NRA says it opposes idea of banning transgender Americans from owning guns

[Onomea]

Good for the NRA! (This is gonna seriously mess with some people's heads!)

Amid reports the Justice Department is weighing banning transgender people from owning firearms in response to last month's mass shooting at a Minneapolis Catholic church, the National Rifle Association said Friday it will oppose any blanket rule that limits Second Amendment rights.

Their declaration comes after CNN and other outlets reported that Justice Department leadership is considering whether it can use its rulemaking authority declare that people who are transgender are mentally ill and can lose their rights to possess firearms.

"The NRA supports the Second Amendment rights of all law abiding Americans to purchase, possess and use firearms," the organization said in a social media post."NRA does not, and will not, support any policy proposals that implement sweeping gun bans that arbitrarily strip law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights without due process."

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/05/politics/nra-transgender-gun-control

 

[326MOD10]

Glad to see the NRA doing the correct thing.

The entire premise of this makes zero sense and here is that slippery slope you all worry about.

Those who forget history are destined to repeat it.

 

[Truckman]

I'm with the NRA on this...Such a ban would be a violation of Constitutional rights......Ben

 

[Bald1]

Hmmmmmmmmm

 

[DARE]

If the Justice Department is weighing such a ban, I am disappointed in them. Pretty sure the Supreme Court would strike down such a ban if implemented.

 

[rwsmith]

People have the stupidest kneejerk reactions to ANYTHING concerning guns.

 

[ImDrRich]

Not intending to open a can of worms here but banning ANY American who has no criminal or psychiatric record(s) from owning firearms is an outrage.

All the other crap that goes with this subject isn't up for discussion.

 

[2500]

Allen West opinion on the matter

Gun Control?

It is time we stop coddling individuals who are suffering from a mental condition. We do not need to acquiesce to individuals with a mental condition just so that they feel "accepted.”

theacru.org

 

[Rimfire Fanatic]

Good for the NRA! (This is gonna seriously mess with some people's heads!)

Amid reports the Justice Department is weighing banning transgender people from owning firearms in response to last month's mass shooting at a Minneapolis Catholic church, the National Rifle Association said Friday it will oppose any blanket rule that limits Second Amendment rights.

Their declaration comes after CNN and other outlets reported that Justice Department leadership is considering whether it can use its rulemaking authority declare that people who are transgender are mentally ill and can lose their rights to possess firearms.

"The NRA supports the Second Amendment rights of all law abiding Americans to purchase, possess and use firearms," the organization said in a social media post."NRA does not, and will not, support any policy proposals that implement sweeping gun bans that arbitrarily strip law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights without due process."

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/05/politics/nra-transgender-gun-control

This^^^^You may not like certain people, but stripping their 2A rights over this would be unconstitutional.

Imagine if the Prez and DOJ said that black people shouldn't be allowed to purchase or possess guns because they are black. That wouldn't go over well. And this is the same thing IMO.

 

[pasound]

No discrimination! 2A is for everyone!

 

[RevV67]

I agree. Taking away the rights of ANY group is a bad thing.
So is taking away the rights of people because of things they have not done but someone thinks they might do (red flag laws).

 

[Bald1]

Allen West makes sense. That's uncommon today.

 

[Telecaster]

They would have to be adjudicated mentally ill on an individual basis, first.

 

[Rodan]

"Shall not be infringed"

That's either the standard, or it's not. The only legitimate suspension of a recognized right comes after individual due process.

What we do with crazy and dangerous people is a different discussion, and letting them not only run amok among us, but promoting their illness as 'normal' and 'acceptable' is NOT the answer.

 

[Markpixs]

They would have to be adjudicated mentally ill on an individual basis, first.

Sometimes it appears we're moving away from that standard.

 

[Yendor357]

The NRA isn't in the business of keeping its mouth shut. But in this instance, they should have.

 

[Bud man]

Not intending to open a can of worms here but banning ANY American who has no criminal or psychiatric record(s) from owning firearms is an outrage.

All the other crap that goes with this subject isn't up for discussion.

