.
There's not supposed to be any national database. I say,
they're not supposed to be. A lot of US suspect
the ATS been secretly trying to build this illegally, by
the way, because part of the Gun Owner's Protection Act

(53:46):
of nineteen eighty four prohibits it was eighty six, the
Firearm Owners Protection Act prohibits the federal government would be
keeping any kind of a national database of firearms and
serial numbers and gun owners outside the NFA National Firearms Act.
But for the typical rifles, pistols, and shotguns, government's not

(54:07):
supposed to keep any kind of database. But they what
is legal, and what's actually legally required is the gun
shops are supposed to keep those forty four to seventy
three forms. And I've heard all kinds of numbers. I
first I heard twenty years, I heard twenty five years
and then I heard until they go out of business,
and they're supposed to keep them in some kind of
a chronological searchable format. And so the gun store says, okay,

(54:32):
about when would we have received this gun in And
the ATF will know that based on what they heard
from the distributor or in the manufacturer. If manufacturers sold
it directly to a gun shop, so, well you got
it in about blank. Wellt usn't tell them when they
sold it, depending on how long it's sat in inventory.
But they'll go in and this has no easy process.

(54:53):
A lot of times these forty four to seventy three
forms are are held just in payper form and so
it's literally rifling through a box of these forms looking
for a making model and serial number. Eventually they'll find
it and they'll say aha, and they'll come back on
the phone or they'll call ATF back and say, we

(55:14):
sold this gun to so and so. The name will
be on the forty four to seventy three form with
a date, and then they'll have their identifying information, their name,
their address, etc. But that trace to the gun shop.
If that gun shops in Indiana, then they say aha,
this is based on information from the manufacturer, any distributors,

(55:37):
anybody else in the chain of distribution before it ended
up at that gun shop. So if that gun shops
in Indiana, boom, there's a gun recovered in this case,
given our discussion from a Chicago crime scene, that was
originally sold in Indiana. Now, when might that have happened?
The study of twenty twenty three data that looked at

(56:04):
twenty two thousand, nine hundred and seventy three, so just
shy of twenty three thousand guns recovered or traced in
Illinois in twenty twenty three, twenty two thousand. They looked
at those and they actually calculated what they called time
to crime. So, in other words, from that date that
gun was sold by the first FFL, the first Federal

(56:28):
Firearms licensee, the first gun shop. And they determined that
by again going back through the manufacturer, anybody else in
the change of distribution till they got to the gun shop.
In this case, it was six years. What they called
time to crime from the time was received by the
gun store or sold by the gun store. It's the latter,

(56:49):
it's sold by the gun store until it was recovered
at crime. Now, some smart and knowledgeable people on the
chat feature on YouTube are saying the average long term,
given more than just one year of data, which was
the subject of this particular study of twenty twenty three,

(57:10):
says it's more like twelve years on average. What could
be a long damn time. So all they're saying is
this was originally is a gun recovered in a Chicago
crime scene that was originally sold in Indiana. It may
have been sold in Indiana twenty years ago. The average
for twenty twenty three guns it was six years ago.
How many times has it changed hands in that six

(57:34):
years or twelve years or twenty years on that particular gun,
And is there something that tells you, based on that
timeframe there was something wrong with the gun laws in
the state in which it was originally sold that allowed
to do something that was legal in that state. It
would have been prevented had they not had such quote

(57:55):
unquote lax gun laws. In my view, and I feel
strongly about this, you can't blame violence on so called
lax gun laws if what was done was actually illegal
under the laws of that state or illegal under federal law.
And I'll make this point and then I'll go into

(58:16):
this break we're always late going into breaks on my show.
But for instance, is it legal to sell a handgun
to a citizen of another state, a resident of another state. No,
So somebody from Chicago with an Illinois driver's license drives
to Indiana and buys a handgun. Somebody broke the law

(58:39):
by selling them that gun. That's true, whether a private
purchaser or at a gun store. Is it legal to
be engaged in the commerce of buying and selling firearms
like a lot of these people are. They'll know. They say, oh, well,
they come to gun shows and they fill up a
van and they drive back to Chicago and sell the guns.
And that's all totally illegal under Indiana law. And that's

(59:05):
why it's the lacks gun laws that allow all those
guns to make it back to Chicago when we wind
up in the hands of gangs or other criminals. Was
that really true? First of all, if you're doing that
and you're taking them back to Chicago and selling them
for a profit, which obviously they are, let's be illegally
engaged in the commerce of buying and selling firearms, which
is already illegal under federal law. So you're breaking a law.

