Podcasts about Heller

Jarl Friis-Mikkelsen ved ikke, hvad han skal bruge sin uddannelse som cand.mag. i dansk og engelsk til. Men i hvert fald ikke noget akademisk. Det kan man vist heller ikke kalde Øb og Bøv, den første makker, han får sammen med Ole Stephensen. Heller ikke Walter og Carlo lefler for eliten, for Jarlen vil gerne være folkelig. Og det bliver han. Folk strømmer i biografen for at se deres film, og han bliver folkeeje. Også i en grad, at det næsten bliver for meget. Efter den 3. og sidste Walter og Carlo-film, der flopper fælt, vil han gerne videre og væk. Vært: Anne Sofie Kragh Klipper: Leo Peter Larsen Redaktør: Christian Stemann Research: Donya LykkebergSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Der Asteroid Nausikaa ist jetzt so gut zu sehen wie seit Langem nicht: Der rund hundert Kilometer große Felsbrocken ist nur 120 Millionen Kilometer von uns entfernt – so nah kommt er uns erst wieder in einigen Jahrzehnten. Lorenzen, Dirk www.deutschlandfunk.de, Sternzeit

In this episode, Joseph Blocher of Duke University School of Law and Clark Neily of the Cato Institute trace the ongoing debates over the Second Amendment. They analyze recent Supreme Court decisions on this key provision, preview a case on the Court's docket this term, and look ahead to the issues on the horizon. Thomas Donnelly, lead scholar at the National Constitution Center, moderates. Resources  The Second Amendment, Interpretation & Debate, National Constitution Center   District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) Supreme Court Cases Library, National Constitution Center  McDonald v. Chicago (2010)  New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen (2022)   United States v. Rahimi (2024)  “No earthquake, but did the Supreme Court shift a bit in its approach to guns?,” NCC's Constitution Daily blog, (June 24, 2024)  United States v. Hemani (2025)  “Supreme Court rules in favor of man facing gun ban for using marijuana,” NCC's Constitution Daily blog, (June 18, 2026)  Josephe Blocher and David Pozen, “The Excluded Middle of Law: Constitutional Drivers of Extremism in Gun and Drug Policy,” Duke Law School 2026 Supreme Court Review (forthcoming)  Wilford v. Lopez (2025)  “Supreme Court strikes down Hawaii law regulating firearms possession,” NCC's Constitution Daily blog, (June 25, 2026)   Brief of the Cato Institute as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners, Viramontes v. Cook County  Stay Connected and Learn More  Stay connected with We the People—follow, rate, and review the show wherever you listen.  Questions or comments? Email podcast@constitutioncenter.org.  Follow @ConstitutionCtr on social media and sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate.  Support our important work by making a donation today.  ⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate

Ein Rätsel über Gottes GeduldRuth Heller liest die Geschichten aus dem Buch der Richter heute mit anderen Augen. Am Beispiel von Gideon zeigt sie, wie sich hinter einer zunächst verstörenden Geschichte auch die unendliche Geduld und Treue Gottes entdecken lässt. Gideon ist keineswegs ein selbstsicherer Held: Er zweifelt, fürchtet sich und bittet Gott mehrfach um Zeichen. Dennoch wird er zum Retter Israels. Nach seinem Tod beginnt das Volk jedoch wieder, sich von Gott abzuwenden. Am Ende bleibt die Erinnerung an einen Gott, der barmherzig und gnädig, geduldig und von grosser Güte ist.#WortZumTag #RuthHeller #Bibel #Gideon #GottesGeduld #GottesTreue #Barmherzigkeit #Glaube #Vertrauen #ErstesTestamentRuth Heller, Buch der Richter, Gideon, Jerubbaal, Gottes Geduld, Gottes Treue, Barmherzigkeit, Zweifel, Zeichen, Vertrauen, Befreiung Israels, Bibel, Psalm 103, Glaube

In this episode, host Daniel Raimi talks with Andrea Furnaro and Patrick Heller from the Natural Resource Governance Institute. Drawing from a recent report, Furnaro and Heller lay out a five-step framework for how national oil companies (NOCs) can navigate an impending energy transition. Together, they contend that a business-as-usual approach is not a neutral option for these companies and their respective countries. Instead, NOCs must define national policy goals, assess transition risks and opportunities, establish a strategic direction beyond oil and gas, strengthen institutional governance, and ensure a just transition and responsible exit for workers and communities. Examples from Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, and Denmark illustrate how different NOCs can weigh diversification opportunities and adapt strategies to their unique national circumstances and organizational, technical, and economic capacities. References and recommendations: “National Oil Company Transformation: Strategic Choices for an Uncertain Energy Future” by Andrea Furnaro, Giovanni Tagliani, Patrick Heller, Ana Carolina González Espinosa, Tengi George-Ikoli, Fernanda Ballesteros, Nicola Woodroffe; https://resourcegovernance.org/publications/national-oil-company-transformation “Facing the Future” by Andrea Furnaro and David Manley; https://resourcegovernance.org/publications/facing-future-what-national-oil-companies-say-about-energy-transition “Jane” documentary film; https://films.nationalgeographic.com/jane-the-movie “The Secret Agent” film; https://www.imdb.com/title/tt27847051/ Subscribe to stay up to date on podcast episodes, news, and research from Resources for the Future: https://www.rff.org/subscribe/

Riding Shotgun With Charlie #261 Dan Hagan, Esq. Mass Gun Lawyer I've been running into Dan Hagan at several of the pro-gun events in Massachusetts. At one event, we talked a bit more. Then I found out how many cases he was doing in the Western Mass and the impact he's had on them. So it was time to reach out and have him on the show. We met at a local gun store and took it from there.  Like many people, Dan was into firearms when he was a kid and teenager. His father was a police officer. I found out one of his neighbors was involved with one of the most tragic firearm accidents in Massachusetts. A young boy was at a machine gun shoot and using an Uzi. The boy lost control and ended up taking a fatal round under the chin.  At law school, the Second Amendment doesn't get covered well or much. He says "guns were the third rail of law". I've heard this from other attorneys I've had on the show. For this thesis, he talked about the Second Amendment.  Around the time of Heller (2008), Dan was working a corporate lawyer job. But decided it was time to fill the niche for gun owners in the Bay State. His practice deals with both criminal law and Second Amendment issues.  Dan does open up about some of the bigger cases he's had. There was the Kyle Culotta case. Where Culotta and his fiance, Sarande (RSWC #238), were working their way from Arizona to New Hampshire. While Door Dashing for money, they were pulled over. The car was impounded due to expired registration. When he removed his lawfully owned Arizona firearms, he was now in possession of them in Massachusetts. He ended up going to jail for 4 months on a trumped up "dangerousness" charge as well as a few others. Dan helped get some charges dismissed. Some are still pending now. Although there are projections in the Mass gun laws, they don't help you on the front end of the process. Only once you get to court can the attorneys bring up the laws.  The conversation also leads us into discussing Chapter 135, which was passed in 2024. It's been a disaster for citizens and instructors. There's been a whole movement here to repeal the entire law, which is on the ballot in Nov 2026. The law makes it more difficult for people to get a license to carry. It changes definitions and makes it confusing to the people, but also for law enforcement and lawyers. Even the law makers who signed it can't explain it, because the 130+ page bill was passed in less than 24 hours.  Some other cases that have been happening are one that includes a woman driving from Connecticut to Vermont, passing through Mass, gets into a car accident. At the hospital, she's charged with illegal possession as she is now "visiting" the state… in the hospital. Another where a woman was driving from one of the Carolinas to New Hampshire, gets lost in central Mass, gets pulled over, tells the police she has a firearm. Chapter 135 says its lawful to pass through the state, but they want her to plead guilty to a misdemeanor even though the new law says what she's doing is legal.  A big case he had earlier this year involved a self defense shooting where the intended victim shot an innocent bystander. This was the first time in Mass where someone shot a person who wasn't the intended target and didn't get a murder charge. This was really groundbreaking.  It's great to talk with people like Dan. Hearing him talk about inner city young people who live in dangerous areas and want to protect themselves from local gang violence made me realize that some people get put into unsafe situations and want to get out of them. But when the system tries them for illegal possession with zero history of crime or violence, it leaves them with no other choice than to keep pursuing that lifestyle.  This was a really good conversation! There's lots of great points he makes. He's working on cases that are shaping the future of the Second Amendment where nearly everything here is an uphill battle. I'm glad he's on our side.    Favorite quotes: "Guns are like the third rail of law…There's an Amendment there for those who don't like guns." "They didn't get the $100 gun license, but they would otherwise qualify if they did." "Even if you have a pre-94 magazine…carrying that now, for anybody, is illegal." "You manufacture people to be criminals in the context." Mass Gun Lawyer https://www.massgunlawyer.com/ Dan On Facebook https://www.facebook.com/dan.hagan.758   Second Amendment Foundation https://secure.anedot.com/saf/donate?sc=RidingShotgun   Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms https://www.ccrkba.org/ Please support the Riding Shotgun With Charlie supporters.  US Law Shield Legal Defense for Self Defense. Use "RSWC" as the discount code and get 2 months for free! https://www.uslawshield.com   Patriot Mobile Use this link and get one month for free! https://patriotmobile.com/partners/rswc   Or listen on: iTunes/Apple podcasts https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/riding-shotgun-with-charlie/id1275691565

Editors – Chris Chandler and Devin Dulany The Musical editors Chris Chandler and Devin Dulany discuss cutting a dark comedy that turns professional frustration, romantic jealousy and middle-school theater into an increasingly elaborate act of revenge. For Devin, the project began years earlier when he edited the original AFI short that eventually became the feature, while Chris brought a background in comedy that includes Curb Your Enthusiasm, Dave and Blindspotting. Directed by Giselle Bonilla and written by Alexander Heller, The Musical stars Will Brill as Doug Leibowitz, a frustrated playwright working as a middle-school theater teacher while dreaming of a more important career in New York. When Doug discovers that his ex-girlfriend Abigail, played by Gillian Jacobs, has begun dating his nemesis, Principal Brady, played by Rob Lowe, he decides to sabotage Brady's pursuit of a prestigious Blue Ribbon award by secretly replacing the school's planned production of West Side Story with an original musical designed to create the worst possible publicity for everyone involved. The film began as an AFI Conservatory short before Bonilla, Heller and several members of their original filmmaking team expanded the idea into their first feature. Devin edited that original short and returned for the feature, while Chris joined the team as both editor and post producer. The movie premiered in the U.S. Dramatic Competition at the 2026 Sundance Film Festival before receiving a nationwide theatrical release. In our conversation, Chris and Devin talk about expanding a premise that worked at short-film length into a feature, maintaining the movie almost entirely through Doug's increasingly distorted point of view, and finding the right editorial balance for a protagonist whose commitment to his own grievances is essential to the comedy. They also discuss working with Will Brill's intensely serious performance, preserving the sincerity of the young cast, building the escalating revenge plot, and holding back enough of the school production to make the final performance deliver on everything the film has been promising. CHRIS CHANDLER Chris Chandler is an editor whose credits include The Musical, Blindspotting, Dave and Curb Your Enthusiasm. His work spans comedy, music-driven storytelling and character-focused television and feature filmmaking. Chris received an ACE Eddie Award nomination alongside Roger Nygard, ACE for the Curb Your Enthusiasm Season 11 finale, "The Mormon Advantage." In addition to editing The Musical, Chris served as the film's post producer, helping guide the project through an abbreviated post-production schedule leading into its Sundance premiere. DEVIN DULANY Devin Dulany is an editor and filmmaker whose work includes The Musical and the AFI short on which the feature was based. An alumnus of the AFI Conservatory's Editing program, Devin was part of the original group of filmmakers who developed the project during their time at AFI and later reunited to expand it into a feature. Before attending AFI, Devin worked professionally in editorial in New York and Los Angeles, cutting commercials, trailers, documentaries and narrative projects while also developing his own work as a director and cinematographer. The Credits Visit ExtremeMusic for all your production audio needs. Hear Chris discuss his work on the Starz series BLINDSPOTTING. Subscribe to The Rough Cut podcast and never miss an episode. Visit The Rough Cut on YouTube.

In this episode of Talk Law Radio, host Todd Marquardt is joined by Marquardt Law Firm attorney Paul Weiss to examine key Second Amendment cases before the Supreme Court and analyze how recent judicial precedents are reshaping gun rights across the nation. Key Discussion Points The "Vampire Rule" Invalidated: Analysis of the Wolford case out of Hawaii, where the Supreme Court struck down provisions requiring citizens to obtain property owner permission to carry firearms in public spaces—a restriction legal commentators dub the "Vampire Rule". Semi-Automatic & "Assault-Style" Firearms: Why historical definitions established in the Heller decision (2008), combined with the "common use" test (Caetano standard requiring items to be both dangerous and unusual to be banned), suggest upcoming SCOTUS rulings will protect semi-automatic rifles. Circuit Splits on Magazine Capacity: How the D.C. Circuit's ruling in the Benson case created a federal circuit split by declaring 10-round magazine caps unconstitutional, likely forcing the Supreme Court to take up magazine bans. Disarmament & Due Process: A look into the Hemani decision regarding firearm possession prohibitions, establishing that depriving individuals of Second Amendment rights requires specific adjudication that the person is actively dangerous, rather than applying blanket prohibitions. Minors, Safety, & Gun Ownership: A discussion on youth access to firearms prompted by a local incident in the Somerset school system, balancing historical military service under 18 against modern parental oversight and age-of-majority laws. Defining Personal & Financial Legacy: Paul Weiss reflects on his career transition from CPA to estate planning attorney, defining legacy as both financial security for family and a moral commitment to leave the community better than one found it. Weeds and Guns still shouldn't be mixed This video offers an in-depth legal analysis of the Supreme Court's Hemani decision, which directly addresses the standards for disarming individuals based on drug use discussed in the episode. -Sponsored by Marquardt Law Firm and Financial Planning HQ -Go to marquardtlawfirm.com and financialplanninghq.net If you found this episode valuable, please Subscribe and hit the Notification Bell on YouTube. Sharing this podcast with other parents, grandparents, and caregivers helps raise vital awareness to protect the children in our communitiesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's a Jake's Take with Jacob Elyachar EXCLUSIVE! It is a privilege to welcome Giselle Bonilla and Alexander Heller to the podcast!  Giselle is the director of the upcoming film The Musical, which Alexander Heller wrote. The movie stars Tony Award-winning actor Will Brill as Doug Liebowitz, a frustrated playwright and middle school drama teacher.  Doug's ex-girlfriend, Abigail (Gillian Jacobs), the school's art teacher, is now dating his nemesis, Principal Brady (Rob Lowe, who also co-produced the film).  To retaliate and undermine their school's chances of winning a prestigious Blue Ribbon of Academic Excellence, Doug decides to turn the fall musical, West Side Story, into an original, controversial, chaotic production.  The film was selected for the U.S. Dramatic Competition at this year's Sundance Film Festival, where it had its world premiere during the festival's run from January 22 to 27, 2026. This festival marked the last time it would be held in Utah before relocating to its new home in Boulder, Colorado.  The Musical is scheduled to be released nationwide on Friday, September 18.  For this special edition of The Jake's Take with Jacob Elyachar Podcast, Alexander Heller and Giselle Bonilla shared how The Musical started out as a short film. They also revealed how Doug has shades of The Producers' Max Bialystock and School of Rock's Dewey Finn.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jake-s-take-with-jacob-elyachar--4112003/support.

