LLP #120: Money Talks, Rights Walk: The NFA Edition

Ask us a question. We will answer it on the podcast.

Show sponsors:
My Patriot Supply
MyPatriotSupply.com/LLP
Save Up to 60% Off

Choq
choq.com
25% off any subscription
Promo code: LLP

Undertac
undertac.com
20% off
Promo code: LLP20

In this provocative deep dive, hosts Eric and Matt peel back the curtain on the shadowy world of gun rights lobbying and its sometimes contradictory relationship with constitutional rights. What happens when the business interests of gun manufacturers clash with the principles of the Second Amendment? The discussion centers around recent developments with the Hearing Protection Act, where a curious compromise maintains registration requirements while removing the $200 tax stamp—raising questions about who truly benefits.

The conversation takes a fascinating turn when examining the financial mechanics behind lobbying. With gun rights organizations spending a staggering $14.7 million in 2024 alone, we're forced to ask: what exactly are gun owners getting in return? Could some manufacturers and businesses actually prefer keeping suppressors on the NFA registry because it allows them to maintain higher prices and specialized services? The hosts break down how companies that have built entire business models around navigating NFA regulations might quietly oppose full deregulation.

Beyond the immediate policy battles, Eric and Matt explore the philosophical implications of lobbying as representation. When organizations claim to speak for millions of gun owners, politicians can conveniently ignore individual voices—creating a system where your rights are negotiated by third parties with their own agendas. The hosts distinguish between "access-based lobbying" (cultivating relationships through donations) and confrontational approaches (threatening to primary politicians who don't comply), explaining how both methods shape legislation.

Eric closes with a powerful personal statement about his refusal to accept money from any gun rights organization throughout his advocacy career—viewing his work not as a financial opportunity but as service to a constitutional cause. His approach highlights the tension between moving the chess pieces necessary to win political battles and maintaining the principled purity of the fight for Second Amendment freedoms.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome back everybody.
This is Eric and Matt and thisis Life, liberty and the Pursuit
, your beacon of freedom and theAmerican way of life.
Tune in every Monday for a newepisode as we dive into the
world of liberty and what makesour country great.

Speaker 2 (00:14):
All right boys and girls, welcome back.
This is Eric and Matt here withLLP, your home for all things.
Freedom in a world gonecompletely mad, full of
debauchery, chaos and justdownright damn craziness Crazy
lobbyists.
Yes, in the case of today's show, we're going to be discussing
lobbying.
Now, of course, you know us, wego off the rails on a lot of

(00:37):
different concepts anddiscussions throughout the show,
but we are going to eventuallykind of focus on lobbying.
What is lobbying?
What does this accomplish?
Is it good or bad?
How should we look at this?
And, primarily in the vein ofthe Second Amendment, when we
look at these gun bills and wehave these pro-gun lobby

(00:58):
organizations that come in,anti-gun lobby organizations
come in, what are they trying toaccomplish?
How do they accomplish theirgoals?
What is the purpose of it all?
How does it equate to you and Iaverage everyday man?
That's kind of what we reallywant to discuss and I think a
lot of people are confused aboutthe subject.
We are going to dive into itand we're going to have a lot of
fun with today's show and we'regoing to talk about our weeks

(01:19):
and see how y'all are doing andI also typically every show
y'all are doing and I alsotypically every show y'all.
I just want to do some quickhousekeeping here.
Every show I typically will putout a tweet.
So make sure you follow me onIRACVeteran8888 over on X slash
Twitter.
I always will put out an emailsaying hey, this is the subject
for today's show, this is whatwe're talking about.

(01:41):
I may give some context and Ioffer you guys a chance to
provide your commentary and askany questions.
And while we're cutting theshow, you're kind of interacting
with the show.
Even though I may not beresponding on Twitter, we may
read some of your tweets here onthe show and respond to some of
your questions and or comments.
So make sure you're alwayschecking the Twitter feed
because you never know when wemight be recording.

(02:01):
I don't announce it, we justkind of throw it up there and
you guys can get in on theconversation.
So we will check in on somequestions and answers.
I've been promising that for afew shows We've gotten a little
long-winded and had the subjectmatter was really deep to dive
into.
But I think today's show we'regoing to have a little time to
get into some questions.
So we will do that today.
And a few folks have beenasking about flights and such.

(02:24):
We are going to get back intodoing some of those.
If you look at some of theolder LLP content, we were doing
some of the like whiskeyflights and pepper flights and
doing various foods and coffee.
I really enjoy that type ofstuff and, to give you just a
quick little teaser, okay, I didget some Bankman cigars.
Now I don't know if we're goingto sit out there and try to

(02:46):
smoke freaking five cigars inone sitting.
I don't know how fun that wouldbe, maybe for some of you, but
I got a great selection ofBankmans here.
I've always been kind of thekind of guy that I really do
like the my Father ConnecticutGreat stick it's a great
Connecticut.
Really do like the my FatherConnecticut.

Speaker 3 (03:05):
Great stick it's a great Connecticut.

Speaker 2 (03:06):
I do like the my Father Connecticut a lot and
also I really like Padron cigarsa lot.
I mean it's a known thing thatI'm a Padron junkie.
I love the Gurkha rum cigarsand cognac cigars.
You know those are great.
As many of you know, that wasthe particular cigar that the
Navy SEALs celebrated with afterthey killed Bin Laden.
They all had the Gurkha rumcigar.

(03:28):
Anyway, I don't know if we'regoing to smoke five cigars in
one sitting, but we definitelywill give our thoughts on these
bankmans.
So we do have some flights onthe way.
We might bring in some guestsand maybe have five of us sit
here and then each person maybegive an opinion on what they
think about each cigar.

(03:48):
I think that's the way to do ityeah, because there's no way
you're going to make it throughfive sticks in one city man, you
for yourself, you would have aserious case of nicotine
poisoning going all right lookso it is a known fact.
All right, I have quit drinking,quit smoking.
I haven't had a drink in overthree years and, uh, I will
occasionally still have a cigaron on occasion, uh, special
arrangement, special celebrationwith friends, something like

(04:10):
that.
Um, so some of the flights thatwe're doing, we may not really
work with alcohol much, but ifwe do a little, taste is not the
end of the world, so we maystill do some alcohol flights,
um, and we'll have some fun withthat in the future.
Yeah, man uh, right now we'regoing to go ahead and give a
shout out to the first sponsorof the show, and that is our
friends at my patriot supply.

(04:30):
Memorial day is more than justa long weekend.
It's a time to remember thosewho sacrifice for our freedom
and to make sure we're doing ourpart to protect what they
fought for.
For me, that means making suremy family's prepared for
whatever comes next, and rightnow my Patriot Supply a company
I personally trust is runningtheir Memorial Day sale, and

(04:50):
it's their biggest of the season.
You can save up to 60% on theemergency gear that matters most
Emergency food kits, waterfiltration, off-grid power
systems and much more.
Preparedness is not about panic.
It's about peace of mind.
It's about knowing that if theshelves go empty or the grid
goes down, you're alreadycovered, and this sale makes it

(05:11):
more affordable than ever to getthere.
If you've been thinking aboutpreparing or expanding your
supplies, this is the time to doit, but this sale won't stick
around, so go tomypatriotsupplycom slash LLP
Lima, lima, papa to stock uptoday.
That's mypatriotsupplycom slashLLP.
Check them out, get yourselfsome food.

(05:31):
Heck, yeah, that's not a baddeal at all.
Is it how things been goingthis week you get your butt
kicked again yeah, man, alwaysman.

Speaker 3 (05:40):
so I did.
Um, you know, as you guys know,uh, we've talked about it
before I own Alliance Jiu Jitsuin Roswell, Georgia.
So we train Jiu Jitsu a lot,quite a bit.
And also I wrestle.
So my daughter wrestles atMorris Fitness in Alpharetta,
Georgia, and I wrestle withMorris Fitness in Alpharettao,

(06:03):
George.
So I train there.
They have an adult class.
You know older adults thattrain on the weekends but I'm
usually not able to catch thatclass.
So I asked the coach there.
I was like, hey, can I justjump in with the high school and
college kids?
I mean, he said yes, thatprobably wasn't a good idea on

(06:24):
my part.
Those guys have gas tanks fordays.
Man, I got a black eye.
Like, if you look, man, I havea black eye right here.
It happens.
It's just part of jiu-jitsu andwrestling.
You know you get fingers to theface.
You know you're doing a lot ofhand fighting.
I love the class.
I wear a whoop band.