(59:25):
If that law were enforced, the gun would have never
gotten made. It would have never made its way back
to Chicago. If somebody sold a gun, whether it's a
private citizen or an FFL at a gun shop sells
a handgun a resident of a different state, they broke
the law under current law. So how has it lacks
gun while that it resulted in that as opposed to
failure to enforce the laws we already have. And invariably,

(59:49):
if somebody comes to Indiana buys a gun and takes
it back to Chicago and resells it and it ends
up in the hands of criminals or gang members who
then commit crimes because O say they're criminals, then there
were a whole series of laws broken. In that context,

(01:00:10):
how can you blame lax gun laws When laws were
broken and the person didn't care about breaking those laws,
if there were one additional or two additional or twenty
additional laws in place, what makes you think that person
would suddenly comply with the law, and when what they
did was already illegal. But how about the numbers? People say, well,

(01:00:34):
we wouldn't have any crime or wouldn't have a significant
crime in Chicago if Indiana didn't have these lax gun
laws because this mass quantities of guns come from Indiana
or and keep in mind when we say come from Indiana,
all it means is they were originally sold by a
gun store an FFL in Indiana, could have gone through
changes of hands twenty different times, could have ended up

(01:00:56):
in Florida or Mississippi or wherever else and then brought
to Chicago. So came from Indiana doesn't mean they came
directly from Indiana into the hands whoever committed that crime
that caused the trace to occur in the first place.
It just means it was originally sold, it went through
untold number of hands beforehand, went to untold a number

(01:01:16):
of other states, and eventually wound up wound up in Chicago.
But are the numbers even accurate. That's what we'll go
into when we come back. Right now, we're taking a break.
This is Guy Ralford on The Gun Guy Show on
ninety three WIBC.

Speaker 1 (01:01:36):
He's a Second Amendment attorney, he's an NRA certified Firearms instructor.
He's the Gun Guy Guy Ralford on ninety three WYPC.

Speaker 3 (01:01:48):
And welcome back. We have a bit of a short
segment here because I want to reserve some time at
the end of the show to talk about something a
little different, but talking about whether Indiana should really be
blamed for Illinois's crime problem. And again when President Obama
at this town hall, and I don't remember, I could
find it easily with a Google search, but it was

(01:02:08):
sometime during his presidency, and I want to say it
was when he was running for his second term, and
he was president what from elected in two thousand and
eight until twenty sixteen, so his term would have actually
been what January two thousand and nine to January twenty seventeen,

(01:02:29):
And I say, I want to say when he was
running for reelection, But he came out and he made
this claim and the number was completely off. He said
forty percent of Chicago quote unquote crime guns that his
guns were covered from crime scenes were from Indiana. And
I remember researching it at the time and the number
was actually eighteen percent. Another ATF study like we just saw,

(01:02:51):
looking at twenty twenty three numbers and the actual number
was eighteen so it was less than half of what
he claimed. I remember thinking at the time that eighteen
percent was incredibly low when you think about it, because
until twenty and ten, possessing a handgun in Chicago was
completely illegal. I couldn't sell them, and you couldn't own them,

(01:03:16):
and you couldn't possess them. Why because Chicago had a
complete ban on handguns and that wasn't overturned by the
Supreme Court of the United States until twenty ten in
the McDonald versus City of Chicago case, And that was
on the heels of the Heller Heller versus d C
is actually DC versus Heller. It was in two thousand
and eight they said, yes, there's a constitutionally protected right

(01:03:37):
to own a handgun. That was applied to d C
a federal territory, and then a McDonald they said, yes,
the Second Amendment is quote unquote incorporated through the fourteenth
Amendment to apply to the states. So Illinois and the
City of Chicago have to comply with the Second Amendment too,
And yes, there's a constitutionally protected right to own a handgun.
So starting only in twenty ten during Obama's presidency, could

(01:04:04):
you even own a gun in Chicago or Illinois. And
they still had incredibly draconian licensing requirements. They were drug
kicking and screaming to even issue licenses. So if it's
completely illegal for all that time to possess a handgun
in Chicago, did Chicago banned them until the constitutional ruling

(01:04:24):
came down? The Supreme Court ruling came down in twenty
ten requiring them to allow some ownership of handguns. So
you couldn't buy a handgun until twenty ten sometime thereafter.
So was it surprising that eighteen percent of quote unquote
crime guns originally came from Indiana? Well, you couldn't buy

(01:04:44):
a gun in Illinois, a handgun. It was shocking to me,
given the proximity of Hammond and Gary to Chicago, that
only eighteen percent came from Indiana. So what's it done
since that timeframe? Let's call it twenty thirteen or fourteen.