Ein eifersüchtiger Gott? Ruth Heller setzt sich mit der Bitte aus dem Unservater auseinander: «Führe uns nicht in Versuchung.» Beim Lesen von Richter 2 entdeckt sie darin eine neue Bedeutung. Die Israeliten wenden sich von Gott ab und anderen Göttern zu – mit Folgen für ihr Leben. Doch Gott lässt sie trotz ihres Ungehorsams nicht fallen. Besonders beschäftigt Ruth Heller das Bild vom «eifersüchtigen Gott». Was zunächst nach Zorn und Rachsucht klingt, kann auch als Ausdruck einer leidenschaftlichen Liebe verstanden werden: Gott möchte den Menschen nahe sein, ihn schützen und ihm immer wieder zu Hilfe kommen. So wird die Geschichte von Ungehorsam und Versuchung letztlich zu einer Geschichte über Gottes Treue, Gnade und Geduld. Und am Ende darf sogar ein Stück Schokolade erlaubt sein. #WortZumTag #Versuchung #UnserVater #Gott #Gottesliebe #Treue #Gnade #Bibel #Richter #RuthHeller #Glaube Versuchung, Unservater, Richter 2, Israeliten, Baal, Götzendienst, eifersüchtiger Gott, Gottesliebe, Treue, Gnade, Vergebung, Schutz, Bibel, Ruth Heller

AI is top of mind for everyone in the investment business. Our Summits are abuzz with curiosity about what others are doing. I asked 8 CIOs to share how they're using AI today, including what's working and what isn't, the tools they've adopted, and where they're headed next. They range from a single-family office with one investment professional to one of the largest pension funds in the world with thousands. What emerged is a range of use cases — from using AI as a personal productivity tool, to changing investment workflows, organizing institutional knowledge, improving decisions, and ultimately trying to generate alpha. You'll also hear some consistency in the tools currently used and different views on how far AI should go in the investment process. Featured in this interview: Abby Barlow, CIO of Westwood Management Laura Hill, CIO of Advocate Health Brian Sugrue, CIO of Shannonbridge Jenny Heller, President and CIO Brandywine Group Advisors John Lawrence, President of Rice Management Company Matt Bank, CIO of GEM Kristin Kallergis Rowland, Global Head of Alternative Investments for J.P. Morgan Asset & Wealth Management Jon Webster, Senior Managing Director and COO of Technology & Operations at CPP Investments Try ALEX by Admired Leadership. Learn More Follow Ted on Twitter at @tseides or LinkedIn Subscribe to the mailing list Access Transcript with Premium Membership Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://thepodcastconsultant.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠)

Being alone and being lonely are not always the same thing.Sometimes being alone can be peaceful. It can give us room to think, reflect, rest, reconnect with ourselves, and simply enjoy our own company.In this episode of Dr. Davina's Dots, we reflect on the difference between solitude and loneliness and the possibility of finding peace in moments when no one else is around. Take a little time for yourself and enjoy an hour of thoughtful reflection and relaxing jazz. Musical Selections include Hypnotic Adrian Crutchfield feat Nicholas cole Chillin Art Ruprecht Coastal Blue bill Heller (feat Eric Maraienthal) Sphaghetti Western Alma de Lisbon Kim Scott Featuring Kevin Wooten You Keep me up Nils Under the Stars Brian Simpson feat Isaiah Collier Tropical Coast Lee Jones & David Margam – check the names on this Northern Hospitality The Moore Twins 1979 feat Michael Broening Turning Point Igor Fedotov Late Night Drive feat Judah Sealey If today's reflection resonated with you, you'll find similar calming thoughts throughout my books, created to offer gentle perspective, emotional clarity, and meaningful encouragement for everyday life and leadership.My books are designed to help you slow down, reflect deeply, and reconnect with what truly matters, whether you're navigating personal growth, professional demands, or simply seeking a quieter mind in a busy world.You can explore my full collection of books, reflections, and creative experiences at www.drdavinasdots.comUntil next time Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Supreme Court just took a case about assault weapon bans, and the whole fight turns on four words from Heller: dangerous and unusual. Attorney Alan Beck, who won Wolford at the Supreme Court, wrote an amicus brief arguing that courts have had those words backwards for years. Unusual never meant rare. It meant carrying a weapon in a way meant to terrify people, and the distinction goes back to English common law in 1328. Also this week: a retired Navy SEAL says 18 year olds cannot be trusted with a firearm off duty, and we take that apart. Anti gun groups demanded better data on defensive gun use and got a number more than twice what they expected. A school board candidate in South San Diego County gets attacked for our endorsement, and her reason for carrying is one nobody bothered to ask about. Plus the Dixie Chicks, and a straight answer on which home defense shotgun to buy. Chapters: 0:00 Cold open: soldiers are not allowed in my home 0:48 Welcome, and why the voter guide matters 4:31 Michael gets Judge Benitez to sign a 60 round magazine 10:34 The Madison quote that stuck with Alisha 14:14 What is on the show today 14:47 How Good Are You: the September 23 training day with Dave Reed 15:44 Win a Springfield Echelon at SDCGO.org/sweepstakes 17:41 Attorney Alan Beck on what dangerous and unusual really means 19:31 Where the phrase comes from: English common law and the 1328 Statute of Northampton 24:42 Common use, and the forty million AR-15s in circulation 26:12 Why counting up guns is the wrong test 28:43 Unusual never meant uncommon 30:26 The dagger at the market versus the battle axe in armor 33:18 Whatever happened to the bazooka argument 35:50 Leland Yee, California's biggest anti-gun voice, and the Stinger missiles 38:11 Parity with the average foot soldier 40:44 Which of the forty five amicus briefs are worth reading 44:53 Guns for me but none for thee: Eddie Gallagher on 18 year olds 48:29 If the standard is emotional regulation, where is the line 53:28 The cases fighting for 18, 19 and 20 year olds 58:39 The Second Amendment is not a second class right 1:01:00 Anti gunners demanded better data and got it 1:04:24 1.67 million defensive gun uses, and why that was an undercount 1:04:56 The new number: 2.2 million a year 1:07:23 What the survey did to the female ownership claim 1:14:54 Dixie Chicks: anti self defense, pro revenge 1:17:38 Goodbye Earl worked through the other options first 1:24:05 Delia Dominguez Cervantes attacked over an SDCGO endorsement 1:24:51 They doctored our voter guide before sharing it 1:31:39 Why she got a CCW, in her own words 1:38:12 Stump My Nephew: Eddie from Lakeside wants a home defense shotgun 1:42:53 Mossberg 500 versus Remington 870 1:46:52 The budget answer: Mossberg Maverick 88

Author Peter Heller returns to Northwest Passages to discuss "The Dog Stars" and its transition from page to big-screen thriller directed by Ridley Scott and starring Jacob Elordi, Josh Brolin and Margaret Qualley. Onstage with Heller is Edward Humes, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and author who is also making his return to NWP - this time as the interviewer.

There is a particular kind of dread that shows up around a first performance review, a first networking event, a first job where nobody hands you a manual. For introverted professional women who spent years being praised for grades and credentials, the workplace often demands a different currency entirely — people skills, self-advocacy, the ability to connect without performing extroversion. Nobody taught this. It was never on the syllabus.That is the gap Rob Heller has spent two decades trying to close. After a 40-year business career and selling his insurance firm for eight figures to a publicly held company, Heller founded the Boost Program — a curriculum built around what he calls the three legs of the stool: people skills, character, and a healthy mindset. In this conversation, Heller and Serena Low talk about why 85 percent of what employers say they want is soft skills nobody is systematically teaching, why phone and social media use functions like a genuine addiction for the 14-24 age group, and why introverts do not need to become extroverts to master connection — they simply need the skills nobody gave them the language for.Questions AnsweredWhy do young people leave school without the people skills employers say matter most?What are the three "legs of the stool" in Rob Heller's Boost Program?Is phone and social media use actually an addiction, and how does the Boost Program address it?Can introverts build strong people skills without becoming extroverts?Why did Rob Heller create Boost after selling his insurance company for eight figures?What role do parents play in reinforcing the skills their teens learn in a program like Boost?What is a growth mindset and why does it matter for connection and resilience?How does the attention economy affect teens' ability to build real relationships?Key TakeawaysThe gap between "employable" and "prepared" is wider than most parents realize. Heller names it directly: employers report that 85 percent of what they are hiring for is soft skills, yet schools spend nowhere close to that proportion of time teaching them. The dissonance between what a transcript proves and what a workplace actually requires is the quiet crisis sitting underneath a lot of early-career anxiety.Naming an addiction as an addiction, without shame, changes how people respond to it. Heller does not lecture teens about willpower. He walks them through how deliberately phones and algorithms are engineered to keep them hooked, and he includes himself in that struggle rather than standing above it — a move that turns a shame-based topic into a shared, workable problem.Social media's distortion is not a discipline problem — it is a highlight-reel problem. Heller's framing that social feeds show only the equivalent of a basketball player's best dunks, never the misses, gives language to something many quiet achievers already feel: the comparison trap is not a personal failing, it is a design flaw in what gets shown.Introversion is not the obstacle to connection — it is a different route to it. Heller is explicit that his students do not need to become the loudest person in the room. Curiosity about the other person, active listening, and small consistent behaviors build connection just as effectively, without requiring anyone to perform a personality that is not theirs.A growth mindset reframes struggle from evidence of inadequacy into evidence of growth. For the perfectionist, quiet achiever who assumes discomfort means something has gone wrong, Heller's reminder that discomfort is a normal, necessary part of developing any skill offers a genuinely different relationship to struggle.Chapters00:00 — Introducing Rob Heller: entrepreneur, youth development innovator, founder of the Boost Program00:56 — From an eight-figure insurance exit to noticing the skills gap at home04:32 — Why Boost went on hold for fifteen years, and what brought it back during the pandemic06:03 — The three legs of the stool: people skills, character, and a healthy mindset08:15 — Why Boost focuses on ages 14 to 24, and the neuroscience behind that window09:59 — "The Missing Course": why schools teach math and science but not the skills that determine a life11:41 — Soft skills aren't soft: why leadership, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence are actually hard15:04 — You don't have to be an extrovert: introverts, effectiveness, and connection15:36 — Naming the phone and social media addiction without shame20:01 — How Boost spreads: schools, workforce development, and building a peer community for organizations22:10 — What engagement looks like when a program actually lands with teens23:32 — Parents as the head coach, Boost as the assistant coach25:39 — Rob's message to introverted listeners: you don't have to change who you are to build these skills27:05 — Wired to connect: why relationships, not achievement, predict a good life27:35 — Growth mindset as the third pillar of a healthy mindAbout the GuestRob Heller is an entrepreneur, youth development innovator, and founder of the Boost Program, a curriculum built to teach teens and young adults the people skills, character development, and mental health tools that traditional education often leaves out. After a 40-year business career, including selling his insurance firm for eight figures to a publicly held company, Heller returned to the program he first started twenty years earlier as a parent trying to give his own children a skill set no school course offered. He is the author of The Missing Course for Today's Youth: 26 Skills That Matter — How The Boost Program Fills The Gap.https://boostprogram.com/Follow the PodcastIf this conversation resonated, leave a review to help other introverts find The Quiet Warrior Podcast.Work with SerenaAre you at a career crossroads? Before deciding if your next career move is stay/go, take the SEEN Career Clarity Diagnostic. 4 questions to help you reflect on where your career holds up in relation to Safety - Energy - Ethos - Need: the four pillars of a sustainable career for introverts. Once you have completed the diagnostic, you will be invited to book a Clarity Consultation, during which I will share what I've observed and your options for moving forward.Loved this episode? Leave a review to help other Quiet Warriors find the show.This episode was edited by Aura House Productions

Join us in Relationship Academy to continue the conversation! ⁠ 7 day free trial and then get the founders rate of $25/month Take Dr. Heller's Free Attachment Quiz Clean out your closet by downloading VINTED for free! In this episode of Relationship Advice, Colter talks with Dr. Diane Heller about anxious, avoidant, ambivalent, and disorganized attachment patterns. They explore why these patterns are often intelligent survival strategies—not character flaws or relationship “red flags”—and how early relational wounds can shape the way people experience closeness, conflict, and love. Dr. Heller explains that everyone has an innate capacity for secure attachment and that understanding these patterns can help partners respond with more compassion instead of blame. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Denver and Paonia author Peter Heller says he's often been moved to tears seeing his 2012 novel “The Dog Stars” turned into a major motion picture. Jacob Elordi stars and Ridley Scott directed. Heller discusses the ‘transmogrification” with Ryan Warner at the Denver Press Club. 