(06:47):
If you guys wear their whoopbands, not an endorsement, but
if you're serious about training.
It gives you all yourinformation biometrics, heart
rate, which zone you're in,lasts for weeks, but it lets you
know how many calories you burn.
So immediately after thattraining session it's like, oh
hey, guess what?
You burn 1,480 calories in anhour and a half, and I wasn't

(07:11):
even keeping up with them.
I was kind of probably goinglike half speed, Um, cause I'm
older.
So for for you to go in thereand burn 1,400 plus calories in
an hour and a half whilewrestling and getting beat up.
Um, you could say I'm having arough day.
Yeah, I woke.
I woke up pretty sore today,but you know we do that twice a

(07:32):
week.
We train jiu-jitsu, you know,two or three times a week and
it's a pretty good, pretty goodtraining regimen.

Speaker 2 (07:37):
Okay, yeah, okay.
Well, as you can see, we've gota puppy in the studio here.
This is, this is mona, our new,new European Doberman puppy.

Speaker 3 (07:46):
Beautiful.

Speaker 2 (07:46):
Yeah, so I'm doing some babysitting today.
I'm a man of many talents.
Not only do I have a podcast,but I also handle some
babysitting on occasion.
So mommy's upstairs trying tosleep, so we've got her in the
studio here today and she'sgetting into everything, aren't
you girl?
But things have been good on myend.

(08:18):
There's not really a whole lotto report other than just the
same busyness and everythinggoing on, and you know lot of
people.
It's kind of the talk right now, I mean, with everything going
on with HPA.
I know that was originallygoing to be the primary
discussion of today's show wastalking about the Hearing
Protection Act, but as theseshows come out, y'all, I'm just
giving you an idea that you know.
Sometimes we record these showsin advance and sometimes it can

(08:41):
be as much as a couple of weeksbefore a show drops.
So, as a result, I didn'treally want to talk about stuff
that's overly time sensitive,because I didn't really want
people to get the wrong ideaabout what we're talking about,
because some developments couldstill come in in regards to HPA.
All I can really do about HPA isdiscuss it in the context of
what's happening right now.

(09:01):
So if you're listening on theshow.
Don't take this as gospel forwhat is going on at the precise
moment.
This is merely to draw someinterest to the subject so that
people know what's going on, andI'm going to put this girl down
.
She's getting angsty here.

Speaker 3 (09:17):
Yeah, and I think that's very important, that we
do prerecord some episodes andwe don't want to put out, you
know, old information, so we tryto stay on top of it.
And the HPA, or HearingProtection Act, you know it's a
very active situation, so thingsare changing day by day, so we
just want to make sure we'recorrect.

Speaker 2 (09:38):
It's still going through the various committees,
so just made it out of means andways and, of course, it got an
upvote to essentially wherethat's at right.
Now and again, y'all look atthe latest updates on what's
going on with HPA.
This information could beslightly a week or two old by
the time you hear it, but I'mjust trying to give you the
context of what today'sconversation is about.
Does this lobbying somehow putus in a situation where we're

(10:04):
all pulling against each other?
And sometimes it might right.
So what's going on with HPAoriginally was that the Hearing
Protection Act essentially wantsto remove suppressors from the
NFA.
Okay, which, at its face value,you're thinking okay, cool, you
know, remove suppressors fromthe NFA and the whole idea would
be that, all right, that's abuilding block to where, if we

(10:25):
can take suppressors off of theNational Firearms Act and remove
the $200 tax stamp, remove theregistration, then in theory,
then we can go forshort-barreled rifles,
short-barreled shotguns andmaybe even eventually machine
guns and completely gut the NFA.
The whole question is theconstitutionality of the NFA
right, the constitutionality oftaxing a right.

(10:46):
So it appears that somecompromise has been reached on
the situation concerning HPA, sothey're going well, yeah, we're
going to go ahead and progressHPA to the Rules Committee, but
we're going to say that, insteadof having the original language
of the bill, we're going to saythat, instead of, you know,
having the original language ofthe bill, we're going to say

(11:07):
that it's a zero tax, so zerodollar tax, no taxation anymore
on suppressors, but you stillhave to register the suppressors
.
So there's still theregistration.

Speaker 3 (11:18):
Uh, in there which is the one thing that everybody
was trying to get rid of.
Because, in actuality, if theyremove the 200 let's say they
they remove uh the items, thesuppressors from uh needing to
be registered that tax stamp.
They're just going to add thatonto the price of the suppressor

(11:38):
.
So they think that.
So the 200 is the tax isarchaic.
You know $200 back in the 19,you know 30s and 40s was a
significant amount of money.
Now, not so much.
So when, when you look at it,when you look at all I'm going
to use EVs as an example whenyou look at, you know the tax

(12:01):
credits that they're giving forvehicles, every single car
company is adding the tax creditonto the price of the vehicle,
knowing that the government isgoing to credit you back that
amount of money.
So when you go in and purchasea suppressor, if this passes,
and they say, hey, there's no,no more $200 tax stamp, well,
the companies know you'rewilling to pay the $200 on top

(12:23):
of it, know you're willing topay the $200 on top of it
because you were willing to doit before.
Why not just raise prices by$200, still collect the $200 on
their end?
Instead of giving it to thegovernment, you're giving it to
the company and then now youdon't have to register, you can
just buy it.
It's just $200 more.

Speaker 2 (12:40):
That's a very good point.
That wasn't necessarily thepoint that I was going to draw
right out the gate, but I'm gladyou did, because that saved me
from having to even put my braininto that mode and think about
it that way.
But you're right, capitalism asa power is a superpower.
Capitalism has brought morepeople out of poverty than any
other type of system that therepossibly could be.

(13:00):
And part of capitalism is that,yes, you can sell something for
whatever the market will bear.
And the idea is that, okay,we've gone from removing some
suppressors from the NFAcompletely the original
intention of the HPA to nowsaying, well, you still have to
register it, but there's no $200fee.

(13:21):
Who would benefit the most fromthat?
Well, for one, $200 is not alot of money to the government.
So it's been a well-known factthat $200 tax stamp is nowhere
near enough money to evenjustify the NFA existing as some
sort of tax collection.
Essentially, essentially, thebest way to explain this is if,

(13:43):
if they were going to raise theprice of a tax stamp to 1930s
dollars, ok, the tax stamp wouldhave to be three or four
thousand bucks to even matchlike what that money was back
then.
Now how pissed would people beif they had to buy a six hundred
dollar suppressor and pay afour thousand dollar tax stamp.
So they know that they can'tincrease the tax stamp to

(14:05):
actually make it profitable forthem in 1930s money.
So they know they can't do that.
Two, they know that the income,that the tax itself is
unconstitutional because thereare multiple Supreme Court cases
that have already affirmed thatyou can't tax a right.
So that's one issue they have.
And then of course there arethe constitutional ramifications

(14:25):
right that the NFA isunconstitutional as it is anyway
, right?
So any sort of registrationscheme, let's just say, is not
consistent with the SecondAmendment as it existed in 1791
when it was brought in.
So you know, when we have theBruin decision, what the Bruin
decision upholds is that alllaws must pass constitutional

(14:50):
muster and they must pass thesmell test of the Second
Amendment in its day, in the1790s, right?
So in those days were thereregistration requirements?
Were there requirements to payfees to own a certain type of
gun?
Were there limitations on thetype of firearm you could own?
Were there limitations on whatthe features of that firearm

(15:10):
could be?
No Citizens had warships.
They had letters of marquee.
Back then they could literallyhave a warship with cannons and
all the most advanced field gunsof the day, whatever they
wanted, and they could literallyride around and carry out
piracy against enemies of theUnited States and keep

(15:30):
everything that they found outthere.
Privateers, they wereprivateers, so we were all
literally mercenaries, okay, andit's just so wild to think that
you know we've gone from agroup of people who you know, to
think that you know we've gonefrom a group of people who you
know we we get things done to.
Now we're sitting here goingover the, we're heeing, hauling
over registration right.

(15:51):
Think about how dumb that iswhere the founding fathers alive
now they would be like what inthe hell are y'all even talking
about?
This has nothing to do with theoriginal intention of why this,
you know, was put in place, whythis right is here.
So not only does the NFAinfringe on your rights in terms
of being taxed for a right, italso infringes on the very

(16:11):
spirit of what the secondamendment is meant to accomplish
in the first place.

