Welcome! Posting a link back to the GBBL would be much appreciated.
If you see any pop up ads here please click on the Meet the GBBL Mods and send us an e-mail about it so we can get them removed.

Featured Post

RSS FEED Updates

If you see a blog that isn't updating properly, please let me know through my E-mail. For some reason, the RSS feed has been acting goo...

Saturday, September 19, 2026

Is This the End of Gun Reviews? - ARFCOM News

Cop Plants Cocaine to Frame Innocent Woman — But It's All on Camera - The Civil Rights Lawyer

A Couple Spent $12,800 On Carry Permits… And Still Can’t Carry Everywhere - Colion Noir

Clarence Thomas: The Second Amendment Assumes a Right—It Does Not Grant One - Ammoland.com

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas needed only a few sentences to expose the fundamental error behind most modern gun-control arguments: The right to keep and bear arms does not come from government.

Speaking with Senator Ted Cruz on the Verdict podcast, around minute 29, Thomas explained that the Constitution established the federal government, but it did not create the individual rights government was formed to protect.

“The Second Amendment says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed,” Thomas told Cruz. “It assumes a right. It doesn’t grant a right.”

The exchange was recently highlighted in a video published by Colion Noir. It is a short statement, but it draws a clear line between the American understanding of liberty and the permission-based system demanded by the gun-control lobby.

Click the link to read the whole article:  Thomas: The Second Amendment Assumes a Right

Highland Park Lawsuit Subpoenas James Reeves, Treats Gun Reviews as ‘Advertising’ - Ammoland.com

A lawsuit attempting to hold Smith & Wesson responsible for the crimes committed during the 2022 Highland Park parade shooting is now reaching beyond the firearm manufacturer and into the gun media.

Firearms reviewer and attorney James Reeves disclosed on X that he was served with a subpoena demanding years of records and analytics concerning Smith & Wesson and reviews he has produced.

The most troubling part for firearm journalists and content creators is how broadly Reeves says the subpoena defines advertising. According to Reeves, the plaintiffs’ definition includes “even unpaid organic social-media content.”

In other words, an independent review of a lawful firearm could be treated as corporate advertising merely because the reviewer received, tested, or discussed the product.

That is a dangerous theory with implications extending well beyond Smith & Wesson or the firearm industry.

CLick the link to read the whole articleLawsuit Subpoenas Reeves, Treats Reviews as ‘Advertising’