Scott talks with the attorney for the family of a local man who was allegedly killed by his nursing home. Scott gets the details.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Scott talks with the attorney for the family of a local man who was allegedly killed by his nursing home. Scott gets the details.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Fascismen lever i beste velgående og er ikke vanskelig å få øye på, hevder Rosan Smits. Det er ikke hakekors eller naziflagg, men MAGA-caps og memes i sosiale medier. Heller enn å diskutere hvordan fascisme kan defineres, er det viktigere å gjenkjenne hva som skjer i praksis. Det handler om historiefortellinger, mistillit, radikalisering og polarisering. Gjest: Statsviter og journalist Rosan Smits, forfatter av boken «Dette er fascisme».Episoden foregår på engelsk.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Scott talks with the attorney for the family of a local man who was allegedly killed by his nursing home. Scott gets the details.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode 306- Big Brother’s Eye on Guns Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 15 Gun Lawyer — Episode 306 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Gun laws, Second Amendment, Ninth Circuit, California law, Surveillance, FFL, Self defense, Firearm storage, Heller decision, New Jersey, Guillotine, Weapon definition, Propaganda, CDC data, Gun training SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:18 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:20 and I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:21 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. Teddy, welcome back, you new father, you. And I’m the new grandfather. Teddy Nappen 00:29 Yes, I know, and don’t worry, all is good. Just sleep is for the weak. Evan Nappen 00:34 Ah, right, exactly, exactly. Oh my! And how is beautiful, Aliyana, doing? That cute little peanut that she is. Teddy Nappen 00:45 Aliyana is doing quite well. She is. Evan Nappen 00:47 And your lovely wife? How is she? Teddy Nappen 00:50 She’s doing also well. It’s definitely one of those moments when you see your wife holding your newborn child. Definitely that kind of spark. Oh yeah, very special, Evan Nappen 01:01 Oh yeah, very special, special. Teddy Nappen 01:02 Yeah, but they’re both doing quite well, and I’m eternally blessed for that. Page – 2 – of 15 Evan Nappen 01:08 That’s right. And we got the baby to the range. She did great on her first shooting experience there. Teddy Nappen 01:15 I know we took out. Evan Nappen 01:17 She got her CCARE. She’s good. She took out a Charter Arms .22. The trick was the range officer allowed us to just put up balloons to make it easier. It worked. Evan Nappen 01:19 She took out a Charter Arms .22. The trick was the range officer allowed us to just put up balloons to make it easier, and it worked. Evan Nappen 01:28 It was good. It was good. We start them young in the Nappen family. You know, you have to give one day of birth, and then you’re at the range. Teddy Nappen 01:40 There’s two things. Evan Nappen 01:41 Training begins. Teddy Nappen 01:42 The two things Aliyana will grow up with having. Number one, I want to teach her to be a critical thinker, and number two, all I can show her for self-defense. Everything I can for her to be a critical thinker. Evan Nappen 01:56 That’s right. And you do that for all kids. It’s a way of not being a victim, not being a victim. Critical thinking and knowing how to defend yourself – two very important things. Well, I’ve got to tell you, the Ninth Circuit in California had a very interesting decision. The reason I want to discuss it is, I believe this decision may give us hints as to what may be coming in New Jersey and other places. As we see the power of the newly, relatively speaking, empowered Second Amendment crushing gun laws that are literally over a century old, the anti-Second Amendment crowd, the Second Amendment oppressors, are, of course, looking for avenues to oppress our rights, and they have to work within this new framework. This decision out of the Ninth Circuit, I find of great concern because of its potential to possibly be utilized as a mechanism and tactic for the anti-Second Amendment Left. And what happened in the Ninth Circuit is an Appellate Decision, after the trial court in the Ninth, and what it did was leave in place California’s 24/7 gun store surveillance law. Page – 3 – of 15 Evan Nappen 03:31 Now you may say, okay, well that’s just gun stores. Yes, but it’s very easy to expand this, and I’m going to show you why this should be of great concern. So, let’s take a look at what happened in the Ninth Circuit with California law, and then I’m going to discuss where I think the gun rights oppressors may see an opening for shenanigans. We’ve got to be prepared and recognize that this could be a potential area of penetration where they will probably strike and try to oppress us. So, California, requires licensed dealers to video record and audio record. By the way, interior video and audio, and retain all the recordings for at least one year. Now I’m getting this, by the way, from a great article in AmmoLand by one of our favorite authors, John Crump, and it’s called “Ninth Circuit Leaves California’s 24/7 Gun Store Surveillance Law in place”. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/08/ninth-circuit-leaves-californias-24-7-gun-store-surveillance-law-in-place/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=fb0c8bc3fc-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-fb0c8bc3fc-21268623) Evan Nappen 05:02 The article discusses how a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld California’s controversial gun store monitoring law by a two-to-one margin. Now, the case is Richards v. Newsom. No shock that the defendant is Governor Newsom. And what happened in this case was brick and mortar FFLs, two home-based FFLs, gun rights groups, including GOA, GOC, CRPA, and SAF, and individual patrons of the shop, were all plaintiffs in this action. They challenged California’s law, which was enacted in 2024, that requires every California FFL to operate a 24/7 digital video system that also records audio inside the premises. Cameras must cover entries and exits, display areas, points of sale, and clearly identify people, and run at least 15 frames per second. They have to store footage for one year. In addition, dealers must post a conspicuous warning that says, in all bold, THESE PREMISES ARE UNDER VIDEO AND AUDIO SURVEILLANCE. YOUR IMAGE AND CONVERSATIONS MAY BE RECORDED.” Evan Nappen 06:49 At the District Court level, the level below the Appellate level, the law was found constitutional, and the plaintiffs then appealed to the Appeal Court in the ninth, which came out with this decision. It was a three-judge panel, and it was Judge (Lucy H.) Koh, Judge (Ana) de Alba, which were both appointed by Biden, and a Trump appointee, Judge Kenneth Lee. In this case, one of the claims they made was that this violates the Fourth Amendment. That’s the constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure, and the panel rejected the claim, saying that the dealers’ recordings are not themselves a Government search. There is no physical intrusion by the State, citing another case of Jones, and no government acquisition of data, citing two other cases of Carpenter and Chatrie. Dealers are not transformed into state actors by merely being required to keep cameras. Wow, let that sink in. And, of course, the two Biden judges rejected Judge Lee’s inspection theory on three grounds. And that is that the law doesn’t authorize inspections, though there are other penal code provisions that do, and that even if it did, the statute is facially valid under New York versus Burger because it limits who may inspect and what may be inspected. Page – 4 – of 15 Evan Nappen 08:45 The plaintiffs also claim that the law violated the Fifth Amendment takings clause. The Court said no good to that one as well. The majority, again, the two Biden appointees, said it’s not a physical taking. Dealers own and install the equipment, and the Government doesn’t occupy the premises. hey claimed it’s not a regulatory taking. That dealers in this heavily-regulated industry have reduced investment-backed expectations, and the alleged compliance costs, by the way, of $17,000, without a before and after value comparison, do not suffice. And the character of the action is a “public-safety regulation, not a physical invasion”. he Court also rejected the First Amendment claims, where the judge held that overbreadth fails because the statute doesn’t punish or regulate speech. The anonymity claim failed because one, no one must identify themselves, even though cameras must be positioned to identify customers easily. And the Association claim fails because membership is not compulsory, and it shot it all down. hen the majority also declined to adopt the dissent, you know, the good guys’ dissent of the right to receive and exchange information. They rejected that theory, claiming the plaintiffs didn’t raise it, and cited other cases that involved actual prohibitions. So, this is incredible. The one dissenting Judge Lee would have also held that inspection scheme violates the Fourth Amendment as applied to FFLs. There’s no time or place limits. So, agents could theoretically enter home at any hour to check the system, and they left the audio and visual surveillance requirement in place. Evan Nappen 11:08 Now this is California, granted, and this is, of course, on dealers. However, what are the requirements, constitutionally speaking, when it comes to firearm storage, and we’ll argue regulation? You see, we have heard rumors and things have been printed that one of the things that New Jersey is going to pass, particularly in response to the finding of unconstitutionality of both the assault firearm ban and the magazine ban is something having to do with storage. Well, I’m thinking that it probably isn’t simply going to be focused on storage, but may in fact try to utilize a visual and audio surveillance requirement as well, and place that upon anybody that possesses so-called assault firearms magazines, maybe even all guns. Who knows how far they’ll take it? Evan Nappen 12:20 If we take a step back and we look at the Heller decision, in (District of Columbia v.) Heller, the Supreme Court ruled, of course, that requiring lawfully-owned firearms in a home to be kept unloaded and disassembled, or bound by a trigger lock is a violation of the Second Amendment. The Heller Court found that this storage requirement was unconstitutional because it rendered firearms inoperable and prevented individuals from using them for immediate self-defense in the home. Scalia, when he wrote the majority opinion, said the Second Amendment protects the right to keep a working firearm ready for core lawful purpose of self-defense. Now, of course, if it’s surveillance, surveillance does not stop you from keeping the gun ready for lawful purpose of self-defense. t’s simply a surveillance and “security requirement”. Evan Nappen 13:36 Further, the court in Heller noted that the ruling did not cast out on certain other traditional regulations, stating that laws regulating the storage of firearms to prevent accidents under specific or different regulatory contexts were not necessarily invalidated by Heller. Scalia, when he wrote the Heller decisions, suggested that the Court’s analysis did not “suggest the invalidity of laws regulating storage Page – 5 – of 15 of firearms to prevent accidents”. When he talked about that distinguishing feature. He was drawing a sharp legal line. The Court did not say that all storage laws are unconstitutional. Instead, it distinguished between complete baseline disabling of a gun versus conditional safety rules. And you know how the Second Amendment oppressors always try to exploit to the max anything they’re given in any way, and this is an opening that I expect they’re going to attempt to. Evan Nappen 15:01 Let’s take a further look and elaborate. So, for example, the absence of a self-defense exception. ow, the fundamental flaw in the District of Columbia storage law was that it was an absolute 24/7 mandate. Well, in terms of the DC code, a firearm had to be unloaded and bound by a trigger lock, even if an intruder was actively breaking into the home. Now, Heller struck that absolute mandate down, but what Heller preserved was storage regulations that maintain a flexibility enough to allow a person to access and use their weapon dynamically when facing an immediate threat. So, it might still be able to require lock boxes that can instantly be opened. Let’s say with a fingerprint or something like that. This may be a direction they’ll go. Evan Nappen 16:11 There’s a distinguishing between immediate control and unattended storage. The lower courts heavily relied upon in the Heller quote to uphold secure storage and child access prevention, and New Jersey in fact has a law that says you can’t allow a minor to access a loaded firearm. But the crucial legal distinction is whether the gun is currently in use or whether it’s sitting unattended. One of the distinctions is the on-person distinction. In challenges that followed Heller, courts ruled that laws requiring guns to be locked up only when not under direct personal control of the owner are constitutional. So, they’re going to be exploiting that. f you’re awake and carrying a firearm or have it on your nightstand while home, that’s within your immediate control. But if you leave the house, if you well, if you leave the house and you go to sleep, and the children are present. The state has a valid interest in regulating the unattended storage to prevent an accidental discharge or theft. Teddy Nappen 17:30 So, my question would be, when it comes to, if they were trying to regulate, let’s say they force everyone to have, okay, you need to have X amount of storage. You need to have a safe in requiring of that. Could there be you’re putting the undue burden of saying, well, now you’re adding essentially a poll tax to a right? Evan Nappen 17:50 That may be one of the arguments about that. I’m not sure how that’ll play out. It’s interesting. Well, and the third thing to keep in mind in Scalia’s reference to “different regulatory contexts”, it means that certain storage laws can be tailored to high-risk environments and specific populations, and they’re historically and legally permissible. So, for example, commercial and public contexts, the Government can mandate strict storage requirements for commercial gun dealers, and California has completely exploited that. You know, usually to prevent like smash and grab robberies or public housing, military barracks, government workplaces, stuff like that. Then there’s preventing vulnerable access. And that’s laws specifically punishing gun owners if a child or legally prohibited person, like a convicted felon, can Page – 6 – of 15 gain access to an unsecured firearm and causes harm are widely considered valid under Heller. So, these do not ban self-defense. They penalize essentially negligence. Evan Nappen 19:04 This is the playing field that we’re going to see the antis try to exploit. And now you can combine that with possibly requiring 24/7 surveillance to the degree that it could be applied to an individual, even in their home. Because remember you had home-based dealers as well that were part of this that were trying to raise these claims. Now, granted, this is the Ninth Circuit’s view of it. New Jersey, frankly, has often taken a strong view when it comes to Fourth Amendment protections. But who knows whether their desire to have Second Amendment oppression will overcome their desire to have Fourth Amendment protection? We’ve got to be aware of this. Teddy Nappen 19:56 I would take it a step further, Dad. Now say, you need to have an AI program required for your camera, and now that AI can calculate and determine firearms, where they’re going, who has them, how many you have, and no longer need it. We’re always worried about Universal Background Check as the way of the national registration. Imagine an AI in every home, and it determines each firearm. There’s your national registration, and now they have their list to come collect them. Evan Nappen 20:26 And then it could be viewed at any time. You could see these things happen. I mean, it’s just outrageous the implications. This is very scary stuff when you combine the potential of a surveillance requirement and mandating alarm systems in a home. Cameras, audio, lighting-all these different things. To what degree can the Government extend its power in the name of public safety? Given what is apparently allowed and disallowed by way of Heller and subsequent courts’ rulings and determinations over those things. So, I see this as a new battlefield, a new front that we’re most likely going to have to be very much vigilant about and wary. I also can see this type of California law, at a minimum, applying to New Jersey dealers. At a minimum imposing and trying to create because New Jersey often follows California for their extreme gun rights oppression, and California often follows New Jersey for what they do. They work often hand in hand, and its extension to citizens is something we need to be very concerned about. Hey, Teddy. What do you have of interest in Press Checks? You had mentioned something that I thought was kind of fascinating, and it reminded me of the French Revolution. What is that you need to tell us about this? Teddy Nappen 22:24 As you know, Press Checks are always free, and this comes from the Capitol Police as they had to arrest. Evan Nappen 22:26 The Capitol in Washington D.C. Page – 7 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 22:34 Yeah. United States Capitol Police seized a guillotine, shot a man, and arrested him for carrying a dangerous weapon, for being in possession of a guillotine. (https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/uscp-arrests-driver-guillotine-truckbed) Evan Nappen 22:48 Oh, a guillotine. How did he possess it? Teddy Nappen 22:51 In the back of his pickup truck. Evan Nappen 22:53 So, he’s driving around with the guillotine on the back of his pickup truck. Was he going to use it in a theatrical play or movie, or was he going to use it to make political speech, or did he actually want to start chopping heads? Teddy Nappen 23:09 There was no clarification, but he was just pulled over. There was this giant guillotine on the back of the truck. Evan Nappen 23:16 Could have been a Halloween display in advance. I mean, I don’t know. Well, you know, it’s an interesting kind of weird to say a guillotine is a weapon unless it’s being utilized as a weapon. I mean, what do, you know? What are you gonna say to somebody? You know, give me your wallet, or I’m gonna cut off your head. I mean, what? I don’t really see how. It’s not like it fires a projectile. It’s not like it’s easily carried in one’s pocket. How is it gonna qualify as a weapon unless it is somehow intentionally used as a weapon? Teddy Nappen 23:55 Here’s the problem, though, for the law. From what I was able to pull on DC. They have to prove that he’s able to carry the guillotine in order to charge him with that. Evan Nappen 24:09 Well, I guess it’s a vehicle-mounted weapon. I don’t know. But it’s not a weapon. It’s not firing anything. It’s not projecting anything. It’s harmless unless you actually get somebody to stick their head in it. Other than that, you know, it’s as much a weapon as somebody’s shoe is a weapon. You could take off your shoe and start beating somebody in the head. Now your shoe is a weapon, right? Otherwise, shoes just aren’t weapons. I don’t necessarily see how. If I was handling that case, I would immediately bring a motion that this doesn’t qualify as a weapon. Now, I don’t practice in D.C. So, I don’t know how broad their description of weapons are. But if we were to look at New Jersey, the best they could claim is that it falls under the “other weapons” section of N.J.S. 2C:39-5d. But even with that, the definition of weapon under New Jersey, I don’t even think it’s fitting it unless there’s some allegation that fits it under NJ’s definition of weapon and meets all the elements of it. Page – 8 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 25:33 I want to go a step further and just have someone drive a truck with like an electric chair on the back. Then have another one where he’s driving with the car, and it has the torture device that was used to stretch people. I’m just curious to like what does the extent of where do they can where do the line drawn is it just because it has a blade? Evan Nappen 26:03 Well, here’s where it gets odd, and it’s an interesting thing. Because New Jersey’s definition of weapon, which you’ll find under N.J.S. 2C:39-1r. says that a weapon means anything readily capable of lethal use or inflicting serious bodily injury. However, there are so many things out there. I mean, a kitchen knife, a chainsaw, a hammer, a golf club. I mean, it never ends because anything is readily capable of it. But you still have to fit into New Jersey’s other weapons. Because even before we go there, the term “weapon” under New Jersey law includes, but is not limited to firearms, even though not loaded or lacking a clip. They say a clip. Can you imagine this? I mean, magazine, but okay, or other component to render them immediately operable. Components which can be readily assembled into a weapon. I always hate a definition that tries to define it by using the term itself. That’s frickin’ useless. And then Teddy Nappen 27:30 Definition. Evan Nappen 27:30 And then, gravity knives, switchblade knives, daggers, dirks, stilettos, or other dangerous knives, billies, blackjacks, bludgeons, metal knuckles, sandclubs, slingshots, cesti, or similar leather bands studded with metal filings or razor blades embedded in wood. Well, that sure gives you a lot of great ideas. At least I give it credit there. But anyway, and stun guns or any weapon or other device which projects, releases, or emits tear gas or other substance intended to produce temporary physical comfort, discomfort, or permanent injury through being vaporized or otherwise dispensed into the air. But if you notice, all these things that they’re putting in this category of weapons require a person to use them in a way that an individual would be targeted for being struck or hit or cut. Evan Nappen 28:37 Whereas, a guillotine would require the person themselves putting their head into the guillotine, or being forced to put their head in a guillotine, and that seems like a bit of a challenge to still fit it under the definition of weapon. But even if it did fit under, just for argument’s sake, of being arguably a weapon because it’s capable of that lethal use, you’d have to say. But the definition of weapon isn’t the prohibition in New Jersey law. The prohibition for weapon you’ll find in the weapons prohibition statute, which is the 2C:39-5d. “Other weapons”. And 2C:39-5d. says other weapons. Any person who knowingly has in his possession any other weapon under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have is guilty of a crime of the fourth degree. It’s felony level offense, and it carries a year and a half max in State Prison. Evan Nappen 30:02 So, what would be circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have? f you’re riding around with the guillotine, let’s say, for political speech purposes, which could be legit, or Page – 9 – of 15 you’re transporting it for making a movie, let’s say, or using it in a play or in a magic show. Okay, because there are magician guillotines. I personally have one called the Arm Chopper, where you do a whole routine where you get a volunteer, and you chop carrots with it. Then you put their arm in it, and it’s a whole fun thing. Of course, it doesn’t chop the person’s arm; it magically does not, and everything’s fine. en there’s another one. A guillotine version, magician, where when you chop it, it’s rigged so that the arm looks like it’s falling into the bag below, but of course it isn’t. Yet you can still lock it in place to cut carrots and demonstrate its effectiveness before you do the trick, you know. But there’s a legitimate, lawful purpose – a magician’s prop. Maybe you are into it for decorative purposes, for craftsmanship purposes. I mean. Teddy Nappen 30:03 You’re trying out a new thing. Teddy Nappen 30:03 You’re trying out a new Gallagher routine with watermelons. Evan Nappen 30:03 I don’t know, but this is intriguing to say the least. I’ve done a lot in almost 40 years of practicing this area of law, but I will have to say that I’ve yet to have anybody charged with possession of a guillotine as a weapon. But I’m ready to defend it; should it be necessary. But there you go. That’s a crazy, interesting story, Teddy. Thanks. Evan Nappen 30:03 Hey, I want to talk about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is a range in Lakewood, New Jersey. That is a range where Teddy and I both shoot, and my family shoots, and my brother shoots. We love it. WeShoot is an awesome resource right there in Central Jersey, easily accessible right off the Parkway. You’ll love it at WeShoot. If you haven’t checked out WeShoot, you really need to. It is a great place, a special place. They have a fantastic state-of-the-art range, a great pro shop with awesome toys, and they can set you up whether you’re a beginner or advanced shooter. They can get you the right equipment, the right gear, the best ammo, best guns, right there at WeShoot, and the best people. They will help you and guide you so that you make the right choices for what your needs are. You need to go to WeShoot, try it out. You’ll see what I’m saying. Evan Nappen 30:03 You can check WeShoot out at weshootusa.com. They have a great website, beautiful photography. They pride themselves on their great photography. They have all kinds of great courses, not just courses, so you can get your CCARE and other certifications that you may need, and other courses for getting permits from even other states, but advanced training and other types of fun shoots and very Important advanced training, and if you are brand new, they can start you off right by learning the basics and beginning with proper instructions so that you don’t become a GOFU. It’s very important training and having a place to shoot. It’s critical in New Jersey, and WeShoot can give it all to you. So check out WeShoot at weshootusa.com. Page – 10 – of 15 Evan Nappen 30:03 Let me also shamelessly promote my book New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of New Jersey Gun Law, used by, well, everybody that needs a gun law book. They’re using it, and you need to have one so that you don’t become a GOFU. I’ve taken great pains to explain the insane matrix called New Jersey gun law. It’s done in only five over 500 pages, but don’t let that intimidate you. It’s 120 topics all broken down in question and answer, so that you can even you can get an understanding of New Jersey’s insanity and so that you can protect yourself and stay legal. Go to evannappen.com, evannappen.com, and get your copy today. Evan Nappen 30:32 And, of course, we’re all very excited about the Federal Relief From Disabilities Program being reinvigorated by the Trump administration and the DOJ. It’s been 33 years since I’ve been able to help people regain their Second Amendment rights that may have federal disqualifiers. If you’d like to get a free evaluation of whether you qualify and what it can do for you, and what you need to know as its interplay with other states and Jersey law, and to see what it can do for you, go to evannappen.com, and you can fill out our little contact form there for getting federal relief. And if you need state relief, we do rights restoration, including New Jersey expungements, and getting rid of other disqualifiers that may be in your past, whether it’s old restraining orders or other things that create bars to the exercise of your Second Amendment rights. Go to evannappen.com and learn about those things. And feel free to get in contact with me. I’ll be happy to speak with you, or someone from my team will be happy to help you with your issues. And let me also mention that Teddy has other Press Checks. I’m sure. What else do you have? Teddy Nappen 36:34 This is the famous double Press Checks. I could not pass this one up. When I saw this article, I was shocked, and then reminded that the vast majority of the Left can’t be funny. If you go back to maybe the ’90s, and you’d have. Teddy Nappen 36:54 You laugh at them all the time, though, Teddy. Teddy Nappen 36:56 Yeah, we laugh at them. They try to be funny, and they try to joke on us. But they just come off as boring because comedy was always about pushing the envelope. The all-time favorite movies of comedy, like Blazing Saddles, or even like George Carlin’s bit, “Seven Things You Can’t Say on Television”. George Carlin. Evan Nappen 37:17 George Carlin. I saw him live twice. Yeah. Teddy Nappen 37:20 And you have, you know, Nick DePaolo, Norm Macdonald, people who would their whole idea was to push the envelope. Funniest man alive, Richard Pryor. These are all the ideas, and then comes to the Marxist Left. This is, you know, we’ve got to give it to The Trace, who decided to give them free Page – 11 – of 15 advertising. They decided to make a musical pushing to repeal the Second Amendment. (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/08/good-guy-with-a-gun-musical-interview/) Evan Nappen 37:48 Oh my God! A gun oppression musical. Teddy Nappen 37:53 A musical called “Good Guy with a Gun”. That is their comparison. Evan Nappen 37:57 That’s about as wokey as you can get. A musical doing this. Teddy Nappen 38:02 It’s gay. It’s really gay. Evan Nappen 38:05 Oh my G-d! Teddy Nappen 38:07 And going through this. By the way, you can go on Spotify. You go wherever they have the song list. You can listen to it if you want to. Evan Nappen 38:16 Oh, that’s it. I want to listen to anti-Second Amendment songs. Teddy Nappen 38:20 Yeah. Songs, yes. Evan Nappen 38:23 What are they trying to do this like the other play? What was it that going after or mocking Mormons? Teddy Nappen 38:30 Yeah, the Book of Mormon. It was. Evan Nappen 38:31 There you go. Right. This is the Left’s one of their tools of pushing their agenda is doing. Yeah, I know, real, Teddy Nappen 38:40 Real, real stunning and brave to mock Mormons and going after the Second Amendment. Now, do one on Sharia law and see how that goes. Evan Nappen 38:51 Oh yeah, right. Yeah, that’ll go over big. Sure. Yeah, that’ll be the yeah. Page – 12 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 38:57 Or what is the Chinese play where it’s China before communism, where Chinese have actually sent agents to attack their bus, and do stuff like that. But here. Evan Nappen 39:10 That’s really edgy. Teddy Nappen 39:12 Yeah, no kidding. Evan Nappen 39:13 You know, not this stuff. That’s just you know agenda driven with just another potential way of somehow getting their effed up message implanted. Teddy Nappen 39:27 Yeah. So, they got a bunch of F tier celebrities who wanted to show their virtue signal. They took a pay cut, so they would do this play out of Los Angeles, of course. It is a theatrical concept, billing it as the Book of Mormon for the NRA. The action satire swells on the day the Second Amendment is wiped away, and the numbers reminiscent to Les Misérables begins with the right winger singing, “The day that we’ve always feared the liberals have come to take our guns away. Then comes a brief monolog from a Cockney woman spiles into mania. They came in the night. They took the little ones, the Glocks, the small handguns you keep under your pillow. It was invasion of basement of ant and basement and antics violated antiques violated. Evan Nappen 40:15 Well, they think it’s really hilarious that they’re going to come for the little ones, the handguns”, and then build up from that. That’s so funny, Teddy. It’s just so funny the way they crush our rights. Teddy Nappen 40:29 Well, you have this. It’s the screeching Left who still believe in going after the little ones. Just look at Lindsey Clancy. But anyways. The whole and going I love how they like say this famous actor from “This Is Us” and this other lady from “Orange is the New Black” and the way there and George voice the voice of God was George on Seinfeld. Okay, cool. The whole plot is the character gets a magic gun that turns people conservative. His daughter gets a magic megaphone that turns people liberal, and the antics ensue. In the end, they go into the whole article about the whole point is to dispel the myth of the good guy with the gun. Evan Nappen 41:11 Oh, the myth of the good guy with the gun. Like all these folks that have made a difference in stopping crime, criminals, terrorism that are average citizens, that no longer want to be victims but have chosen to be defenders. And not just defenders of themselves, but defenders of others. As a matter of fact, Teddy, this goofy crap by them on the play, but weren’t you telling me about that very fact? About the difference being made by people that try to stop, for example, mass shootings? What were you telling Page – 13 – of 15 me about that? Let’s talk about good guy with a gun. What have we learned about good guys with a gun? Teddy Nappen 42:02 So, the CDC again have added the data showing that it’s two. Evan Nappen 42:06 And this is their data from the CDC? Teddy Nappen 42:08 Up to 2 million self-defense uses of a firearm. Self-defense uses. That doesn’t even mean pull the trigger. Defensive uses of a firearm. Evan Nappen 42:18 Right. Just the mere presence of a firearm. Teddy Nappen 42:19 So, if it saves one life . . . how about 2 million? Two million lives saved! That is from the CDC’s website. Also the fact that they are now including the FBI reports showing mass shootings. Now they’re showing civilian intervention and stopping the bad guy. Evan Nappen 42:35 You mean, good guys with a gun, or good guys no longer wanting or agreeing to be victims, and good guys making a difference, right? Teddy Nappen 42:47 Yeah. This is something to where they are. This is a logical fallacy right here. It’s called false premise. They’re starting with a false premise, believing that there’s never any good guy with a gun. Even though we can clearly debunk that immediately just by that argument. But going into this whole insanity of the play, I want to remind you all. This is what they’re about. This is what they try to do through propaganda, and yeah, it’s in the gayest way possible. And I’ll take the citizen vigilante that’ll probably sell out more than this play out of. Evan Nappen 43:21 Well, that’s the crazy thing because movies and other things that were not necessarily designed to be propaganda, but that have the message of individuals who fight back. I mean, you can look at “Red Dawn”, which is still considered a classic today, and what was that? Individuals fighting back. You can look at virtually the entire genre of westerns is the individual who fights back. I mean, that’s what we’re really about. Teddy Nappen 43:55 The funniest scene I ever saw for this as a pro gun argument was in the movie “Death Proof”. It’s rated as one of the worst for Quentin Tarantino. I happen to like it. Page – 14 – of 15 Evan Nappen 44:07 I enjoyed Death Proof. I like the music, too. Teddy Nappen 44:07 Oh yeah, it was good there. Just seeing Kurt Russell play a weird twisted serial. Evan Nappen 44:16 Oh my G-d, yeah, did he ever. Teddy Nappen 44:17 There’s one scene where it’s the four girls are sitting on the table. They’re having a discussion. That’s what Quinn Tarantino always does: is having table conversations. The one girl says, “You still carry a gun? Why do you do that? And it’s like, “Why not?” And goes into that whole argument of where, like, “Why you don’t you know you can risk that? You know what I want? I want to carry my gun. I want to go where I’m able to go. I want to be able to defend myself, and she makes and hits home every argument. Where then they say, “What about pepper spray? I don’t want to give them a rash. I want to put them down. Like that’s the whole. Like they’re trying to be satirical. They’re going to be showing it. Evan Nappen 44:55 Big spoiler is that’s what she uses. Yeah, saves the. Teddy Nappen 45:00 hoots it. Shoots at Kurt Russell to get him to go away to save the girls. So, it’s one of those demonstrations. But even I’ll even give it another way, just satirical. Always Sonny did the exact thing where you have two both sides, ones for pro, ones against, and the anti side is like it’s so easy to get a gun. Both of them get denied their background checks immediately. Then they try, and then immediately try to go to a gun show, and they’re trying to do under the table. And the gun dealer’s like, “No, I’m not going to do that. And finally, they try to do a deal to buy it from an illegal alley, and that falls through, and to the point where they’re arguing. They see like, wow, it really is hard to get a gun. Then we realize, and it’s satirical because they show it in a way. This one here in the whole article, they’re trying to like joke on the liberals by she shops at Trader Joe’s. If you’re using a bazooka on one side and a squirt on the other, it’s you’re not both sizing it very easily. Evan Nappen 46:00 Right. Well, that’s not their goal, but that is really interesting. But I don’t think that play will be coming to a playhouse nearby anytime soon. And if it is, it’ll be a financial failure. Teddy Nappen 46:12 Remember, this is the Left’s game, though. Do you remember when they did Julius Caesar? They dressed him as Donald Trump. This was in 2017. In the play where he’s killed. In the play where he’s violently stabbed to death. Evan Nappen 46:15 No, gee, what were they trying to say there? I wonder. Page – 15 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 46:31 Yeah, exactly. And then you have the New Yorker here trying to say, it’s hardly bears the point that art is not life. I love how they play that game every time. Oh, really? Okay. Now cast Ryan Reynolds, Ryan Gosling as Black Panther for in Wakanda. Then tell me it’s not that. No big deal. I love how they always bring that up when it comes to oh art takes that. Cut to the musical of assassins that they had to cancel after the first attempted assassination. Evan Nappen 47:06 Yeah. Teddy Nappen 47:06 Where it’s a musical about Evan Nappen 47:08 Yeah. This is part of their M.O., and it’s disgusting. Well, Teddy, thanks for bringing that to our attention, so we know what play we’re going to never get a playbill for or see. Now, I’ve got to tell you about this week’s GOFU. You know the GOFU is Gun Owner Fuck Up. It’s where gun owners make mistakes that can cost them their freedom, their firearm rights. It cost them a lot of money, and you get to learn for free, so you don’t become a GOFU. And this week’s GOFU is really basic. Some of you listening may say, “Really, seriously?” I’m telling you, why am I talking about this? Because my friends, I get the phone calls. I get the phone calls from the GOFUers. I get those calls. Evan Nappen 48:01 This week’s GOFU is real simple. Practice your draw. Know your firearm. Okay, simple. Practice drawing and firing if you’re carrying. Practice reholstering. Practice it with an empty firearm. Make sure you are proficient in how to handle your specific firearm and know your gun. Know how it operates. You know, some guns have manual safeties. Some guns do not. Know your gun. Know how to use it. Practice and train. Not just on shooting. Not just on hitting the target. But practice on understanding the function of your gun – the loading, the unloading, how to absolutely know it’s empty. How to work your gun and how to draw your gun. How to holster and unholster your gun. Make sure you’ve practiced that with a safe, empty firearm. That you’ve had the right training. That you’re doing it properly, and that you are proficient in that. Because if you’re not and you have a problem, if you have an A.D., if you have some issue, you’ll become the next GOFU, and I don’t want to see that. Evan Nappen 49:35 This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws do not protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens. Speaker 2 49:48 Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing Evan@gun.lawyer. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state. Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E306_transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.Known as “America's Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it's no wonder he's become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets. Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It's Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham's Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News. As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists. He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America. Email Evan Your Comments and Questions  talkback@gun.lawyer Join Evan's InnerCircleHere's your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America.  Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL.  Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits.   Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