Speaker 3 (16:15):
You know it's funny.
You brought that up because thefirst thing that popped into my
head was there's a key and peelskit about, but they made one
about the second amendment,where they're writing the
constitution and they're writingthe second amendment and the
guy pulls out like two uzis andhe's like what, if you know,
he's a time traveler.
It was just like this wholehilarious skit where he shows

(16:38):
how you know how devastating themodern firearms have become,
and he was like you wouldn'twrite this if you know you could
in the future they could dobecome.
And he was like you wouldn'twrite this, if you know you
could in the future they coulddo this.
And he just like sprays thewhole room with uzis but then
like it's almost like a back tothe future moment where he
disappears and he's like, oh,yes, I succeeded.
But then it comes back and thenlike everybody has machine guns

(17:00):
and they're like, oh, this isamazing.
They're like completelybackfired because they saw how
awesome it was and theyspecifically wrote it in there
for that reason and that's whatwould happen.

Speaker 2 (17:09):
Yes, yes, if you show george washington an m60, he
would be like, yeah, we're,we're writing that, we're
putting it on the flag yep, theywould put it on the flag
american man.

Speaker 3 (17:21):
Come on, that's the way it is exactly.
Yep before.

Speaker 2 (17:24):
Yep, before we get too further in the show, I do
want to give a quick shout outto our friend Chuck.
Now.
You guys know everything that'sgone on with the show.
We've talked a lot abouttestosterone and how important
it is to keep your testosteronelevels in check.
And you know many of youfollowing this show are probably
in our age range, possibly abit younger, some of you older,

(17:44):
of course, and for manydifferent walks of life, and
your testosterone levels areextremely important thing to
keep track on.
And you guys have to check outChalk.
That's why we've partnered withthem.
They offer a whole lineup ofproducts formulated to increase
your energy focus, detoxify yourbody and clinically studied
boost testosterone Ingredientsin the Chalk male vitality stack

(18:05):
have.
And clinically studied boosttestosterone ingredients in the
chalk male vitality stack havebeen clinically studied to boost
free testosterone in 87 percentin just 21 days, unlike with
gimmicky vegetable pills orpowder.
You will feel the differenceand they have the clinical
studies to back it up.
So right now you can get 25 offyour Chalk subscription for
life.
Go to Chalkcom it is spelledC-H-O-Q, that is,

(18:27):
charliehoteloscarquebeccom, anduse the promo code LLP, lima,
lima, papa.
That's 25% off any subscriptionfor life and you can cancel any
dang time you want.
Chalk is made in America andthey have all American customer
service teams standing by toassist you.
So get your made in America andthey have all American customer
service teams standing by toassist you.
So get your testosterone inorder, get it checked and if you

(18:50):
don't want to go withinjections or TRT or hormone
replacement therapy or anythinglike that, try to get your
testosterone in order naturallyand without the use of any
injections with chalk.
So check them out.

Speaker 3 (19:04):
Absolutely, Absolutely absolutely.

Speaker 2 (19:05):
So, again, now let's talk about the lobbying
component of this wholesituation.
This is where some of the let'sjust say the dirty pool starts
to come out.
Okay, and again, the last thingI would ever wanna do is start
pointing fingers or namingpeople or trying to make a big
deal about anything.
But recently, okay, goa, theyjust put out this tweet.

(19:28):
In fact, I think it was thismorning or yesterday.
Now, mind you, today's datey'all is May 15th.
So this is you know, by thetime you're seeing this, this
podcast is going to be a littlelonger in the tooth than when we
recorded it.
So bear in mind I'm workingwith information that is
available to me at the presenttime.
Please remember that I'm nottrying to put out anything
outdated, but I certainly wantto, you know, kind of give my

(19:50):
thoughts on some of this stuff,and the thoughts and the ideas
are almost as important aswhat's going on.
I mean, how you approach aproblem, how you solve a problem
and how you see what's reallyhappening, the long game that is
in play.
That is how you figure out howin the world you're going to
make the best of this situation.

(20:10):
All right, so they put out atweet the other day and they
were talking about how a bunchof manufacturers signed on to a
letter to Congress saying thatyou know, we do not support
these revisions to the HPA, thatwe want the hpa sent through in
its original form, we want toremove suppressors from the nfa,
etc.
Etc.
Including several suppressorcompanies, you know, etc.

(20:34):
Etc.
Certain retailers, guncompanies, industry partners, so
on and so forth.
All right, hurrah, good thing.
Okay, eric pratt shared thatand we got that out there and
and that does show somesolidarity between manufacturers
and and the citizens who usethose products.
But it is also concerningbecause there's a lot of dang

(20:55):
suppressor companies that aremissing off that list, which
would indicate that, okay, well,maybe they just didn't get the
memo about signing on with goaor possibly they don't support.
Support what these lobbyists aretrying to accomplish.
Now, you know GOA, nra, all ofthese folks, nagr, you know
Dudley and them.
They all do good work in theirown ways.

(21:17):
But lobbying is this kind ofweird.
Kind of weird.
It's weird when we look at itfrom the perspective of average
people who see it kind of likefor what it is, but what it
actually accomplishes is kind oftwo different things.
So I've talked about lobbyingin some other videos and some of
my opinions on lobbying and Iwill give some opinions in

(21:38):
today's show, of course.
But it seems that at face value, it seems that at face value,
okay, at face value, lobbying isessentially, you know, going to
a politician and kind ofbribing them, like in a way,
you're, you're, you're sort ofgaining that influence from them
somehow okay.

(21:59):
if it comes down to, I don'tknow, is it contributions to a
certain you know cause they'retrying to to deal with?
Is it direct cash payments?
Is it you?
Is it contributions to acertain cause they're trying to
deal with?
Is it direct cash payments, isit just?
Hey, we want our issue to beyour issue and we want you to
see our way on this issue.
And then they're essentiallydonating money to sort of gain

(22:20):
the ear of a person.
And lobbying in practice ismore like that.
It's like you know, thesepeople are not just going to
give someone an audience.
What you eating there.
No, put that down.
All right, put that down.
Lobbying essentially is inpractice, you know, these
politicians are not just goingto go and listen to any Joe Blow

(22:43):
person off the street, are notjust going to go and listen to
any Joe Blow person off thestreet.
Right, you know their influenceand their ear comes at a cost.
You have to be someone, and,all right, how do you be someone
In their eyes?
Well, you have to representsome sort of lobbying group,
someone who looks at thecollective interests of a great
block of people.
So if someone like let's useGOA, for example, which you know

(23:07):
, I like Eric and Aiden and thewhole crew over there.
They're good people, okay, andso what they may do is they may
come to the table and go well,hey, we represent here's a good
example.
We represent I don't know howmany, let's say 300,000 or
350,000 or 400,000 gun owners.
Like you know, we representwhatever their numbers is.
Hey, we represent a million gunowners, however many it is.
When you look at a group likethe NRA, if they come and they

(23:29):
say, well, we have 2 million, 3million, 4 million, however many
million members, then thatgives them the clout to come and
say our group has the influenceof all these people and we
represent the common interestsof all these people.
So therefore, you should listento us on this particular issue,
okay, and our weight, theweight of our word, is the word.

(23:52):
It is the word of gun owners.
So you essentially become therepresentative of all gun owners
in the whole country.
So the politicians can simplyjust look the other way and
pretend that all the actual gunowners don't exist, and they can
.
Simply.
The face of gun owners to themis that lobbying group, and
that's a scary thing to thinkthat your rights could literally

(24:15):
be in the hands of people whomight have some ulterior motive
that is not in line with yourgoals.
That is not in line with yourgoals.
Now, the idea is that obviouslythey're supposed to have boards
of directors and trustees andthey're supposed to have their
own internal ways of decidingwhat the members actually want.
And then they go and they takethose desires to Washington and

(24:37):
they lobby with the money thatyou donate.
That's kind of the overall ideaand on paper it sounds fruitful,
it sounds good and in somecases, to be fair, it is good
right, lobbying does get somethings that we do want.
I mean, look at all the statesthat are constitutional carry.
Now, that's all a direct resultof lobbying.
Okay, look at some of thethings, such as Bruin.

(24:59):
I mean there are many thingsthat we have brought to light
and brought to the table fromeffective lobbying.
So I'm not here to paintlobbying as some ineffective
tool for accomplishing the job.
But, matt, what we also have todiscuss is how does lobbying,
how can it also stab us in theback sometimes?
How could lobbying stab us inthe back in the case of?

