Perfect is the enemy of good enough.
And good enough is way better than really really bad.
I like to remind younger Second Amendment advocates who get a little down in the mouth about the fortunes of our right to keep and bear arms that the world we live in today is just about 180 degrees reversed from the one I came up in.
In the 1980s:
- Polls showed a majority of Americans supported gun control, and over 85% would get behind radical control and bans of handguns. Not AR15s; pistols.
- There was one "constitutional carry" state (Vermont) and eight "shall issue" states. Texas was not among them. Either was Florida until 1987.
- Many states forbade carry permits, and most were "discretionary" issue, meaning that one's right to keep and bear arms was subject to your local sheriff's discretion.
- The dominant legal theory was that the right to keep and bear arms was collective, not individual.
What a difference a couple of decades and three consequential Supreme Court cases makes.
Speaking of differences - President Trump took some flak on Second Amendent issues during the first term. Some called him a gun grabber. It's not quite true - he was a binary trigger and bump stock grabber. And I know, "...shall not be infringed" and all, but he also loaded up the Supreme Court with the most pro-2nd Amendment panel in modern history, not to mention some federal judges who've come up through the system with the post-Heller and McDonald "individual right" point of view on 2nd Amendment issues.
Perfect is the enemy of good enough.
And we've been seeing the wages of "good enough" lately.
Reign of Terry: The Fifth Circuit has been laying down the law on Second Amendment issues lately:
When it comes to deciding Second Amendment cases, there's probably no appellate court more cognizant of the fundamental nature of the right to keep and bear arms than the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Judges on the court have, among other things; ruled several ATF rules out of bounds, upheld the right of "unlawful" users of marijuana to possess firearms (so long as they're not actively under the influence), and declared that adults under the age of 21 have a Second Amendment right to purchase handguns from firearm retailers.
And they didn't stop there, also ruling that merely possessing a gun isn't grounds for a police search. Cam Edwards notes:
For those of us who don't regularly pal around with drug traffickers or violent offenders, the Fifth Circuit's decision offers real protection against unlawful searches just because we're exercising our Second Amendment rights... at least in those states under the court's jurisdiction. It's unclear whether Wilson will appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, but even if he does the Court will most likely be able to respond without discussing the Second Amendment implications of the appellate court's decision.
The Friendlier Skies: In the meantime, the Trump administration is pushing the TSA to make rules for law abiding citizens tranporting firearms a little more rational:
The Trump Administration recently announced a review of TSA policies designed to simplify travel ahead of major US events like the FIFA World Cup, Olympics and America250 anniversary celebrations.
America’s 83 million gun owners are hoping that review will include a streamlined approach to air travel with firearms. For millions of gun owners who fly with firearms each year, the process is seen as unnecessarily burdensome while at the same time adding little to public safety.
You want more?
Where Credit Is Due, Redux: House Republicans are moving to drive back some of the administrative bias against small businesses that deal in firearms:
On July 16, U.S. Rep. Roger Williams, R-Texas, introduced the Equal Shot Act of 2025, designed to protect small business owners from politically motivated bias, defend Constitutional rights and guarantee that businesses supporting the Second Amendment have the same access to federal resources as any other eligible enterprise.
The bill comes as a response to concerns that, under the Biden Administration, federal agencies or financial institutions may have denied support or imposed restrictions on gun-related businesses for political or ideological reasons. This legislation aims to ensure that all eligible small businesses, regardless of industry, are treated fairly and without bias.
“Unelected officials should not have the power to discriminate against an entire industry based on political bias,” Rep. Williams said in a press release announcing the measure. “Firearm-related businesses are owned and operated by hardworking Americans who follow the law, create jobs, and contribute to their communities. They shouldn’t be punished for their values. This bill stands up for their right to compete on a level playing field.”
This might help address some of the debanking issues we discussed a while ago.
Swamp Critters: But all of that is just a buildup to the big kahuna; the good guys may be coming close to taking a chunk out of DC's picayune system of issuing carry permits:
D.C. recognizes no permits other than those issued by the Metropolitan Police Department, which forces non-residents to obtain a D.C CCW before they can lawfully carry once the cross the Potomac and enter the District. That's easier said than done if you live beyond the greater D.C. area. Good luck finding an instructor in most states who can teach the training course the MPD requires before someone can submit an application.
As we recently covered, though, there's an effort underway to give the District's carry laws an overhaul using the appropriations process, and this week that effort got one step closer to becoming reality.
Don't get cocky - but let's take the "W" when we can.