For complete Medicare guidance, dial (617) 644-0093 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter Medicare Advisors.The great and powerful Harmeet Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, has just filed a brief with the US Supreme Court in defense of American's Second Amendment right to keep and bear AR-style rifles—the so-called “assault weapons” that a handful of states and every Progressive politicians wants to wrest from our grasp. The case is question is Viramontes v. Cook County, involves an Illinois “assault weapons” ban, and is a Second Amendment challenge to various state and local “assault weapons” bans. This case has been advanced by the Second Amendment Foundation and my friend Attorney Kostas Moros, once again doing stellar work in defense of American's civil rights. SCOTUS has combined this case with another AWB case, Grant v. Higgins, which involves a similar “assault weapons” ban out of Connecticut, and the legal question on such bans will likely be settled for the entire country in the Court's ultimate ruling.  Specifically, the legal question presented before SCOTUS is whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's right to possess AR-15-platform and similar semiautomatic rifles. The case tests how Heller and Bruen apply to commonly owned semiautomatic rifles that governments have labeled “assault weapons.”Oral argument is scheduled for December 2 of this year, and the past week has seen dozens of excellent Amici briefs submitted in support of the Second Amendment and in opposition to the bans.Prominent among these amicus briefs is that submitted this week by AAG Harmeet Dhillon, and that's the one I've selected to highlight today. Join me LIVE at Noon ET!Make sure you're ready to win the LEGAL FIGHT that follows the PHYSICAL FIGHT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself or your family from criminal predation. Learn why I am PERSONALLY a member of CCW SAFE, and why YOU SHOULD CONSIDER JOINING, TOO:  https://lawofselfdefense.com/ccwsafeClarence Thomas x 9: Perfect SCOTUS Mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2kFor complete Medicare guidance, dial (617) 644-0093 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter.All @TheBrancaShow mugs & MORE! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2kJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9 Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kfFOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nzEpisode #1437.Chapter and its affiliates are not connected with or endorsed by any government entity or the federal Medicare program. Chapter Advisory, LLC represents Medicare Advantage HMO, PPO, and PFFS organizations and stand alone prescription drug plans that have a Medicare contract. Enrollment depends on the plan's contract renewal. While we have a database of every Medicare plan nationwide and can help you to search among all plans, we have contracts with many but not all plans. As a result, we do not offer every plan available in your area. Currently we represent 50 organizations which offer 18,160 products nationwide. We search and recommend all plans, even those we don't directly offer. You can contact a licensed Chapter agent to find out the number of products available in your specific area. Please contact Medicare.gov, 1-800-Medicare, or your local State Health Insurance Program (SHIP) to get information on all of your options.