Speaker 3 (25:23):
HPA.
You know that's a greatquestion and I think you raise a
very valid point is that whenyou are members of these groups,
you're paying dues, you'redonating, and they're using that
money for partially, forlobbying, and you don't know
what their interests are.
They could be very welllobbying for gun rights, to

(25:46):
fight for your rights, but atthe same time, they could also
be using that for let's not saynefarious reasons, but maybe
reasons that you don't align on,or they're willing to make
compromises and certain thingsto get their end result.
Um, just like, it's stillpolitics, guys.
Politics is, for lack of abetter term, dirty.

(26:10):
You have to play the game.
Nobody goes into Washington andstays clean.
I don't believe it.
There's nothing you can say tome that will tell me that every
single politician is willing to,you know, toe the line on their
own moral values Because atsome point in time, they're
willing to turn their head toget what they want, or to pass a

(26:35):
law that they want, or to gettheir constituents on their side
to make sure they're stillreelected, which is and I know
this is off subject, but whichis why term limits are so, so
important.
If you had term limits, thatwould solve a lot of those
issues.

(26:56):
But to go back to what you weresaying, eric, about lobbying
groups, I pulled the data for2024 from open secrets and if
you guys aren't familiar, opensecrets has all of your, your
government data on pretty muchhow the money is being spent.
And on 2024, there were 50total lobbyists.
This is for a single.
These are for single issue gunrights lobbies.

(27:19):
All right, 50 lobbyists, 11total clients.
So there's 11 groups thatutilized lobbyists for gun
rights and the amount that theyspent.
No surprise.
Number one NSSF.
They spent $6.9 million 2024.
Goa came in second place $2.4million.

(27:42):
Nra 2 million.
National Association of GunRights 1 million.
Citizens Committee for Rightand Keep and Bear Arms 408,000.
So this is where we start tosee a drastic drop off in amount
of money that was used forlobbyists.
So, those top 4 millions,everything below that, 000, you

(28:08):
know.
So we're going down to like 200000, all the way down to the
number 11, which is quitesurprising, I might add, because
I thought they might have done.
Actually, you know, it's notsurprising how I think about it,
because they're a team oflawyers, they do their own stuff
.
Uh, fpc they spent twentythousand dollars 2024.
But now that I think about it,they all do their own legal work

(28:31):
, so it makes sense.
A lot of these companies don'thave like legal teams in place.
They're hiring that out.
So got it, um, but you know, atotal of $14.7 million over the
course of 2024.
Now what did you ask yourselfthis, guys?
What did we gain in 2024?
For $14.7 million in lobbyingfees?

(28:52):
How much of that money went tobuying tables at a senator or
house of representatives tablefor one of their dinners to
fundraise?
How many tables did they buy,like three, four tables at, you
know, $10,000 a piece?
How many of those went togetting you know gifts or trips

(29:16):
or whatnot you know, just to getthe ear of the congressman,
just to get into a positionwhere that lobbyist can sit next
to that senator or congressmanor house rep and say, hey, why
don't we do this?
And then them say, nah, thanksfor the trip to Colorado for
skiing.

(29:36):
I appreciate it.
Have a nice day.
That's what I think of when Isee this, because I didn't see
anything huge come out of 2024that would warrant that much
money being spent on gun rights.

Speaker 2 (29:48):
Okay.
So there's some things tounpack.
One is you brought up a reallygood point when you mentioned
that, yes, in many cases thereare some underlying ulterior
motives that some of these gunrights organizations may have up
their sleeve.
Right For one, if we havecomplete constitutional Second

(30:09):
Amendment, as we know it, thegun rights organizations are no
longer a factor, like they nolonger have a job or a purpose.
Now I know that a lot of themwould love to just work
themselves out of a jobcompletely and restore things to
its constitutional muster, andthat's fine, right, we all want
that, I think to some degree.
Right, so there is that factor,but I think it's a minimal
factor.

(30:29):
Fine, right, we all want that,I think to some degree.
Right, so there is that factor,but I think it's a minimal
factor, right?
I think that the other thing toconsider is that many of these
people will say, okay, well,people want xyz I'm trying to
keep her from getting intoeverything, that girl.
So people want xyz.
They want, okay, for instance,let's look at the hearing
protection actions.

(30:49):
That's the talk right now.
Um, so, all right, we wantsuppressors removed from the,
from the nfa.
So, of course, like you, if yougo as a lobbyist and you're
talking about.
Things are going on.
There might be people, there maybe components within the second
amendment community, within themanufacturers community, that
do not want the HPA to gothrough as it's written Now.

(31:14):
Let's just say the Republicansmay be under tremendous
political pressure from our sideof the camp to do something for
gun rights, not just status quo.
Right, you're asking about that$14 million.
That $14 million could just bestatus quo.
That could be, so that nothingadvances anti-gun, or that it at
least gets shelved, or there'stremendous pressure put against

(31:34):
the anti-gunners, who also havetheir own lobbyists who are
trying to put anti-gun billsthrough.
So, at what point do theanti-gunners outspend the
pro-gunners?
Well, what do they have to do?
Do they go?
Well, since the antis areoutspending the pro-gunners?
Well, what do they have to do?
Do they go?
Well, since the antis arespending out the pro,
outspending the pro gunners?
Well, therefore, now we're justgoing to be anti-gun, because
that's the convenient measurefor us to have.

(31:55):
That is going to you know, Idon't know gain us the most
money or whatever.
I don't think it's quite so cutand dry.
I think that you know a lot ofcompanies, for instance, will
donate to both Democrat andRepublican PACs going into
election, many companies havegotten into a lot of trouble for
donating to Democrats and youthink, well, why would you

(32:16):
donate to Democrats?
Well, if you look at it fromjust a strictly business point
of view, do you really not wantto have some form of lobbying
power with those people?
If they do get elected?
What if you live in a primarilyDemocrat-controlled area and
you're a gun manufacturer?
And what if you don't donate tothose people?
Then if you have an issue, ifyou have something you need to

(32:36):
bring to light, are they evengoing to have you in their
office at all if you didn't dosomething?
So it's like the smooth brainresult is that people will go
well, you're anti-gun becauseyou donated to Democrats.
Don't get me wrong.
I get it Like I don't want themscumbags to have a single
dollar in my money.
But you also have to understandthat it's a giant game of chess

(32:57):
and you know sometimes you haveto think three moves ahead.
And if you know dang well thata Democrat is going to get
elected in the area, you know ifyou have Democrat
representatives, you know you atleast stand a little bit of a
chance to bring a grievance tothe table.
That is a legitimate grievanceif you've done some part to.
You know, support their effort,even if you didn't really want
to support them.

(33:17):
So the game of chess as itinvolves with this stuff, is
that you know you have to be inwith all of them, and that's the
thing that's so crappy about it.
But getting back to what youwere talking about before, is
that sometimes in the SecondAmendment world with the
manufacturers, there mightactually be some 2A
manufacturers that are goingagainst the HPA as written.

(33:39):
They don't want suppressors offthe registry.
Well, why would that be?
What would be their underlyingpurpose for not wanting
suppressors to be on theregistry?
Well, for one, it is a luxuryitem that they can charge a lot
of money for.
As you brought up that pointearlier, nfa items, you know,
have this allure of being, youknow, cool and they have a

(34:02):
justification for charging a lotof money for a product that,
quite frankly, if a suppressorwas an over-the-counter item,
some of these people that aremaking these super high-end
suppressors now, they're stillgoing to have their clients that
buy the super high-endsuppressor.
Don't get me wrong.
But if you remove suppressorsfrom the NFA completely and
there's no registration,regardless of the tax that has

(34:24):
to be paid.
You're going to havemanufacturers popping up making
$150 .22 suppressors and everysingle person who buys a Walther
P22 or a Smith Wesson M&Pcompact pistol with a threaded
barrel, every one of thosepeople are going to be walking
out with that add-on, with thatsuppressor, and for them they're
just buying a muzzle device.

(34:45):
It would be no different thanbuying a muzzle device for your
favorite AR or a brake for yourfavorite AR.

Speaker 3 (34:51):
Well, think about the , think about the oil, the, the
oil filter knife.
Right, you could just go to theshop and buy the actual adapter
and just screw oil filter on.