(01:05:08):
It is my best estimate of when Obama made that
claim and I ran it down, it was eighteen percent. Well, again,
let's go back to the study we just saw from
ATF looking at twenty twenty three, what the percentage was
that came from Indiana twelve twelve percent. Do you want
to blame Indiana for Chicago's crime problems? Well, you got
to account for the other eighty eight percent, And keep

(01:05:30):
in mind that that twelve percent that was just It
doesn't mean they they popped out of Indiana the day
before a crime occurred, and Indiana directly supplied that gun
to a crime scene or to a criminal who perpetated
a crime at the crime scene. It just means it
was originally sold in Indiana, which could have been on

(01:05:52):
average six years before based on twenty twenty three data,
and based on historical data, was about twice that long.
So can you draw these conclusions that Indiana is the
source of the guns that contribute and in fact cause
Illinois's crime problem? Of course not. The numbers don't support it.

(01:06:15):
I guess we're the largest single source in terms of states.
What was the largest single source of guns recovered at
Chicago crime scenes and traced in twenty twenty three? The
largest single source state forty Illinois. Illinois gun shops sold

(01:06:39):
forty percent, almost four x the number of Indiana. How
you blame in Indiana? So that's fifty two total? Where
did the other forty eight come from? A smattering of
other states? Mississippi, Alabama, a whole number of other states.
How you blame in Indiana? And if Illinois had these
wonderful crime preventing laws. Gun control laws they have in

(01:07:03):
Illinois work so fabulously. Why is the number one contributor
of quote unquote crime guns at Chicago Crime scenes? Illinois?
Explain that to me, it doesn't hold up, doesn't hold
up to logic, it doesn't hold up to facts, and
it doesn't hold up to atfs and statistics. With that,
we're taking a break. We'll be back and wrap up
this edition of the Gun Guy Show when we come back.

(01:07:24):
This is Guy Rayford on The Gun Guy Show on
ninety three WYBC.

Speaker 1 (01:07:31):
Now you've got a gun guy, Guy Ralford on ninety
three WYPC.

Speaker 3 (01:07:39):
And a wrapping up this edition of The Gun Guy Show,
I want to play a couple of clips, both from
chief law enforcement officers in different jurisdictions. The first one
is from a police chief in Canada, and as you know,
Canada doesn't have a Second Amendment. Canada has largely banned handguns,
certainly the quote unquote assault weapons right down the line,

(01:08:02):
and they're really moving toward completely banning or at least
dramatically inhibiting civilian gun ownership. Here's what a police chief
in Canada says about you potentially experiencing a home invasion.

Speaker 7 (01:08:17):
In the unlikely event that you find yourself the victim
of a home invasion, we are urging citizens not to
take matters into their own hands. While we don't want
homeowners to feel powerless, we urge you to call nine
to one one and do everything you can to keep
yourself and love one safe until police arrive, and be
the best witness possible. This could mean locking yourself in

(01:08:38):
a room away from the perpetrators, hiding, fleeing the home,
but don't engage unless absolutely necessary. But as it stands,
we know the best defense for most people.

Speaker 5 (01:08:52):
Is to comply.

Speaker 7 (01:08:52):
As you've just heard a number of safety recommendations.

Speaker 3 (01:08:58):
Okay, so home invasion, so bad guys have forced their
way into your home. And and by the way, there's
no it's very perhaps a little bit province to province
in Canada, but for the most part, there's no castle
doctrine or ability to defend yourself. So you're supposed to

(01:09:19):
either flee the home, lock yourself up somewhere, don't engage,
and pray for the best, and called nine on one, Because,
of course, the law enforcement is always minutes away. When
seconds count. Let's contrast that here, where we have a
second Amendment, and in fact have a law enforcement official,
my current favorite law enforcement official Sheriff Grady Judd from

(01:09:44):
Polk County, Florida.

Speaker 4 (01:09:46):
But we have received information and social media that some
of the criminals were going to take their criminal conduct
into the neighborhoods. I would tell them, if you value
your life, you probably shouldn't do that Polk County because
the people of Polk County like guns. They have guns.

(01:10:08):
I encourage them to own guns, and they're going to
be in their homes tonight where their guns loaded. And
if you try to break into their homes to steal
to set fires, I'm highly recommending they blow you back
out of the house.

Speaker 3 (01:10:24):
With their guns. So if you're a budding you know,
aspiring home invader and you live in Canada and you
hear that first police chief, go, well, you know what
we recommend, you know, just comply, just call me in
on one and hope for the best. Or you're that

(01:10:46):
same aspiring home invader in Polk County, Florida. What do
you think your reaction is. That's why we have a
second Amendment, among many other reasons. That's it for this
week's show. Remember always shoot straight, Always be safe.