Acclaimed debut author Kevin C. Morris spoke with us about exploring the Alaskan coastline in search of a mysterious island, his query and publishing journey, and the resultant novel UNTAMED COAST.  Kevin C. Morris is an engineer, and journalist (with 20 years of long-form writing under his belt), as well as a recreational pilot, boat captain, and entrepreneur based in Portland, Oregon. His genre-bending debut novel, Untamed Coast, spans three timelines: 1938, the 1980s and 2017, all set along the rugged Alaskan coast, and described as “an atmospheric novel perfect for fans of McConaghy's Wild Dark Shore, Moore's God of the Woods, Lawhon's Frozen River, and Heller's The Guide. New York Times bestselling author Kate Quinn said of the book, “Untamed Coast is a bold, intricately plotted debut unfolding against the beauty and danger of the Alaskan wilderness. . . . The timelines coil, the intrigue mounts, but it's Kevin C. Morris's vivid evocation of Alaska's savage beauty that truly shines…” Kevin spends his summers navigating the Inside Passage to Southeast Alaska—a rugged landscape that fuels both his adventures and his fiction. [Discover The Writer Files Extra: Get 'The Writer Files' Podcast Delivered Straight to Your Inbox at writerfiles.fm] [If you're a fan of The Writer Files, please click FOLLOW to automatically see new interviews. And drop us a rating or a review wherever you listen] In this file Kevin C. Morris, Milena, and I discussed: The story behind the Radioville mystery that inspired the book How the novel was won at auction after multiple rewrites Why his agent found his original query “kind of awful” and how he recovered Where Morse code became a part of the plot and the structure of the novel The wildness and beauty of the Alaskan coast as a character And a lot more! Show Notes: ElevenReader is a new, award-winning audio app for iOS, Android, Web kevincmorris.com  Untamed Coast: A Novel by Kevin C. Morris (Amazon) Kevin C. Morris on YouTube Kevin C. Morris on Facebook Kevin C. Morris on Instagram Milena Gonzalez | Writerhttps://www.instagram.com/kevincmorrisauthor | Reader | Book Reviewer diary_of_a_book_babe on Instagram Kelton Reid Instagram Kelton Reid on Twitter Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Grant reacts to what feels like a breaking point between the Brewers and Cubs and talks Badgers with Mike Heller. Jeff Hafley recalls an experience in Green Bay and people lose their mind over Matt Stafford.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You and I have been trained to want more. You have been trained to see yourself as incomplete without the next car, the next house, the next upgrade. And the people who trained you did it deliberately, professionally, and with plausible deniability baked into every word on the label. Orange juice beverage. Sales event. Plausibly not lying. Definitely bamboozling. In this episode, Dov sits down with Neal Foard (F-O-A-R-D, pronounced Ford), a lifelong advertising creative who helped launch Lexus at Saatchi & Saatchi, spent 30 years inside the industry, and now spends his time doing something almost nobody in his field does. He goes online and tells short true stories about ordinary human decency, because after three decades of writing what he now calls propaganda, he became convinced that the countervailing force to a divide-and-consume culture is quieter and stranger than most people expect. It is the deliberate practice of staying ordinary. Then Dov and Neal take that principle somewhere unexpected...Not to self-help, but to what it looks like when the practice of ordinariness meets the culture of Andrew Tate, the seduction of consumerism, the loneliness epidemic, and the specific psychological trick that makes a barely-employed man idolize a billionaire. Neal has one of the sharpest single stories in this series, told about his father, a 1960 Oldsmobile, and a young cowboy on Interstate 5 in 1969, that redefines what "faith in humanity" actually costs to earn. Inside this conversation: The airport troll: how one improv actor with a pink-haired troll doll turned two abusive customers, two exhausted counter agents, and a boarding gate into an unexpected upgrade for everyone paying attention The insider vocabulary you have been reading your whole life without noticing: orange juice beverage, sales event, and the specific legal formula the industry uses for plausible deniability The Vonnegut and Heller exchange at the billionaire's house that names the single word most successful people have forgotten how to feel Neal's rule for anyone who wants to tell better stories, and the one thing every amateur storyteller does that instantly loses the room Dov's own confession: the moment nine months after his 120-foot fall when he realized the man he had been was never coming back If you came here for a comfortable listen about the power of storytelling, this is the wrong podcast. If you came because something in you has been quietly wondering whether the stories you have been telling yourself are the ones you would tell if you were the person you actually want to be, press play. Connect with Neal Foard: Neal Foard's Course: https://storyfire.net Personal: https://NealFoard.com Neal Ford Social Media: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@nealfoardInstagram, TikTok, (search Neal Foard, F-O-A-R-D) Connect with Dov Baron: https://DovBaron.com dov@dovbaron.com Please Rate, review, and send this episode to the storyteller in your life who is still practicing. That is how the algorithm finds the people whose stories are worth telling. Connect with Dov Baron:https://DovBaron.comdov@dovbaron.comRate, review, and send this episode to the most thoughtful builder you know. That is how the algorithm finds the people who still ask why. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This episode is sponsored by C1.ai! Thanks C1.ai for hosting the podcast and the meetup. C1.ai is hiring!Thanks James Heller for co-hosting

After more than two decades at The Wall Street Journal, Jamie Heller made the leap to Business Insider with a clear vision: raise the bar and make original reporting – including exclusives, features and profiles – the main event. Now, nearly two years into her tenure as Editor in Chief, she joins Press Profiles to talk about how she's helping to reshape one of business media's most recognizable brands.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear Vermont versus Cook County, its biggest Second Amendment case since Heller. The Cato Institute's Clark Neily, who worked on the original Heller case, joins Rikki Schlott to explain what's at stake for the 20 to 25 million Americans who already own an AR-15 style rifle. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

My guest today is is Gail Heller, the owner of Erie Quilt Art Inc. based in Calgary, Alberta. Gail spent years working as an intensive care nurse and then a manager in the medical industry before shifting her focus to the quilting world. She started out representing fabric lines and eventually established a wholesale company that distributes top tier quilting and sewing products to businesses across Canada. In addition to managing the business, Gail is a quilting teacher and certified Aurifilosopher and she supports and mentors quilting businesses and shops across Canada.Find Gail's website here: https://eriequiltart.com/ anf follow Erie Quilt Art on Instagram. Quilter on Fire Website - https://quilteronfire.com/Square One Textile Art WorkshopJoin Brandy's email listFree Quilter on Fire Holiday Table Runner VIDEOSUPPORT THE PODCAST by becoming a Quilter on Fire Podcast Angel for as little as $3 per week.Support the showThank you for listening to the Quilter on Fire Podcast. 

David French and Sarah Isgur steelman Justice John Paul Stevens and Justice Stephen Breyers's dissents in the Heller case through a one-act play produced by ChatGPT. The two also invite Chris Scalia to play the majority opinion writer (and his late father) Justice Antonin Scalia.  The Agenda: –One act, three justices –What AI got right and wrong –Justice Breyer, fully vindicated –Shul is Yiddish and Friends of the Earth is SCOTUS precedent Show Notes: –Originalism and Stare Decisis Order Sarah's book here. Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's episode is a powerful conversation about resilience, healing, and learning to support your body through every season of life. I'm joined by Jen Heller, host of the Homes That Heal podcast, who shares the incredible story that changed the trajectory of her life. After surviving a devastating explosion that took the life of a dear friend, Jen went on to experience serious health struggles in the years that followed—including an episode where the left side of her body became paralyzed for a time.. That experience became the beginning of a decades-long journey of asking deeper questions about her health and environment. Over the next 30 years, Jen focused on reducing her exposure to heavy metals, addressing thyroid concerns, making lifestyle changes, and ultimately losing weight and walking other people through creating lives and homes that HEAL. One tool that became an important part of Jen's personal wellness routine? Infrared sauna. During our conversation, I walk Jen through my current infrared sauna routine, and she helps me fine-tune it—especially for women navigating midlife, perimenopause, menopause, and beyond. One of my favorite reminders from this conversation is that wellness doesn't have to be extreme to be effective. Our bodies change, our needs change, and sometimes healing looks less like pushing harder and more like learning how to support ourselves well. If you have an infrared sauna—or you've been wondering whether one might fit into your wellness routine—this is an episode you'll want to hear. And even if sauna isn't your thing, Jen's story is an incredible reminder of what can happen when we become curious about our bodies, our homes, and the things we expose ourselves to every day. Listen in and share this episode with a woman who is navigating midlife and wants to feel better in her body. This episode shares personal experiences and general wellness information and is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any medical condition. Always talk with your healthcare provider about what is appropriate for you, particularly if you have a medical condition or are considering significant changes to your wellness routine. Connect with Jen Heller : https://jenhellerlifestyle.com Homes that Heal Podcast Interested in getting your own sauna?

For most, the IPO is the milestone. For Jay Heller, that's when the real work begins.In this episode of Startup to Stock Exchange, Seth Farbman sits down with Jay Heller, former Head of Capital Markets at Nasdaq, to discuss the lessons he's learned from overseeing more than 3,000 IPOs and now building a company of his own.Jay shares what separates companies that succeed from those that don't, why going public is only the beginning, what founders need to understand about investors and the public markets, and why he ultimately left Nasdaq to become CEO of K-Lab.AI, a programmable payment infrastructure company using AI and blockchain to bring greater speed, transparency, and accountability to payments.In this episode, you'll learn:What Jay Heller learned from overseeing more than 3,000 IPOsWhy the IPO is only the beginning, not the finish lineWhat separates companies that succeed in the public markets from those that don'tWhy Jay left Nasdaq to become CEO of K-Lab.AIHow K-Lab.AI is using AI and blockchain to transform payment infrastructureWhy strong teams, clear roadmaps, and investor alignment matter when building a public companyWhat founders need to understand about delivering on their promises once they enter the public marketsWhether you're a founder, investor, CEO, or simply interested in the journey from startup to public company, this episode offers insights into IPOs, capital markets, leadership, and what it really takes to build a company for the long term.

What separates instruction from true coaching?In this thought-provoking conversation, Jay Doran sits down with educator, researcher, and performance coach Daniel Heller to explore what it really means to help people grow. Drawing from nearly two decades of experience coaching everyone from race car drivers and mountain bikers to hockey players and university students, Daniel reveals that performance isn't simply about mastering technique—it's about understanding the person behind it.What begins as an interview quickly becomes a live coaching session as Daniel helps Jay unpack a recent experience learning golf. Together, they uncover how fear, patience, confidence, and self-awareness influence not only physical performance but leadership, relationships, and everyday life. The conversation becomes a powerful demonstration of coaching in action rather than merely a discussion about it.In this episode, you'll discover:-The difference between teaching a skill and coaching a person-Why technique provides the foundation, but behavior determines performance-How curiosity fuels lifelong learning and personal development-The relationship between attention, patience, and mastery-Why reflection transforms experience into meaningful learning-How community accelerates growth in ways individual effort cannot-The role of psychological safety in unlocking better performance-Why the best coaches simplify complexity instead of adding more information-How vulnerability creates breakthroughs both on and off the fieldThroughout the episode, Daniel shares practical stories from coaching motorsports, hockey, mountain biking, and strength training while connecting them to universal principles of leadership and human behavior. His thoughtful approach reminds us that coaching is less about providing answers and more about creating the conditions for people to discover them for themselves.By the end of the conversation, Jay reflects on a surprising realization: the golf lesson he thought was about improving his swing was actually revealing deeper patterns about fear, confidence, and how he approaches challenges in life.It's a reminder that the greatest coaches don't simply improve performance, they expand awareness, and when awareness grows, performance naturally follows.