Speaker 2 (34:59):
Correct.
So so the the the kind of issuefor some of these manufacturers
is it's going to essentiallyprice some of the manufacturers
completely out of thecompetition.
That's a good point.
Now, look, okay, let's look atHuxworks.
All right, listen, there's somedrama going on with Huxworks
right now.
Okay, because they just secureda contract with the ATF to

(35:23):
provide them with suppressors.
They're flow-throughs, right,flow-throughs right.
Okay, whatever, I like Huxworkssuppressors.
People say what they want, butthey make a fantastic suppressor
.
They're great.
Okay, I can't hate thetechnology just because of a few
decisions that the companymight make.
And look, huxworks has alwaysbeen really good to us.
They've always been pretty cool.
They're generally a prettybased company.

(35:43):
I mean, hey, if, if somebodywants to buy a ton of
suppressors, who cares?
In their mind, they're just,they're capitalists.
They want to make money likeanyone else.
I don't hate them for thatpurpose.
But let's look at Huxworks, foran example.
And again, I feel like I'mgetting on to my stepchild or
something when I talk aboutcertain companies, because
that's the last thing I wouldever want to do.
I mean, I love their products.
Okay, I'm not trying talk crapabout anybody, but Huxworks, for

(36:12):
instance.
You know, if suppressors wereremoved from the NFA.
A company like Huxworks, youknow they're kind of like the H
and K of suppressors, you knowwhat I mean.
Did she go?
Yeah, she's chewing on a wire.
Oh, she's chewing.
Okay, sorry, we've got it.
We have a dog incident thatwe're clearing up here in the
studio.
We don't want to want her tochew something up.
But yeah, what would happen ifwe remove suppressors from the
NFA?
You know Huxworks is kind ofthe H and K of suppressors.

(36:34):
They're high end, they're nice,they're, you know, they're
super upper end flow through,like they're good construction,
good quality materials,everything like that.
So you know, would that causethat company to see a downward
spike in sales because they wereremoved from the NFA completely
?
It could if some othermanufacturer comes in and offers

(36:57):
a very similar product for halfthe price.
But see, that's capitalism atwork, right.
So could they offer the samequality product as Huxworks for
half the money?
Well, it's not going to be thesame quality, not going to be
the same materials, construction, engineering, it's not going to
be the same product, it's notgoing to be Huxworks.

(37:17):
But would someone come in andultimately offer some form of
competitively pricedflow-through can?
That would be maybe even halfthe price of a Huxworks?
Possibly, yes, so wouldHuxworks.
Let's just and I'm not callingthem out and saying that they're
doing this, but I'm just, I'mtrying to paint a picture here
that drives my point home WouldHuxworks have some underlying

(37:39):
reason to not support the HPA?
In that case?
If, in their mind, they thoughta scenario like that would play
out and were indeed true, thenthey may not actually support
the HPA.
And that could not only beHuxworks, matt.
That could be a variety ofother companies.
All right, what about companieslike Silencer Central, or
someone who, or Silencer Shop orany of these other silencer

(38:01):
places that they have spent alot of money on these kiosks and
this whole fingerprintingoperation?
And they have a ton of moneywrapped up in this whole
fingerprinting operation tostreamline the process and make
it easier for someone topurchase a suppressor?
Well, yes, they're streamliningthe process, yes, they're
making it easier, but what doesit involve, matt?

(38:24):
Registration?
Okay, it involves paying thetax stamp.
It involves registering theitem.
If you remove suppressors fromthe registry, those companies,
essentially, are going out ofbusiness.
Now do you think for one secondthat those people support the
HPA?
No, Now they say publicly thatthey support it, but do they

(38:45):
really?
Where's the money changinghands?
Where's the influence changinghands?
All I'm saying is lobbying isgreat.
You know, there's nothing wrongwith lobbying, but it can be a
double edged sword.
And just because all of us, allof us people yeah sure, do we
want suppressors off the NFA?
You're damn right, we do.
Do we want to have to tell thegovernment or ask permission

(39:06):
from the government to ownsomething?
Hell, no, we don't.
Do we want to have to tell thegovernment or ask permission
from the government to ownsomething?
Hell no, we don't.
Do we want to pay $200?
Hell no, we don't.
We don't want any of thempeople in our business.
But the truth of enterprise andcapitalism and business is that
there are people who do notcare essentially about your
rights.
At the end of the day, theycare about staying in business
and they're working within theconfines of an existing system

(39:29):
that they make money off of.
And if that system goes away orchanges or completely just
disappears, now there's no anglethey have anymore.
And if you think for one secondthose people support the hba,
I've got a bridge to sell youit's, it's very, it's a very
true statement.

Speaker 3 (39:47):
I'm not hating them, no, but you're just calling a
duck a duck when your entirebusiness revolves around
manufacturing suppressors, R&D,and that's your lifeline, You're
going to try to protect itRight.
And a lot of these companies,they do more than just
suppressors.
Some companies that's all theydo.

(40:08):
And if I were them, you know,in my as a business person,
you're like, well you know, ifthis goes through, like you said
, Eric, you're going to have,you know, Jim Bob in his garage
creating suppressors, sellingthem for half the cost.
Not that that's a bad thing andagain, like you said, it's not
the the same quality.
But not everybody wants that.

(40:29):
You know, 1400 can.
They don't like that.
They're not going to use it tothe full potential, they're just
buying it because that's what'srequired at the time.
There's.
There's not really any othercompetition.
But now you have theopportunity.
Hey, I can go and buy this 250can as a range toy.
I can put it it on.
I'm not taking it through, youknow, austere conditions, I'm

(40:51):
not putting it through mud, I'mjust taking it to the range.
I want to pop off a couple ofrounds in the backyard without,
you know, bothering my neighbor,whatever.
Now they have that option andyou're going to the bigger
companies would see a drop inguaranteed.

Speaker 2 (41:06):
They would see a drop in sales yeah, I mean the
competition is going to go outthe roof.
Oh yeah, if suppressors are notterribly hard to make you know
and you know, realistically,guys, they're not terribly hard
to make they're not now.
Now look to be fair.
Like those hook works flowthroughs that you know they are
very nice suppressors and andthat's different technology.

Speaker 3 (41:25):
So that's what I was referring to.
Like you have companies likethat is their bread and butter.
They're R&Ding new technologyBecause think about like baffles
, like the whole, like bafflesystem, k baffles and whatnot it
really hasn't changed like overthe course of time.
And then you have like the flowthrough, like that's a pretty
recent development and it worksreally well.

Speaker 2 (41:59):
You're not getting gas back in the face every time,
especially if you're shootingfull auto.

Speaker 3 (42:01):
I mean the camera angle still good.
No, I'll fix it all.
Right, you're good, go ahead,continue, man.
Um, yeah, guys, so like that,that flow through technology.
It's pretty recent and it isreally good technology.
I have a full auto, uh,integrally suppressed, uh, ar.
And when you shoot that thingfull auto, it's not flow through
, obviously it's oldertechnology you're getting kicked
back with a ton of gas in theface and it it stings, your eyes

(42:24):
sting after a couple, couplemagazines.
You don't want to deal with it.
So I can see why thesecompanies wouldn't want that.
Now to take that one stepfurther, eric, not just
suppressors, and I wanted totouch on there's another act
going through because theyseparated it the short act.

(42:45):
So the short act dealsspecifically with short barrel
shotguns, short barreled rifles.
So they kind of separated thatum.
So now you have two, two thingsgoing through for you know
approval.
So just keep an eye out forboth of those guys.
You have the hpa and you havethe short act, short act, um.
But to take it one step further,about the nA, not just

(43:08):
suppressors, but let's just saymachine guns, right, everybody
has this grand idea.
They're like oh, I want machineguns off the registry.
I do too.
That's great and I would loveit.
That's not magically going todrop the price of machine guns.
You go on Gun Broker right nowand you'll see a pre-80s Mac-10

(43:30):
for transferable $10,000.
Or more or more, $10,000 ormore for a three pieces of sheet
metal stamped together with acrude firing mechanism on the
inside.
Ask me how?
I know, because we have one.
So I mean, it's one of the mostcrude machine guns you can ever

(43:51):
get.
All right, $10,000.
And only good for getting in agunfight in a phone booth.
The phone booth man, I love it.
But let's just say the NFA wasabolished and now you could buy
and sell machine guns.
You could buy new machine guns.
That price and the barrier toentry is going to be the same,
and that's going to drive peoplewild For some time.