Tired of sitting on the sidelines? In this episode, we're sitting down with physical therapist, yoga teacher, and marathoner Dr. Rachel Heller, DPT, to break down how to keep your body healthy, strong, and injury-free through every training cycle. We discuss running injuries, physical therapy, injury prevention, injury rehab, marathoning, and more!Whether you're training for your first marathon or dealing with nagging pain, Dr. Heller shares actionable rehab and prevention strategies for the most common issues runners face.In the episode, we cover:Dr. Rachel Heller's journey from her first marathon to running the NYC MarathonWhy she launched her physical therapy practice to empower athletesRunner's Knee: Root causes, quick fixes, and long-term preventionPlantar Fasciitis: How to rehab foot pain without stopping running completelyHip Flexor Strain: Strengthening vs. stretching for optimal hip healthThe mental side of pain management and recoveryEssential strength and mobility tips for long-distance runnersWhat it's like to be an entrepreneur in the health spaceConnect with Dr. Heller:Instagram: @thebalancedrachConnect & Support:Enjoying the show? Follow/Subscribe on Apple Podcasts and Spotify so you never miss an episode!Leave a 5-star rating and review to help more runners find the podcast.Newsletter: Subscribe for Recipes & Health TipsSupport the Show: Pledge your support for less than a cup of coffee!Instagram: @healthbyhavenWebsite: healthbyhaven.comSpecial thanks to our Season 5 sponsor, Avodah Massage Therapy!Support the show

Abu and Obssa begin their read-through of The Dog Stars by Peter Heller. They dig into the odd-couple partnership between the poetic, dog-loving Hig and his cold-blooded neighbor Bangley, Heller's stripped-down, punctuation-free prose style, and the quiet question sitting under the whole book: what's actually worth surviving for. IN THIS EPISODE How chapter five's chewing-out from Bangley reveals a surprisingly protective, tactical mind underneath the gruffness Peter Heller's own life as an adventure writer, from a doomed Tibet expedition to owning the same model Cessna Hig flies The upcoming Ridley Scott adaptation, its cast (Jacob Elordi as Hig, Josh Brolin as Bangley), and its August 28 release date JOIN THE CLUB Bookmark the reading schedule: sfbc.netlify.app/schedule Join the conversation in our free Discord: discord.gg/bVrhwWm7j4 Get bonus content: patreon.com/scifibookclubpod Watch video episodes and clips: youtube.com/@loreparty Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

After a season of growth, reflection, and transformation, Spirituality Now returns with inspiring conversations designed to help you live with greater awareness, purpose, and joy.In our Season Premiere, Ivonne Delaflor welcomes Linda Heller, educator, author, meditation teacher, and lifelong seeker, for a heartfelt conversation about one simple decision that has the power to change everything: having the courage to say yes.In this episode, you'll discover:✨ Why the greatest transformations often begin with unexpected opportunities.✨ How choosing adventure over fear can open doors you never imagined.✨ The importance of living with mindfulness, grace, and gratitude.✨ The power of an honest “yes” — and an honest “no.”✨ Practical wisdom for parents navigating difficult challenges, including bullying.✨ Three powerful pillars that, when practiced consistently, can truly transform your life.Linda shares practical, timeless insights that you can begin implementing today. Sometimes the biggest changes don't happen because life changes—they happen because we choose to respond differently.

Episode 302-Not Getting Tired of Winning Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 12 Gun Lawyer — Episode 302 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Gun Lawyer, New Jersey assault firearm law, Third Circuit Court, Supreme Court, stay granted, unconstitutional laws, Second Amendment, sensitive places, National Firearm Act, suppressors, Jordan Salinas, good guy with a gun, training, legal advice, gun rights. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:16 I’m Evan Nappen,. Teddy Nappen 00:18 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:20 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, my friends, the wins keep coming. These are great times. You know, we have suffered from the oppressors on our gun rights for decades upon decades, and now we are seeing the collapse of all their machinations over the years. It is great and getting greater. And so, just within this short period of time, we’ve had the spectacular win in New Jersey in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and the full en banc panel, all the judges, of course, finding that New Jersey’s 36-year-old assault firearm law and magazine law is unconstitutional. It’s a fantastic decision, as we’ve discussed, written by a Biden-appointee judge who happened to be the first woman of color appointed to the Appellate bench. That is fantastic and has multi-dimensional impact, of course, having that great decision. Evan Nappen 01:52 Now, with that having been said, yes, a stay has been granted in terms of the implementation of the finding of unconstitutionality. So, that stay is granted essentially because traditionally these kind of stays do get granted, especially when the Supreme Court itself of the United States has taken this issue and has granted certiorari over the assault weapon, what New Jersey calls assault firearm law under Viramontes and Grant. They’ll be deciding that. Essentially we’ll have a decision by next June on that issue affecting the nation. Now, New Jersey has got their stay because they’re requesting the Supreme Court of the United States to grant certiorari over New Jersey’s case, and the stay has been granted pending the final resolution, essentially, of these issues, or at least in good part, these issues by the United States Supreme Court. So, in the meantime, Teddy Nappen 03:12 I don’t know if you caught what the AG Davenport wrote in their press release, Dad. Page – 2 – of 12 Evan Nappen 03:20 Well, they can continue to irreparably harm law-abiding, honest gun owners over these unconstitutional laws until that finally happens. But what exactly did Davenport say as they try to turn an utter defeat into some sort of short-term victory? Teddy Nappen 03:45 We are thrilled that the Third Circuit this morning stayed its ruling on our assault weapon / large capacity magazine case while our petition to the U.S. Supreme Court proceeds. That ensures this 36-year law will remain in place. (https://www.njoag.gov/statement-from-attorney-general-jennifer-davenport-on-third-circuits-grant-of-a-stay-in-assault-weapons-large-capacity-magazines-case/) 36 years of going after people, putting them in jail, taking away their rights, providing ruining their lives. Evan Nappen 04:07 Hey, wait, Teddy, are you reading from their news release? Teddy Nappen 04:11 Oh, you know, I read their news release and then added the little context that they forgot. Evan Nappen 04:16 Did they actually use the word “assault weapon”? Teddy Nappen 04:20 Yes. Evan Nappen 04:20 Or did they say “assault firearm”? What did they say? Teddy Nappen 04:21 Assault weapon. Evan Nappen 04:22 Davenport called it “assault weapon” law? Teddy Nappen 04:26 Yes, assault weapons. Evan Nappen 04:27 Okay, just so you know, this is the top law enforcement attorney for New Jersey who is calling their law something it is not. We do not have an “assault weapon” law. We have an “assault firearm” law. Now, granted, it’s a similar issue, and you know it’s the same idea of going after New Jersey’s version of semi-automatics. But you would think if you’re a lawyer, and you’re a lawyer for the State that has this case that you might want to refer to it as the actual name that your State utilizes, because that term “assault firearm” is the term embedded in New Jersey’s law. It is a defined term under N.J.S. 2C:39-1. Page – 3 – of 12 They are called “assault firearms” in New Jersey by law, by law. But you know, why would she bother actually using the correct legal term when discussing laws? That would be amazing, wouldn’t it? Teddy Nappen 05:46 Well, Dad, I mean, just the abuse alone, just to give you the one-to-one. You’ve had many times where people have been charged with having a “assault firearm”, and it’s not. But they love to abuse it and just use whatever term they want. I mean that goes right back to Josh Sugarmann, and his whole idea of making that term “assault firearm” to confuse the public so they could pass their laws. I mean. Evan Nappen 06:10 Yep, it’s exactly that. Well, Sugarmann wrote the manifesto “Assault Weapons and Accessories in America”. That’s what laid the groundwork for this issue. It finally has one foot in the grave, is bedridden, on its deathbed, and the Supreme Court will hopefully administer the coup de gras in June 2027. I believe the odds heavily, heavily favor us, virtually to the point of I would be shocked if we lose. I just don’t see that happening, and the antis know it as well. Those oppressors get it that they’re going to lose on this issue. Teddy Nappen 06:54 It’s Viramontes and Grant. Evan Nappen 06:58 Yeah. Those are the two cases that Supreme Court has granted certiorari on. Just so you know, one is a local law out of Cook County, Illinois, that bans assault weapons, and has incorporated into the definition, magazines into their definition of assault weapon. So, the Supreme Court might actually address the magazine issue because it’s actually part of Viramontes’ law itself. e may see that. The Grant case deals with Connecticut’s assault weapon ban, state law, and when they challenged in Connecticut, they didn’t challenge the magazine portion. They only challenged the so-called assault weapon portion. New Jersey’s case, in the Cheeseman v. Platkin case, that court addressed both assault firearms, aka assault weapons, and magazines. And now, with New Jersey requesting certiorari, meaning requesting the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case, it also opens up the magazine issue. So, the Supreme Court that can do anything it wants might choose to address the magazine issue in the Viramontes and Grant decision. They might even, arguably, they could even take up New Jersey’s case and make it part of that. They might, and what most likely they’re going to just have it in a holding pattern. Evan Nappen 08:47 And we have the Duncan case that deals with magazines as well out of California, the Duncan v. Bonta case (25-198(. So, what it means is, if the Supreme Court doesn’t deal with magazines by next June, but just the guns, then they may very well take New Jersey’s case and Duncan with the split in the circuits there, and then deal with magazines. Like I said, they might do it all together. They might not. But New Jersey proceeding with this actually weirdly in the long run may present and give us a great opportunity because it presents magazines as a complete win by the court from our circuit. So, this may be one of those situations where you know the word to New Jersey is be careful what you wish for. This Page – 4 – of 12 is very interesting to follow. But I believe that all these laws are going to go to the dustbin of history. It’s just a matter of time. Evan Nappen 09:59 But as I have advised listeners, even when this decision came out, not to do anything because of the ability to get a stay. To wait and see. Well, that’s proven correct. I’s been proven out to be the wise thing to do, and have our listeners not end up being GOFUs by obtaining the firearms and magazines that are not yet technically lawful. So, for these continuing months, New Jersey is still free to enforce the magazine and assault firearm laws. Of course, if you have such a case or such a charge, your attorney, if they’re anywhere competent, will raise these very important issues and hopefully get your matter, your criminal matter, stayed pending the outcome and preserve the constitutional issues on your behalf in fighting it. So, be careful. Don’t end up with a GOFU where you’re facing these charges and your current counsel isn’t doing anything about it. I’ve had a number of those cases coming to me from other attorneys, where the client is like, my attorney never raised the constitutionality on these issues. Well, that is a huge mistake because you need to raise these issues, preserve these issues, because ultimately your odds of success are so great here, and it is essentially, arguably, malpractice to not, especially now, raise the constitutional issues if someone is facing in New Jersey or in the Circuit that has decided that these laws are unconstitutional. So, it’s very important that you be aware of that. Teddy Nappen 12:05 Would it be better if the Supreme Court does the other two cases and then take this one up as a mag separately, or is it better to do it all in one go? Evan Nappen 12:13 The best for everyone would be complete victory as soon as possible. However, if they’re not going to do that, if they’re just going to address guns now and then we have these cases to address mags, fine. We’ll fight the fight, and there you go. But the important thing, honestly, is that they’re taking the cases. Remember, for years they did not take these cases, and instead, luckily, wisely, maybe by planning it correctly-I don’t know-maybe intentionally, the groundwork got laid for the challenges to ultimately be successful. Because look, way back in May of 1990, I was an attorney. I remember this horrible New Jersey assault firearm law and magazine law passing. It was disgusting. Of course, it also became the Evan Nappen Full Employment Act. But the fact is, they passed this ridiculous law, and I remember thinking at the time, yeah, you know, in my heart, I knew this has got to be contrary to the Second Amendment. But we did not have any of the cases at that time. We didn’t have Heller finding that the Second Amendment is an individual right. We didn’t have McDonald incorporating the Second Amendment to the states. We didn’t have Bruen laying out the test of constitutionality and what test is to be used to see if guns laws, if gun laws are proper and constitutional. We didn’t have any of that. We didn’t have the giant body of historical research that is critical in these wins. We didn’t have any of it. Evan Nappen 14:08 And what the pro-second amendment gun rights side has done is nothing short of Herculean. All the forces together have built this fortress of the ability to defend and to fight and to take on the fight and to attack. Built this up so that we’re now in a position to have victory after victory. Yet, we see another Page – 5 – of 12 victory, another victory. Just determined in the Fifth Circuit, a nationwide injunction as applied to the members of the parties and their members, such as NRA and GOA and SAF, and FPC, etc. (https://www.nraila.org/articles/20260805/federal-court-strikes-down-nfa-registration-requirements-for-suppressors-short-barreled-rifles-and-short-barreled-shotguns-in-nra-case) All joining, attacking the National Firearms Act under a legal argument that was made possible by President Trump in the Big Beautiful Bill. Remember, the Big Beautiful Bill, which was a reconciliation bill, that was dealing with money, taxation, funding, money. When it’s done as a reconciliation, then what you have is no need or ability to run a filibuster. Since simple majorities can pass the reconciliation bills under the Senate rules, the Democrats, the anti-Second Amendment rights oppressors, could not stop its passage because they would. You know they would demand the 60, have the filibuster cloture, and the laws would die on the vine. But this did not, because it only needed simple majority. In that bill there was a specific repeal of the taxes. The taxes that get paid on suppressors, short barrel shotguns, short barrel rifles, on any other weapon, and silencers. The tax was eliminated to zero. And by doing that, it opened up the ability for the Big, Beautiful Lawsuit that was just a success in the Fifth Circuit, and how it worked was not based on Second Amendment arguments. It was based on jurisdictional arguments. Evan Nappen 16:55 You see, the National Firearms Act is premised upon the federal power of taxation. It is not founded upon the federal power of interstate commerce. Nor is it founded upon the military power. The federal government’s powers are limited. And back in the ’30s, when the National Firearms Act passed, they did not have the insane expansion of the commerce powers under the federal government. Therefore, the first national gun laws, which the NFA was, was jurisdiction by taxation. They imposed a $200 tax on suppressors, short barrel rifles, etc. Now, $200 in 1934 was just a little bit under $5,000 in terms of it being adjusted for inflation. So, imagine today passing a law that said any semi-automatic firearm that you want to possess, you must pay a $5,000 tax to the federal government in order to obtain it. Evan Nappen 18:26 You see how prohibitive that makes the possession, and then go through a registration scheme that is hidden in a pretext of taxation, which is blatantly excessive. And what has happened is by the elimination of the tax to zero, the court essentially said if there’s no tax, then there’s no law. Therefore, the NFA collapses in the enforcement proceedings regarding the paperwork, registration, printing. All the things that get done on the acquisition of NFA items. That law has been stayed for seven days, even though this is a permanent injunction. There’s been a seven-day stay to see if it progresses further, but that is a tremendous win on yet a different front of fighting for Second Amendment liberty. ‘ve had both of these great wins, and we have a lot to be proud of, and a lot to be optimistic about. Teddy Nappen 19:39 Regarding the big win with the NFA, I always want to see what is the what are the gun rights oppressionists? What are they pushing on this one? The Trace didn’t bring up something. However, Giffords, they’re flipping out, and I love this. (https://giffords.org/press-release/2026/08/giffords-reacts-to-federal-court-striking-down-background-checks-for-firearm-silencers-short-barreled-rifles-and-shotguns/) They go right to the. Just laugh, just reading it. This came from Trump’s so-called Big Beautiful Bill. Remove the tax on these devices. The court has struck down the National Firearms Act, requiring background check and registration of firearm silencers, short barrel rifles, and shotguns. Page – 6 – of 12 Silencers and short barrel firearms, and other than handguns, are rarely used in crimes today because current laws have stopped them. Ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding. Logical fallacy alert, everybody! Logical fallacy alert. Correlation does not equal causation. Saying that this will stop that these things have prevented crime does not make it so. What is your argument? Oh, they didn’t. They don’t have access. Even though prior to that, they weren’t used in crime. Generally speaking, as well. Number one is handguns on that front. But I love how they just try to toss that in every time. Just a red herring every single time, and they try to push it. Evan Nappen 20:56 Yeah, they’re just propagandists, and they’re losing left and right. It’s going to end up, my friends. You can mark my words. It’s going to end up that their entire world of gun law schemes, machinations, all these things that they have hoisted upon us as they die. I am greatly enjoying watching these gun laws die. As they die off and are impossible to find workarounds that, as well, get killed and die off. That they’re simply going to be left with only one mission, and their one mission of the oppressors, the one mission of the Second Amendment rights haters, will be to repeal the Second Amendment. And that’s where a fight’s going to end up. A fight over the oppressors trying to remove the Second Amendment. Of course, they’ll push this through their socialist, communist political movement. Remember, they want to make all kinds of institutional, governmental, radical changes, including getting rid of the Senate, including ending the nine-person Supreme Court and expanding it, getting rid of the presidency being elected where it’s an appointed, et cetera, and going at all different constitutional rights and turning America into a communist nation, and in so doing, they will also push. And Teddy, I think they even are saying, even now, to get rid of the Second Amendment. And you’ll see them joining hands. You’ll see the anti-Second Amendment rights folks joining hands with the Communists, with the DSA, the Democrat Socialist Wing, as the Democrat Party in its civil war implodes over the monster that the Democrats have created themselves. This is their Frankenstein that is now running loose on them. Teddy Nappen 23:27 Yeah, and quite frankly, just going back to them where they have pushed and pushed and pushed, where they said we don’t. They and there was a great video where this guy was basically trying to argue the socialist dilemma of the Second Amendment because it’s that catch 22 where they want to ban arms but they need arms for the revolution. For their great, you know, seize the means of production, but they cannot because they still push for red flag. They still push for universal background checks. Evan Nappen 23:58 Teddy, it’s like the meme with the guy sweating as to which button to push, you know. Ban guns so that you get, you know, so they could disarm the populace, or don’t ban so that their radical, violent Left can have access to firearms. Right? You know, they’re conflicted over that choice. Yeah. But regardless of what politics may lay in the future, right now the wins in court and legislatively. Okay. Remember, this is a combination. The reconciliation bill, etc. That’s all an important legislative changes that open the door to the ability to win on the front of the NFA tax attack and the big beautiful lawsuit. We are making tremendous gains and wins. And it is absolutely a reason to be optimistic. Page – 7 – of 12 Evan Nappen 25:03 I’m looking forward to seeing the decision in Koons and Siegel cases. Those that’s the case that addresses New Jersey’s sensitive places. We’re waiting for that same full en banc panel of the Third Circuit. Now, this is the same court that just killed New Jersey’s assault firearm and magazine law. That same court will be rendering an opinion over the constitutional validity of New Jersey’s sensitive places in the very near future. We’re going to see it. We’re just a matter, any day they can come out with that decision. Keep in mind, it’s going to be very important in countering and destroying the Carry Killer bill that Murphy and company got enacted. They did it. How? They did it because of their hissy fit to the Bruen decision, mandating carry permits get issued. So, they tried to make it so that this insane matrix of sensitive places makes it so incredibly difficult to actually exercise that right. is same court that gave us this fantastic pro-Second Amendment decision will be coming out with the sensitive places decision shortly. I’m cautiously optimistic about that. Keep in mind that the vote of the judges on the assault firearm magazine case. That was a panel of 15 judges, and the vote was 10 on our side, and five against us. So, it was 15 judges. One of the judges that opted to stay in was a judge that had been on a temporary assignment in, and that judge was a known opponent to Second Amendment rights. So, of course he wanted to stay in, and of the votes of the 10 to five ruling, one of the five judges was the anti-Second Amendment judge, but that judge is not part of the decision that will come out of Koons and Siegel. Therefore, it’s a 14-judge panel. And if we see the same voting as occurred on assault firearms and magazines, we should see a 10 to 4 ruling. Keeping our fingers crossed here in favor of knocking out New Jersey’s sensitive places, which would be really fantastic. And so, hang in there, folks. We’ve suffered a long time, but our suffering is slowly but surely being relieved. Evan Nappen 28:18 Hey, let me tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot has some pretty cool offers and things happening. They’re offering the Bull Armory Ultralight Pro, and Bull is proudly recognized as North Jersey Friends of NRA Gun of the year for 2026. It’s lightweight. It’s exceptionally accurate, and it’s built for everyday carry. The pistol earned its title through outstanding performance, craftsmanship, and innovation. You can check out that Bull Armory Ultralight Pro at WeShoot. WeShoot is also offering Hornaday Critical Defense ammunition. Now, you know, Critical Defense and that Hornaday line of Critical Duty, as well, is one of the most trusted names in personal protection. That round is designed and engineered for reliable expansion, and dependable feeding, and confidence when it essentially matters most. And let me tell you, the Hornaday Critical Defense and Critical Duty, those are polymer-tipped rounds that perform arguably even better than hollow nose. But are not hollow nose bullets under New Jersey law because the nose is actually not hollow. It’s got an insert filling the hole. So, because of that, it is an ideal round for carry in New Jersey. You can’t carry, at the moment, actual hollow nose, but you can carry Critical Defense or Critical Duty. And frankly, it’s got advantages over hollow nose. Evan Nappen 30:12 Not just because it performs as well or better, but also because of the nose having the polymer plug. It actually feeds even more reliably than hollow nose. So, it’s actually far superior, at least in these terms, to your normal hollow nose ammunition. So, check out Critical Defense at WeShoot. Also, WeShoot has the Ruger Mini-14 Ranch rifle. Now that Mini 14, that’s an American classic. It’s earned its reputation through decades of proven reliability, versatility, and timeless styling. And let me tell you Page – 8 – of 12 about the Ruger. The new Rugers are incredibly accurate. You know the old Ruger with the pencil barrels-they were called pencil barrels. They weren’t known for their accuracy. hey functioned well and sure looked cool when the A-team had them rolling, right? But accuracy-wise, not so much. However, the new Rugers are extremely accurate. The barrel is thickened toward the base, and it is a redesign that gives incredible tack driving accuracy to the new Ruger Mini-14s. The Ranch rifle will be able to deliver for you, and of course, it’s set so you can not only have the scope rings, the classic Ruger scope rings, but even a Picatinny rail that fits in where you could put the rings, and then you could Picatinny it up to whatever optics you like as well. So, Ruger has come a long way, and the new Mini-14 is something you need to check out. I really do love the new Mini. I have one myself and greatly appreciated having had the old ones as well. So, you can get yours at WeShoot. Weshootusa.com is their website. Evan Nappen 32:26 I want to also remind you that if you want to get a New Jersey carry permit, you really should get it. Join our ranks of 100,000 or more here of permitted carry holders. The more folks we get with carries, the closer we get to constitutional carry. So, make sure you’re part of that. You can get your CCARE certification from WeShoot. They have all the great training there. It’s a fantastic facility. It’s a wonderful resource, conveniently off the Parkway in Lakewood, New Jersey. So, make sure you stop by and check out their website as well. weshootusa.com. You’ll be glad you did. Evan Nappen 33:10 Let me also shamelessly plug my book, New Jersey Gun Law. The Bible of Jersey Gun Law. You need to have it. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all question and answer, so that you don’t become a GOFU. Make sure you have that book. Go to EvanNappen.com. You’ll see the big orange cover right there. Click it, and you’ll have it in a matter of days. Go to EvanNappen.com to get your New Jersey Gun Law book. Hey, Teddy, what do you have for us today in Press Checks? Teddy Nappen 33:48 Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free, and I imagine you’ve caught all about the In and Out shooting. What happened there? Evan Nappen 33:59 Well, maybe our listeners aren’t aware of that. would be surprised, but they may not know there was a major shooting that took place at, at and outside of and around this In / Out Burger in Idaho. Hey, I don’t know if any of you’ve ever eaten at In / Out Burger. It’s a West Coast thing. I really do love In / Out Burger. Just a side note, by the way, guys. But anyway, I digress. So, I could have well seen myself ending up at In / Out Burger in Idaho if I was out there. And Teddy Nappen 34:33 Isn’t there mustard on the burger that they do? Evan Nappen 34:35 No, no, that’s Whataburger. Another great burger chain. Oh, listen, we’re gonna have to call this the Burger Show shortly, instead of the burger lawyer, hamburger lawyer. Page – 9 – of 12 Teddy Nappen 34:44 What’s the best at In / Out? Evan Nappen 34:47 I like to get you know they have the secret menu and all that. I get the protein wrap where they take their In / Out Burger and they wrap it in lettuce. You know, I’ve lost over 200 pounds, and I avoid the carbs. I love the lettuce wrap, the protein. They call them the protein wrap. They wrap their In / Out burgers strictly in lettuce, so you have no carbs, and they’re delicious in-out burgers. So, that’s my favorite. But their stuff is really delicious. However, on this particular occasion, it was not so good. We had a bad guy going there with a gun and decided he was going to shoot up the place. And lo and behold, what happened, Teddy? What happened? A fellow by the name of Jordan Salinas. Go ahead. Teddy Nappen 35:35 Yes, good guy with a gun. Jordan Salinas, where he was with his girlfriend, and they had planned a quiet Saturday. You know, going horseback riding, so and you know, going out for a nice lunch in Twin Falls. And as the gunman Chad Williams has been identified, who was shooting up the In-N-Out, Jordan drew his holstered FN five seven semi-auto pistol with a suppressor to fire back and save the people inside. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/08/armed-citizen-used-a-suppressed-pistol-to-save-lives-at-twin-falls-in-n-out/) Evan Nappen 36:10 Okay, so first of all, that gun standard has a 20 round magazine, and it’s readily available to have a 30-round mag, so that gun with its standard capacity magazine, you would you would up until the recent case, and even though there’s a stay at the moment, you still can’t have that handgun with the standard capacity magazine. But I’m confident we will be able to. So, you couldn’t have that gun in New Jersey unless you had a lame 10-round magazine in it. Which what’s the point when you have an FN five seven that can hold 20 or even 30 of the five seven ammo? And then his gun has a silencer or suppressor on it, which is just great. Again, that is prohibited in New Jersey because New Jersey doesn’t allow silencers at all. So, here we have this crime being committed by this Chad fellow, and lo and behold, the hero, the good guy with the gun, breaks out his five seven with the suppressor and starts laying down fire on the bad guy. It was fantastic, and he was credited, wasn’t he, by law enforcement with saving lives, Who’s Crowder? Teddy Nappen 39:28 Stephen Crowder, Gladworth Crowder. He did a full breakdown on it, where it’s about training, where you just do enough to where you can handle yourself in a situation. And what Evan Nappen 39:36 did he? What did he say hasn’t been? Page – 10 – of 12 Teddy Nappen 39:39 So the one thing that caught is the fact that he’s has a suppressor attached to it, and it was identified in one of his other videos as he uses an FN five seven USG fitted Tactical Solutions Axiom suppressor, firing Vanguard 55 grain subsonic five sevens. Evan Nappen 40:00 Nice. Teddy Nappen 40:00 That was I so that may not now they may not be his exact rig at that moment, but that was what was reported to what he was practicing with. But that being said, this is one to one of what he was using in the and so Evan Nappen 40:12 you know when you step back, Teddy, and look at this. Normally, when there is some bad guy shooting up soft target area, the antis just cheer because they get to do a blood dance to try to attack and oppress gun rights, because it’s the old saying of they never let a tragedy go to waste. However, here the entire thing was turned on its ear because we had an armed civilian who saved lives and did it with a 20 to 30 round capacity handgun with a suppressor, okay, and so this completely turned around this incident to be one of the greatest current examples of why citizens need to be armed and ready and trained, and so the antis can’t even respond because in their normal blood dance that they like to do, it just always goes back to well. Look, we had a good guy with a gun make the difference. That’s the key, and it’s so important, so great that Jordan Salinas was there to save the folks that he did. He rendered aid even to the injured after. He’s just a great person as well. It was amazing to see this, that, and it so turned it around that I’m going to put on my conspiracy hat the way we sometimes see happen with the shootings that they use to go against our gun rights, I’m going to put my conspiracy hat on and say I think this, given how the outcome was, that this was a false flag operation run by us, because it’s had such tremendous-I’m just kidding about that. Of course, it’s not run by us. We, but you know, yeah, Candace Owens might run with it. Oh yeah, it was-it was the pro-gun side that engineered the entire thing. To no, but the thing is, the impact has been tremendous, and it’s now iconic of Jordan Salinas in his position. It’s like as iconic as Sophie Cunningham pointing is Jordan Salinas in his perfect firing position with his suppressed five seven. Seeing Teddy Nappen 42:57 the I’ve been seeing the citizen cowboy joke that’s been circling. Oh yeah, Evan Nappen 43:02 as compared to Citizen Vigilante, it’s now Citizen Cowboy. Teddy Nappen 43:06 Yeah, Citizen Cowboy because he has. But he’s Citizen Page – 11 – of 12 Evan Nappen 43:09 Defender. He’s not a vigilante. He’s a defender. He’s a defender at the moment. Being a man, imagine that being a man. Actually, is that your greatest example of so-called toxic masculinity, right there, called saving lives. I guess so. The Teddy Nappen 43:25 the other thing is, and I want to take this step further. I see where we win in the argument of common use. I want this to be a common thing where people are using suppressors in self-defense shootings. I want people to start carrying and doing that. I think there’s a lot of advantages to Evan Nappen 43:44 having them in self-defense shootings because Teddy Nappen 43:46 if you go back to the old where it was like we’re using 45 for the stopping power or nine, this guy had a five-seven with the suppressor. We were putting out more rounds, and you’re protecting your hearing on that. So it’s definitely that new frame. It’s a very interesting Evan Nappen 44:01 choice, and I’m sure on the technical side, people will can always debate what’s the best. But the bottom line is, well, someone Teddy Nappen 44:09 was going to say like, but look, what’s really the best Evan Nappen 44:11 is that a good guy with a gun helped save the day, and that’s what really matters. Evan Nappen 44:17 And Teddy, I need to tell you about this week’s GOFU because I’ve been seeing a lot of it. GOFUs, as you know, are Gun Owner Fuck Ups. It’s where gun owners make expensive mistakes, costly mistakes, and you get to learn for free. I got to tell you, this week’s GOFU something I see. You know, when it comes to restoring rights, when it comes to getting an expungement, I have to say, do not do it yourself. Seek professionals that know how to do it. I’ve been getting more poorly, improperly done pro se, where the individual themselves tried to expunge their record. There’s too much to that law. Too many complications. Too many nuances. Too many things you have to know to do it right. And when you do it wrong, it’s 10 times more difficult to fix it, and it can end up costing you. If you expunge poorly, and then you apply to get your firearm because you think your rights are restored and they’re not, you end up with a denial. Now you end up with falsification of the application because you wrote no when you should have wrote yes. You wrote no because you thought you were expunged, but you didn’t do it properly. We see this all the time. There is an entire procedure. There are things you need to know. You need to go to a professional. Whether, you know, and I just don’t mean me. Like some attorney. We do them at my firm. We do plenty of expungements. We help people with that. It’s great. But you need to make sure whoever is doing your expungement really understands it, and especially does it Page – 12 – of 12 with gun ownership in mind. Because when it’s done poorly, it can absolutely come back and bite you in the behind. Evan Nappen 45:54 Hey, this is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen, reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens. Speaker 2 46:01 Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing Evan@gun.lawyer. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state. Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E302_Transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.Known as “America's Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it's no wonder he's become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets. Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It's Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham's Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News. As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists. He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America. Email Evan Your Comments and Questions  talkback@gun.lawyer Join Evan's InnerCircleHere's your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America.  Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL.  Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits.   Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