(44:12):
Well, think about this.
The market price has been set.
Gun manufacturers and privatesellers know what you're willing
to pay for a machine gun.
Just because you don't have toregister it anymore doesn't mean
they're not.

Speaker 2 (44:30):
They're going to take less money for it but if they
open it up to where anyone canjust make their own machine guns
, such such as in the same ways,you can cut your own barrel
down on your own sbr you can cutyour own shotgun barrel down.
so if, if we wind up doing awaywith the nfa and it's just like,
hey, whatever you want to do,then people just make their own
machine guns.
Now, where that is absolutelypositively true is on the

(44:53):
collectible stuff.
Now, is an old Maxim or Vickersstill going to be a really
expensive gun?
Well, yeah, because there's notgoing to make any more of those
things, right?
So there's going to be certainclassics that, by virtue of the
parts not being out there,they're not available anymore,
unless someone comes up anddecides to manufacture those
things, which, of course, themarket will always dictate what

(45:14):
people will do with their moneyRight.
People want a brand new made1919.
Someone will come out and makea 1919 like Ohio Ordinance right
.

Speaker 3 (45:22):
They already make a lot of that type of stuff, so it
would not be hard for them togo ahead and turn around and
just make a full auto version.

Speaker 2 (45:31):
They make some really interesting fire.
Yes, they have that car andimagine each bar.

Speaker 3 (45:33):
Yeah, the 30 yacht six.
Oh my God.

Speaker 2 (45:36):
So what is old is always new again.
Yes, and and I really do likethat company.
They've got some cool stuffgoing on.
Come here, girl, you gettingbored?
So to piggyback on what you'retalking about with the NFA and
everything like that, is thatwith HPA, okay, we have this
watered down version where, well, we won't have the $200 tax

(45:57):
stamp, but we'll include theregistration.
You still have to have theregistration.
So, politically, what does thataccomplish?
Well, again, again, listen,don't kill the messenger, y'all.
I'm not saying I agree withthem changing up the
circumstances under which hpacould theoretically get passed.
This is still not even out ofthe rules committee yet, so it

(46:19):
hasn't even gone to the housefloor for a vote.
As of the time I'm making thisvideo, today is the 15th y'all,
so there's still some time tochange language, and it could
change by the time this podcastdrops.
Just keep that in mind.
So we're going back in timehere, guys.
This is a week or so ago, twoweeks ago.
All right, could the languagechange?
Yes, it could change, but as itsits right now, ok, as it

(46:42):
stands, it appears that there'ssome compromise on the table,
right?
Well, what is it?
And in the view of thepolitician, what does this
compromise accomplish?
One in their head again.
This isn't me.
This is me speakingtheoretically about what these
people may have going throughtheir heads right now.
For one, they go.
Well, gun owners should behappy, they're saving $200 and
they don't have to pay for a taxstamp anymore.

(47:02):
That very well may be true forsome.
Right In their mind they may begoing.
Well, the manufacturers who arecoming to us behind closed
doors and saying they're unhappyabout the registry being taken
out of there for suppressors andyou know they don't want to be
painted as anti-gun or paintedas tyrants or painted as
anything other than justbusiness people.
But let's face it, they havesome concerns over suppressors

(47:27):
being removed from the NFAbecause it's going to absolutely
disrupt and therefore evenmaybe possibly bankrupt their
entire business model.
So it's making those peoplehappy because it's keeping the
registry.
And then three, you know theRepublicans get some clean hands
and they can say well, see,look we, we did something for
gun owners, but did they reallydo anything?
They really didn't.

(47:48):
They know that the tax stamp isunconstitutional.
So they're actually protectingthemselves by passing this
legislation to remove the taxstamp, because that's actually
preventing that section of theNFA from being challenged, at
least in the meantime possiblybeing challenged in the Supreme

(48:08):
Court.
Imagine the $200 tax stamp goesto the Supreme Court and they
go hey, we're going to look atthe constitutionality of taxing
a right under the guise of thefirearms stuff.
And imagine that the SupremeCourt goes our way on that and
they say well, wait a minute,y'all All right, brewing brewing
here.
Okay, for one, you can't have aregistry.

(48:30):
You know, we've already triedto tell the ATF you cannot
maintain a registry on normalTitle I stuff.
Well then, why are we doing ourNFA stuff?
Two, there was nothing in placeearly on that passes a smell
test.
That would lend us to thinkthat some registry is even
constitutional to begin withanyway.
And then, third, the $200 taxstamp is unconstitutional anyway

(48:52):
.
And, by the way, y'all we'vealready said that here, here,
here and here, like in three orfour different cases, we've
already said that you can't dothis.
So they don't want that to go tothe Supreme Court, they do not
want that case to be made beforethe Supreme Court.
So the Republicans, as much aswe want to think that they're
all pro-gun and this sort ofthing, I mean, look, they can

(49:19):
tell you they're pro-gun all daylong.
But this is also a way for themto kind of cleverly cover their
ass.
Well, to keep this out of theSupreme Court because, trust me,
they do not want this whole NFAthing going for the Supreme
Court, because they know if itgoes our way it's going to set
forth a very largeconstitutional bubble for them.
To overcome that futureadministrations like all right,
if we have a mostly anti-gunadministration and they want to

(49:42):
pass a bunch of anti-gun crap,they're going to have a much
more difficult time getting itthrough a smell test.
That involves hey, the $200 taxstamp's unconstitutional.
The NFA is unconstitutional,you know, hey, here are multiple
courts who verify that theAR-15 and variants of modern
guns are protected by theConstitution.

(50:02):
So once you have all thesethings in place in the court, it
really does landlock any futureanti-gun efforts, especially
under the Bruin standard, thatcould ever take place.
So I think there's a greaterploy in place than we might even
see.

Speaker 3 (50:15):
I agree, and it's not just Republicans but it's also
Democrats.
So I'm just going to use thisas a quick example, and this
isn't really the NFA, butfirearms and gun control in
general.
So you know, eric, WashingtonDC is one of the most locked
down fire anti-gun places inAmerica.

(50:37):
The police, the Capitol policeand the regular police, have to
turn their firearms in aftertheir shift.
So they get to the policestation and they draw the
firearms and then when they getoff their shift, they turn their
firearms in.
That, to me, is crazy.
But with that said, youdefinitely can't take firearms

(51:00):
into the Capitol building.
All right.
And what happened?
New Jersey Senator Cory Booker,his assistant slash driver this
happened a couple of months agoand you haven't heard hardly
anything about it.
This happened a couple monthsago and you haven't heard hardly
anything about it.
Cory Booker's assistant slashdriver brought a firearm
concealed carry into the Capitolbuilding, got caught with a

(51:22):
concealed firearm.
What happened?
Nothing.
One or two news stories.
Slap on the wrist.
Man, if that was a normalcitizen, you'd be in prison
right now.
And to think that the doublestandard that there is for you
know the quote senators andlawmakers compared to your

(51:45):
American citizen, it's insane tothink that someone can, can, be
, can have such a doublestandard applied and there's no
outrage.
I don't see any of the you know, you know gun lobbyists.
I don't see any of the you know, uh, gun groups saying hey,

(52:07):
what's going on with this?
Why are we not making a biggerdeal out of this?
That was a prime example ofwhat we could do to say hey,
rules for thee, but not for me,but we did not take advantage of
it in any sort, and that's justa great example, in my opinion,

(52:27):
on how the differences betweenwhat those that we put into
government to represent ourinterests treat are treated
versus us, the, the averageamerican that has to live under
the tyrannical rule of saidgovernment bro, it's so true
that, like when we have controlof the ship, it's like we do

(52:48):
nothing with it.

Speaker 2 (52:49):
Yep, we don't even try to move the gears of
government we just go up statusquo.

Speaker 3 (52:53):
Here we are.
You know, imagine if that was arepublican.
Oh no, dude, they would have.

Speaker 2 (52:56):
Well, you'd still be in the news right now so we're
going to take a moment to give ashout out to another one of our
show sponsors and look y'all,this is a company.
I really love these guys.
I believe in what they're doing, I love their freaking products
and I think you will too.
When it comes to gear that canhandle anything, there's no
better choice than Undertak.
Designed for and tested by anelite special forces team in

(53:17):
Africa's harshest conditions,Undertak is made to perform when
it matters most, Whether you'renavigating through terrain or
just tackling your day.
Their underwear, socks andshirts keep you dry, comfortable
and mission ready.
Made from premium materialslike Modol there's is 50 more
moisture wicking than cotton.
Under tack offers tacticalperformance that goes beyond the

(53:37):
basics from the ultracomfortable boxer briefs to the
american made battle weavemerino socks.
You'll feel the difference, andyour boys will too.
Don't forget the hoodies andedc t-shirts rugged enough for
anything, yet comfortable enoughfor everyday carry.
Go to to Undertaccom that'sUndertaccom and use the code LLP
to get 20% off site-wide.

(53:58):
Whether you're gearing up foran adventure or everyday life,
you can trust Undertac to haveyour back.
Ooh, that's got a ring to it,Plus a portion of profits.
Support veteran-runorganizations fighting human
trafficking.
Now, that's a damn no-brainerif I ever said so.
Visit Undertaccom.
Use the code LLP20 to get 20%off site-wide.
Code LLP20.

(54:19):
That's Lima.
Lima, Papa 2, 0.
Undertaccom.
I love their infantry britches,the under britches.
Those underwear are so freakingawesome and I'm telling you
you're not going to look like alittle wimp when you're wearing
them either.

Speaker 3 (54:34):
No, it is great.
Great products, great company.

Speaker 2 (54:36):
I'm telling you, you've got to try those freaking
underwear y'all.
Do you think that I would bemaking a freaking ad about
underwear if I didn't like whatthey did?
Come on, y'all Buy some of thedang underwear.
Do your boy solid and it helpsthe show as well.
Great group of people.
We're going to take a couplequestions real quick.
I know we still have a fewminutes on the show here, all

(54:57):
right, so I'm tuning intoTwitter here.
We've got a few comments here.
Dissident Media says is this anew podcast?
If you ever need guests to talkabout grassroots lobbying, the
guys at Defend the Guard areexcellent, okay.

Speaker 3 (55:12):
Speak of the devil.

Speaker 2 (55:13):
Good deal and I appreciate that comment.
That's great.
So to answer the question, no,this is not a new podcast.
Llp has been around for sometime.
We are in our 119th episode.
I think this is episode 119, ifI'm not mistaken.
So we're 119 episodes in.
So we've been doing this awhile.
Matt and I did take a breakfrom doing the podcast because
he got really busy with theJiu-Jitsu Academy getting it up

(55:35):
and running, and now it's doinggreat.
I'm in a position where we'reready to get back.
We're bringing the podcast back.
Appreciate that comment there.
Dissident Media is also afollower of mine over on Twitter
.
They have a great Twitter pageas well.
Check them out at Diss media.
All right, great group of folksthere.

(55:57):
I follow them as well.
Uh, jp mogan, seven, I'm sorry,nine, seven, nine four.
Two says yes, have youreconsidered your stance on the
sikhs and the Marine Corps nowthat you are woke on the Jews?
Whew, wow, what a question.
But hey, I'm not scared.
Look, I'll go there.

(56:17):
I consider the Sikhs to be avery morally pure group of
people.
I've never had a problem withany of them.
Every Sikh I've ever met hasalways been a fair person.
You know just.
I mean just because a Marinewants to wear a turban.

Speaker 3 (56:34):
I just I mean just because a marine wants to wear a
turban.
I ain't got a problem with that, do you matt?
No, not at all.
As long as they do their job,guys, there's.
There's exemptions and profilesfor everything.
Way before there was a headgear, you know.
Exemption for religious reasons.
Religious, religious exemptionsand profiles were probably one
of the normal things in themilitary.
What wasn't normal was like ashaving profile or like a no pt

(56:56):
profile?
all right, I would.
I would probably have somethingworse to say about those guys
than a Sikh that is seeking areligious exemption for wearing
a turban look guys, I will tellyou this to people in the
military it doesn doesn'tfreaking matter.

Speaker 2 (57:13):
There might be a small silent minority that has
an issue with a Marine wearing aturban versus the traditional
headwear.
The truth is, I think societyjust looks at it as some talking
point that they can just pointa finger and say, oh look at
this, this is woke, it'swhatever.
The truth is, as long as thatMarine does his freaking job, I

(57:36):
don't care what head gear hewears.
I'll tell you what if I'mbleeding out on the damn
battlefield and someone wants tocarry me off the battlefield,
if the guy's got a freakingturban on, hey, as long as he
can carry my gargantuan butt offthe battlefield, hey, he can
wear whatever he wants, I don'tcare that's right uh, good
question.
He thought I wasn't gonna answerthat one, I don't care.
Yeah, I have my criticismsabout israel.

(57:58):
I'm not gonna lie about that.
Kyle wilson says that lobbyingbehind closed doors is legal.
But if you want to pay someonefor sex, you have to film it and
put it on the internet for itto be legal, or at least make
the offer.

Speaker 3 (58:11):
So that way they don't.
So they don't arrest you oh mygod, oh man, uh.

Speaker 2 (58:17):
Garbage.
Underscore three zero zero saysare we back on to gun gripes or
do you have a different podcast?
Well, guys, we've always hadlop uh and I haven't cut a lot
of other shows on the channel.
I've been kind of busy withsome other things.
Well, basically just life.
Okay, I've been living life andfor the last 17 years I've been
producing this YouTube channelreligiously and, quite frankly,

(58:40):
I'm taking a little time to, youknow, take care of some things
in the house, clean up, justenjoy life a little bit.
It's been a long road.
I mean, 17 years is a long time.
Put out content Now.
With that being said, I have aton of stuff coming up,
including more gun gripes, fiveguns, range videos, et cetera.
I just got to get my butt backin gear and get back in the

(59:02):
field.
That's the motivation I'mgetting there, y'all, okay.
One more question here We'llwrap up the show.
Curtis Woodard at Curtin C.
Lobbying is fundamental togovernment of by and for the
people.
It's just that the people don'thave the time and the

(59:24):
inclination to lobby on theirown behalf.
That leaves the field open tothose who can pay others to
lobby for them.
The people, by and largeabdicated, good point.

Speaker 3 (59:36):
You know, I think it's a very good point.
I think you know the big partof people being against
lobbyists is not that they'reagainst lobbying.
It is necessary because someonehas to tell the lawmakers what
the word on the street is,because they are so far removed
from what's actually going on.
You're talking about guys thathave drivers.

(59:58):
When you hear lawmakers,congressmen, house reps talking
about oh, how much is a gallonof milk?
They wouldn't know how much agallon of milk is.
They wouldn't know how mucheggs cost.
They're getting fed thatinformation, so they do need
lobbyists to keep them up todate.
The thing that people don'tunderstand or they aren't aware

(01:00:22):
of is that and I have the datahere from Open Secrets 46% of
lobbyists are former lawmakersthat worked in the building
alongside the congressman, sothey are within that.
They're using their existinginfluence to make more money,

(01:00:43):
which isn't necessarily a badthing.
But when you stay in thatbusiness and there's no term
limits for those congressmen orlawmakers, then it becomes a
reciprocating loop of hey, thisguy, he worked as an aide for
one year, he has therelationship of that lawmaker,
and then that lawmaker keepsgetting reelected term after

(01:01:06):
term after term, and they'rejust creating a long-term job
for themselves versus hey, if wejust put in term limits, then
you would have to have turnoverwith the lobbyists, because the
lobbyists wouldn't be able tostay there for 10 years and milk
that short relationship theyhave with those lawmakers Bro

(01:01:28):
that is such a great point.

Speaker 2 (01:01:29):
I'm so glad you brought it up in today's show
because that's one area thatThomas Massey and I have maybe
respectfully disagreed on hereand there.
But I am coming around onThomas Massey's view of term
limits.
Thomas Massey, his view is that, well, if we have term limits,
you never know what boogeyman'sthere.

(01:01:49):
You don't know who's there.
So if we have a revolving doorof people now you're having to
constantly rediscover who's who,where their allegiances lie,
and by the time you figure outwho's who, they're gone, they
fly the coop and then there'ssome other person in there who
could be a scumbag.
They could be better.
How do you know?
But that's what the peoplewanted, though that's what the
people voted for, I know, but atleast if you have the same

(01:02:10):
people, there's a relationshipthere between the lobbyists,
between the congressmen.
You have a voting record.
And that was Massey's point wasthat if we don't have term
limits, at least you have arecord of consistency.
You know what that person'smoral code is by being able to
analyze their votes, by beingable to analyze their stock

(01:02:31):
trades, which is a whole otherpodcast, which is a whole other
podcast, which is a whole otherthing, y'all A whole other thing
.
Nancy, we're listening to younow.
Okay, Basically, if you justtrade like Nancy, you're going
to be rich.
They have a bot that publishesher trades Right.