Episode 4196 │ August 3, 2026 The musket was the decisive weapon in 1791. The drone is the decisive weapon now. The NDAA just took it away from American citizens — quietly. WHAT THIS EPISODE COVERS Scott Kesterson delivers the full BardsFM long-form dispatch on Section 1709 of the FY25 NDAA — a national security review of foreign-made drones that Congress mandated, that no agency ever performed, and that triggered a default consequence anyway: on December 22, 2025 the FCC added foreign-made drones and their critical components to the Covered List, cutting off roughly 80 percent of the American consumer drone market with no domestic replacement in existence. The dispatch maps the full architecture built on that single missed deadline — a market entry gate, a component chokepoint, a federal procurement ban, a Pentagon-controlled approved vendor list, new counter-drone enforcement authority pushed down to local police, and a government-backed domestic manufacturing program — against the simultaneous vertical expansion of state drone capability: $1 billion for 340,000 military drones, an $820 million federal industrial loan to a single manufacturer, and zero dollars in transition support for the half million commercial operators whose supply pipeline was quietly shut off. Building the constitutional case through Miller, Heller, and Caetano — testing the drone against the bearable and common-use standards the Supreme Court has already established, and landing on the live doctrinal fight now before the Court this fall — Scott argues that the decisive arm of this century is no longer the bullet but the sensing-and-transmission stack itself, which means the same restricted component list closing the civilian drone market is simultaneously nullifying the Second Amendment's deterrent function and stripping the independent journalist's ability to see and transmit what power would rather stay hidden — one signature, two rights, both narrowed without a single law being passed, a single vote taken, or a single court ruling issued. KEY QUESTIONS ADDRESSED What actually happened on December 22, 2025 — and why does the fact that no federal agency ever completed the mandated national security review, yet a default consequence fired anyway, reveal a mechanism for closing a constitutional domain without ever passing a law, arguing a case in court, or holding a public vote? How does a drone measure against the constitutional tests already established in United States v. Miller, District of Columbia v. Heller, and Caetano v. Massachusetts — and why does the only remaining doctrinal question, whether a weapon "most useful in military service" forfeits protection, sit before the Supreme Court this fall while the Pentagon simultaneously builds 340,000 of them? Why does Scott argue that the drone component restriction is simultaneously a Second Amendment and First Amendment story — and what does treating the sensing-and-transmission stack as the actual payload, rather than the airframe, reveal about what was really taken from both the citizen militia and the independent journalist on the same signature? ABOUT BARDSFM BardsFM is a daily independent podcast covering faith, liberty, history, and information warfare. Hosted by Scott Kesterson — combat veteran, documentary filmmaker, and rancher. Over 4,100 episodes and 50 million lifetime downloads. New episodes every weekday. bards.fm This episode was researched and produced under the Spatial Terra Intelligence Methodology (STIM v5) — the analytical framework built by Scott Kesterson — with AI-assisted research synthesis at a 70/30 human/AI authorship ratio, fully disclosed. All analysis, conclusions, and editorial judgments are those of Scott Kesterson. BardsFM's archive includes hundreds of episodes on prayer, scripture, and walking the Way of Christ — available free in the full episode catalog. DOWNLOADS Community Sovereignty Framework: click here AFFILIATE LINKS Bards Nation Health Store: www.bardsnationhealth.com MYPillow promo code: BARDS >> Go to https://www.mypillow.com/bards and use the promo code BARDS or... Call 1-800-975-2939.  EMPShield protect your vehicles and home. Promo code BARDS: Click here Treadlite Broadforks...best garden tool EVER. Promo code BARDS26: TreadliteBroadforks.com EnviroKlenz Air Purification, promo code BARDS to save 10%: www.enviroklenz.com Morning Intro Music Provided by Brian Kahanek: www.briankahanek.com Founders Bible 20% discount code: BARDS >>> TheFoundersBible.com Windblown Media 20% Discount with promo code BARDS: windblownmedia.com White Oak Pastures Grassfed Meats, Get $20 off any order $150 or more. Promo Code BARDS: www.whiteoakpastures.com/BARDS Mission Darkness Faraday Bags and RF Shielding. Promo code BARDS: Click here DONATIONS: If you wish to support this podcast directly you can donate here... DONATE: Click here MAILING ADDRESS: Xpedition Cafe, LLC Attn. Scott Kesterson 591 E Central Ave, #740 Sutherlin, OR  97479

Long before the Supreme Court handed down the landmark Obergefell ruling on equal marriage in 2015, activists were canvassing door-to-door, courting any lawmaker who would listen, and losing at the local level—a lot. Their scrappy determination helped convince family members, neighbors and eventually the rest of the country that the Constitution's guarantees of liberty and equality applied to same-sex couples. In Episode 3 of By the People, equal marriage campaign architect Marc Solomon joins Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern to trace the movement's "quixotic" beginnings in 2001. As this series continues to explore how ordinary Americans—not just nine justices—can interpret and enforce the Constitution, the campaign for equal marriage offers examples and tools that dedicated citizens can use to make constitutional meaning.The episode also confronts an uncomfortable question: If popular pressure can produce a ruling you love, like Obergefell, it can produce one you might not, like the court's decision to enshrine an individual right to bear arms in 2008's D.C. v. Heller. Dahlia and Mark discuss what happens when popular constitutionalism is retrofitted as originalism, and why no constitutional win, no matter how popular, is ever truly permanent.By the People is Slate's end-of-term project exploring how ordinary Americans have shaped the meaning of the Constitution outside the Supreme Court. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Long before the Supreme Court handed down the landmark Obergefell ruling on equal marriage in 2015, activists were canvassing door-to-door, courting any lawmaker who would listen, and losing at the local level—a lot. Their scrappy determination helped convince family members, neighbors and eventually the rest of the country that the Constitution's guarantees of liberty and equality applied to same-sex couples. In Episode 3 of By the People, equal marriage campaign architect Marc Solomon joins Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern to trace the movement's "quixotic" beginnings in 2001. As this series continues to explore how ordinary Americans—not just nine justices—can interpret and enforce the Constitution, the campaign for equal marriage offers examples and tools that dedicated citizens can use to make constitutional meaning.The episode also confronts an uncomfortable question: If popular pressure can produce a ruling you love, like Obergefell, it can produce one you might not, like the court's decision to enshrine an individual right to bear arms in 2008's D.C. v. Heller. Dahlia and Mark discuss what happens when popular constitutionalism is retrofitted as originalism, and why no constitutional win, no matter how popular, is ever truly permanent.By the People is Slate's end-of-term project exploring how ordinary Americans have shaped the meaning of the Constitution outside the Supreme Court. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Need to set up your Slate Plus feed? If you subscribed through Slate.com, check out our FAQ at slate.com/podcastfaqs for easy instructions. Members subscribed via Apple Podcasts get automatic access—no setup required. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Long before the Supreme Court handed down the landmark Obergefell ruling on equal marriage in 2015, activists were canvassing door-to-door, courting any lawmaker who would listen, and losing at the local level—a lot. Their scrappy determination helped convince family members, neighbors and eventually the rest of the country that the Constitution's guarantees of liberty and equality applied to same-sex couples. In Episode 3 of By the People, equal marriage campaign architect Marc Solomon joins Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern to trace the movement's "quixotic" beginnings in 2001. As this series continues to explore how ordinary Americans—not just nine justices—can interpret and enforce the Constitution, the campaign for equal marriage offers examples and tools that dedicated citizens can use to make constitutional meaning.The episode also confronts an uncomfortable question: If popular pressure can produce a ruling you love, like Obergefell, it can produce one you might not, like the court's decision to enshrine an individual right to bear arms in 2008's D.C. v. Heller. Dahlia and Mark discuss what happens when popular constitutionalism is retrofitted as originalism, and why no constitutional win, no matter how popular, is ever truly permanent.By the People is Slate's end-of-term project exploring how ordinary Americans have shaped the meaning of the Constitution outside the Supreme Court. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Cam Edwards has spent 22 years covering the Second Amendment — and right now, he says, the fight has never mattered more. Ryan Gresham sits down with the host of Cam & Company to break down how Virginia went from purple to East California in one session, why your "safe" state could be next, and why the Supreme Court's upcoming assault weapons case might be the most important 2A decision since Heller. Plus, the phone call that changed Cam's life — and why groundhogs are about to meet a suppressor.This Gun Talk Nation is brought to you by Colt, Shooting Sports Life, Archon Firearms, Silencer Central, Ruger, and Range Ready Studios.About Gun Talk NationGun Talk Media's Gun Talk Nation with Ryan Gresham is a weekly multi-platform podcast that offers a fresh look at all things firearms-related. Featuring notable guests and a lot of laughs. Gun Talk Nation is available as an audio podcast or in video format.For more content from Gun Talk Media, visit guntalk.com or subscribe on YouTube, Rumble, Facebook, Instagram, and X. Catch First Person Defender on the new Official FPD YouTube channel. Watch Gun Talk Nation on its new YouTube channel. Catch Gun Talk Hunt on the new dedicated YouTube Channel. Listen to all Gun Talk Podcasts with Spreaker, iHeart, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you find podcasts.Copyright ©2026 Freefire Media, LLCGun Talk Nation 07.22.26Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/gun-talk--6185159/support.

Our summer tradition at Here’s the Thing continues, as staff members choose their favorite conversations from the archives for our Summer Staff Pick series. This week, we revisit Alec’s conversation with Becca Heller. On January 27th, 2017, Donald Trump issued the travel ban barring visitors and migrants from seven predominantly Muslim countries. Becca Heller, founder of the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP), had seen it coming. She foresaw that it would catch people in planes, turning passengers into undocumented immigrants midair. She prepared by setting up a network of volunteer lawyers who would show up at airports to help travelers being held there. On the 27th, the lawyers came, followed by thousands of protesters. The Trump administration, facing legal losses and "chaos at the airports," gave up enforcing the ban until officials could draft a new version. For a while, the good guys had won. Two years later, with a MacArthur "genius" grant under her belt, the 37-year-old Heller is strategizing about where to take refugee-advocacy next. Serious stuff, but she's still one of the funniest people ever to come on Here's the Thing. The International Refugee Assistance Project is at https://refugeerights.org/.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Third Circuit delivers a major Second Amendment victory, striking down New Jersey's gun and magazine bans. Dr. John Lott joins Mark Walters to explain what this means for Heller, Bruen, Justice Barrett, and the Supreme Court's historic upcoming gun ban cases.

“Judas Kiss: The Traveling Clairvoyant of Tipton Mountain” — A hermit who claims he can watch distant events from inside a hollow pine tree becomes convinced the woman renting the cabin above his is a murderer — and only he knows what she's done.Look for this podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeart Radio, Amazon Music, Pandora, TuneIn Radio, and other podcast apps. Get a list of free listening apps here: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/OTRCHAPTERS & TIME STAMPS (All Times Approximate)…00:00:00.000 = Show Open00:01:30.028 = CBS Radio Mystery Theater, “The Judas Kiss” (March 23, 1978) ***WD00:45:48.210 = Tales From The Tomb, “Spirit Calling” (1960s)00:50:20.385 = Two Thousand Plus, “World's Apart” (November 29, 1950) ***WD01:19:02.978 = The Unexpected, “Heat Wave” (1947-1948)01:31:11.637 = Unsolved Mysteries, “Indian Fakir” (February 17, 1944) ***WD01:44:47.860 = Dark Venture, “Elizabeth Is Frightened” (July 22, 1947)02:14:43.934 = The Weird Circle, “Haunted Hotel” (May 13, 1945)02:42:15.220 = The Whistler, “Murder Will Shout” (March 19, 1945)03:11:41.385 = Strange Wills, “Emily” (August 31, 1946)03:41:20.826 = Witch's Tale, “Statue of Thor” (May 22, 1933)04:04:13.136 = X Minus One, “Honeymoon In Hell” (December 26, 1956)04:33:07.327 = ABC Mystery Time, “Murder In Haste” (1957) ***WD04:56:48.877 = Strange Adventure, “Death Rides The Carousel” (1945) ***WD05:00:05.724 = Show Close(ADU) = Air Date Unknown(LQ) = Low Quality***WD = Remastered, edited, or cleaned up by Weird Darkness to make the episode more listenable. Audio may not be pristine, but it will be better than the original file which may have been unusable or more difficult to hear without editing.CUSTOM WEBPAGE: https://weirddarkness.com/WDRR0712Weird Darkness presents Retro Radio, a night of classic dark radio drama spanning three decades of murder, madness, and the supernatural.It opens with the CBS Radio Mystery Theater's "The Judas Kiss," in which Oscar Absecker, a solitary handyman living on a dying mountain outside the village of Tipton, believes a big black dog barks three times whenever someone dies — and believes he can watch distant events unfold by standing inside a lightning-struck, hollow pine tree. When Deputy Luke Marbury rents the cabin above his to a woman named Enid Grant, Oscar becomes convinced that she is destroying the much younger man who joins her there, and his visions show him one killing after another. Fred Gwynne stars, with E.G. Marshall hosting.From there comes "Spirit Calling" from Tales From The Tomb, a short piece about a nine-year-old girl named Amy, alone in the house during a violent summer storm after her uncle Stanley's death, and the telephone call that comes through on a dead line.Next is Two Thousand Plus and "World's Apart," in which rocket engineer Jim Granger talks his way onto Flight 17, the first crewed voyage to Neptune, only for the spaceship Phoenix to be dragged off course by an uncharted comet. Crippled and lost, the ship limps to a landing at a place called Green Valley, where Commander Dijkstra can hear heartbeats across a room, the milk is green, and gravity does not behave the way it should.The Unexpected follows with "Heat Wave," starring Barry Sullivan as Whitey Malone, a fugitive sweating out a 110-degree heat wave in a fifth-floor garret while the police close in — and burning to settle accounts with the woman he thinks tipped them off.Then Unsolved Mysteries brings "Indian Fakir," a story told at the United Services Club in Simla, where a colonel recounts what happened when his young English bride, alone in their Bangalore bungalow, tried to outsmart a fakir who demanded a strand of her hair — and handed him threads pulled from a Chinese rug instead.Dark Venture presents "Elizabeth Is Frightened," with Joan Banks as a wealthy woman who marries Philip Bailey, a widower fascinated by the power of one mind to dominate another. As the whole town starts believing Elizabeth is ill and suicidal, only her housekeeper Flora and Dr. Davis suspect what her husband is really doing.The Weird Circle offers "Haunted Hotel," in which Henry Westwick travels to Venice and takes room fourteen at a converted castle to learn how his brother Philip died weeks after marrying the mysterious Countess Narona — and finds the answers coming to him in dreams.The Whistler tells "Murder Will Shout," the story of garage owner George Kramer, buried in debt to a man named Albion, and the small-time racketeer Peanut Marola who offers a black-market car racket, a partnership, and a solution to the Albion problem that goes very wrong on Miller Highway.Strange Wills, starring Warren William, tells "Emily," tracing a violin built by Antonio Stradivarius in Cremona in 1732 through the hands of gypsies, Niccolò Paganini, and the Heller family of Vienna, until it turns up at a barn dance in the Tennessee hills as a GI's war souvenir.The Witch's Tale delivers "Statue of Thor," in which sculptor Neil Redding, bored and cruel, mocks his enormous Swedish model Olaf, seduces Olaf's fiancée Hedwig, and takes the big man to the foundry to watch the statue of Thor cast in bronze — a casting that comes out of the mold wearing a face Redding never sculpted.X Minus One presents "Honeymoon In Hell," set in the late 1960s, when male births stop worldwide and the cybernetics machine known as Junior recommends sending a married couple to the moon. Rocket pilot Ray Carmody is wed to Eastern Alliance pilot Anya Borisovna hours before launch, and on the lunar surface they find an unidentified craft that does not belong to either alliance.ABC Mystery Time offers "Murder In Haste," in which Elbert Taylor kills his wife Ellen, flees Miami by train under an assumed name, and — after a derailment in Georgia — steals the identity of a dead mystery writer named Leslie Jameson, only to have Jameson's wife walk into his New York hotel room.The episode closes with Strange Adventure and "Death Rides The Carousel," where a lawyer named Jeffrey Ford is found stabbed through the heart on a merry-go-round chariot at a village carnival in Merrimack, and Inspector Jonathan Hawke spots the flaw in the ticket taker's account.