Speaker 3 (01:02:45):
yeah, Follow Unusual.

Speaker 2 (01:02:46):
Wells on Twitter.
They have a bunch of great likeunusual bubbles of the market
that will certainly point you insome really interesting rabbit
holes, if you will.
So check it out.
Unusual Whales on Twitter.
And a quick shout out before wesign off on today's show Make
sure you go and check out theTwitter page.
I engage in some spicycommentary over there, but I do

(01:03:08):
love engaging with the audienceon Twitter.
You can also field yourcomments and suggestions for the
show for LLP over on the IRACVeteran 8888 Twitter page.
Many of you know as well, wepost this podcast in video form
over on IRAC Veteran 8888tentatively by 9 Eastern time
every Monday.
Sometimes I forget to uploadthe show.

(01:03:29):
I apologize, I'm kind of like.
I'm kind of like the dude right.
So it's like you know,sometimes I get a little, a
little bit, uh, procrastinatingon on on trying to throw a
reminder to you.

Speaker 3 (01:03:43):
I'm like Sunday night I'm like hey, yeah, hey, man
that show.

Speaker 2 (01:03:48):
But anyway, um, it's been great.
I've enjoyed today's show and Ithink we went down some really
interesting um areas that arethought-provoking.
Maybe some of you have yourthoughts about lobbying.
There are some things thatweren't discussed in the show
that I really wanted to touch on.
We just didn't have enough time.

(01:04:15):
Closing remark about lobbying isthat there are essentially two
basic types of lobbying withinthe gun industry.
Okay, one is what I call I meanI don't know who coined the
term, maybe I coined the term orwhoever did but let's just say
one is access-based.
One is, hey, we go to thecountry club and do all the
crazy ass kissing with thesepeople and therefore we're going

(01:04:35):
to try to be buddy-buddy withthem and that's how we're going
to get our influence.
There's the access-based typeof lobbying and then there's the
we're going to primary your assinto oblivion type of lobbying.
So each of the lobbyists and ofcourse you look at people at
FPC they're going to have thelawsuit machine going burr.
Right, the printer's going burr.
What do they mean by that?

(01:04:56):
All right, that's notaccess-based, that's hey, we're
going to just sue your ass intooblivion-based.
So you're going to justactively sue the crap out of
them.
They're going to be buddy-buddywith them and try to be friends
with them and have that sort ofrelationship, or they're going
to go to them and say, hi, well,look, you know we're cool, but
just know that if you don't dowhat we want, we're going to,

(01:05:17):
we're going to lobby, we'regoing to push our members to
vote your ass out.
Come, come, you know, midtermsor November.
So that's how the lobbying, allof those arms, become part of a
greater machine that affectshow these bills either progress
or they don't.
Sometimes they lie dead on thefloor.

(01:05:45):
So I just, I guess, want to endthis podcast today's show by
saying that all of the lobbyinggroups, no matter who they are,
they all serve a prettyessential role to the overall
process of how things work.
I would suggest, you know,supporting all of them, as much
as it pains me to say this,because I have some issues with
the NRA.
I have not always agreed withthe NRA, okay, but if you got a
few extra bucks to support allof them, join GOA, join NRA,

(01:06:08):
join, you know, fpc, join Dudleyover there, nagr.
They're all great people, theyall have their own little tactic
and all of it equates to what Iview as an overall pretty
effective method for closing inon the enemy and getting what we
need to get done on CapitolHill.

(01:06:29):
Now I'll end by saying this andagain, not to grandstand or
anything I've never accepted asingle dollar from a gun rights
organization.
I've never accepted a bit of pay.
I was the Georgia StateDirector for GOA for a couple of
years.
I've recently stepped down fromthat position.
I've had my issues with the NRAover the years.
I have never accepted a singledollar from a gun rights

(01:06:52):
organization for anything.
I refuse to take money from agun rights organization for any
reason at all, whether it'semployment, whether it's
engagement, whether it's forgetting signups for them.
Whatever the case may be, myheart has always been in the
fight of the Second Amendmentand nothing more.
I do not view the undergoing oflobbying or the undergoing of

(01:07:13):
being involved with a gun rightsorganization.
I don't view it as amoney-making apparatus.
I view it as a service that Iprovide, that I lend the ear of
my viewership to the goals ofthose gun rights organizations
in order to positively move theneedle in the direction it needs
to go in to change the cultureof gun ownership.

(01:07:33):
That's what I care about.
I care about winning the game, Idon't care about.
Okay, maybe, in movinglogistics, win wars right,
that's what they say.
Logistics win wars, notsoldiers.
By moving the chess pieces onthe board where we need to move
them to accomplish the goal.
Yeah, some money's going tochange hands.

(01:07:54):
That's logistics, the logisticsof moving the chess pieces to
trap the anti-gunners and getour checkmate right.
In the moving of those chesspieces there's going to be some
money changing hands.
I don't care about the moneychanging hands, that's not.
I don't care about that.
I don't want their damn money.
I don't want the members money.

(01:08:15):
I want to checkmate the king.
I want to.
I want to win the war.
That's what I care about and Iwant the most rapid way for that
to occur.
And in my mind, if I take nomoney, if I accept no paycheck,
that's my way of contributingwhat I can contribute to the
greater cause at hand.
So take it for what you will.
That's my view.
It may not be everyone's view,but that's the way I look at it.

(01:08:37):
Anything else before we go?
Matt, no, man, that was abombshell to end the show on.

Speaker 3 (01:08:43):
But I mean, I'm just glad you know the viewers have
been absolutely amazing Guys.
The comments have been verysupportive.
I know that Eric and I tookalmost close to two years off
just to get right.
You know, you got to refresh,you got to get your life right
before you can start back and wedecided that whenever we come
back and we start the show,we're going to be able to

(01:09:05):
dedicate much more time to it.
You know, a little bit moreproduction value, and we've
succeeded.
We've done, I think, eric,you've done a great job of you
know, getting everything hereset up.
Um, and the conversations havebeen great, man, like today was.
It was a great conversation andhopefully, you know, the
listeners enjoy it and it's justsomething for you guys to to
munch on while you're working.

(01:09:25):
A lot of you guys tell us thisis what gets you through your
work day.
Uh, I'm glad that you choose tolisten to us because you know
we're just in the end.
We're just two guys having aconversation about probably what
you're thinking about.

Speaker 2 (01:09:36):
That's right.

Speaker 3 (01:09:37):
That's right.

Speaker 2 (01:09:38):
One last little housekeeping before we go that I
thought about here is that withthe show and everything like
that, you know we are trying ourbest to get some more guests.
I know some people have beenasking about when we're going to
bring guests in.
I am still doing some work hereon the studio.
If you want to drop a superthanks and drop a few bucks, I'm

(01:09:59):
not going to complain aboutsome war bucks in the war chest.
You know we do have sponsors onthe show that help with that as
well, but pretty much I amdumping every dang dollar on
this show that I make back intoproduction.
I'm buying more lighting soon.
I know there are a few folksbeen asking about lighting the
mics.
Audio I think is really good,so let me know if you guys like

(01:10:21):
the quality of the audio, doeseverything sound good?
Always let us know.
Give us all the feedback We'dlove to know, like how's the
video look, how's the audiosound, how's the lighting look
Like?
I know those things may notmatter, but to me they matter.
I want things to look right andlet me know what type of guests
you want to see.
You know and look it's not onlygoing to be just gun people.
We're going to bring a bunch ofrandom people in to join in on

(01:10:44):
the conversation.
So I'm so ready to get thisstudio like the way I want it.
I see it finished in my headand it's like I'm so ready to
get it done.
Man, it's going to be great.
Yeah, man, this is going to bethe ultimate hangout room.

Speaker 3 (01:10:56):
It's going to be awesome.

Speaker 2 (01:10:57):
It's going to change a bit.

Speaker 1 (01:10:59):
You're going to notice some difference, but it's
going to be dope Right on Allright man Well, have a good week
, matt and we thanks forlistening to life, liberty and
pursuit.
If you enjoyed the show, besure to subscribe on apple
podcasts, spotify and anywhereelse podcasts are found.

(01:11:19):
Be sure to leave us a five-starreview.
We'd really appreciate that youcan support us over on
ballistic inc by pickingyourself up some merch and
remember guys, dangerous freedom.
Have a good one.