 

[stansdds]

Not really surprised the DOJ is considering banning a class of citizens from buying or owning firearms. AG Pam Bondi is a fan of red flag laws, which can be used to strip citizens of their 2A rights without so much as a hearing.

 

[MelvinWalker]

The entire premise of this makes zero sense and here is that slippery slope you all worry about.

You are 100%, exactly right....

When someone can randomly decide that someone is mentally ill because they don't conform to a "standard" and then deny them their constitutional rights because of that, then that's going to be a big no from me...Slippery slope doesn't even begin to describe that.

Reminds me of that scene in Magnum Force, where Harry tells Lieutenant Briggs about his vigilante cops and their judgement on who to kill next; "Pretty soon, you're executing your neighbor for their dog pissing on your lawn".

 

[Rocketmedic40]

Allen West opinion on the matter

Gun Control?

It is time we stop coddling individuals who are suffering from a mental condition. We do not need to acquiesce to individuals with a mental condition just so that they feel "accepted.”

theacru.org

"Demons don't get guns in America"…sounds incredibly good, but who precisely defines "demon?"

There's no real way to argue that this most recent shooter was experiencing a prolonged episode of psychosis. I have seen his video and as a healthcare professional my first thought was "this dude is in the midst of a severe mental health crisis". Tones of voice, thought patterns, obscessive preparation and conflicting, trendy priorities mirroring social media trends…his brain was melting in real time. And if any of the people who sold him those weapons had seen those videos, the responsible thing to do would have been to no-sell and call the police. But that's the insidious thing about mental illness. It's entirely possible to mask it for a long time. To look normal and act normal and healthy and perform friendly good social interactions. And no one else knows, until they get shown. Are we to assume that everyone is crazy?

This guy has issues, yes. But if they don't identify, and don't ask for help, there's no way to intervene with "the law" on a targeted basis. Even the whole "trans ban" is meaningless if they check "male" and just use and accept their birth name instead on legal documents. What are you going to do, send the Secret Weiner Police to investigate the public to make sure thigh-highs never go with boxers and that everyone is wearing government-approved "gender-appropriate" underwear?

 

[McChemist]

If this country goes down the road of pre-judging people's intent, then welcome to the Dept of Future Crime. Relying on judicial adjudication is a tricky road at best. Does anyone think DJT would have been fairly treated by NY, DC,....judges? If you do, I have some prime land to sell you adjacent to Alligator Alcatraz and a great bridge in Brooklyn.

By extension, having vengeful former spouses, contentious parties, and unfriendly officials (political types, the Biden FBI,....) lodge specious and most probably anonymous allegations could result in 2A rights suspension and possibly incarceration .

Going down the pre-judgement and 2A rights removal is a very steep and slippery slope.

 

[McChemist]

PS. This is unconstitutional.

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

I'm extremely conflicted on this! On the one hand, it's infuriating how much the ATF hassles law-abiding people, FFL dealers, and creates NFA regs on some really nonsensical things, yet there's no enforcement of existing Form 4473 violations, the pretext for the background checks in the first place. On this, I agree with a lot of what Allen West says. On the other hand, give government an inch and they take a mile. I see this idea setting a very dangerous precident. If such a policy is implemented, what then defines one being "adjudicated mentally defective" and how might the goalposts be moved on this definition over time? Who gets to make this determination? If a doctor prescribes a patient SSRIs for depression symptoms, is it much of a stretch to imagine a future requirement where the doctor must report this, it gets recorded in the NICS system, which then denies that patient 2nd Amendment rights?

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

If this country goes down the road of pre-judging people's intent, then welcome to the Dept of Future Crime. Relying on judicial adjudication is a tricky road at best. Does anyone think DJT would have been fairly treated by NY, DC,....judges? If you do, I have some prime land to sell you adjacent to Alligator Alcatraz and a great bridge in Brooklyn.

By extension, having vengeful former spouses, contentious parties, and unfriendly officials (political types, the Biden FBI,....) lodge specious and most probably anonymous allegations could result in 2A rights suspension and possibly incarceration .

Going down the pre-judgement and 2A rights removal is a very steep and slippery slope.

The movie "Minority Report" wasn't so far-fetched.

 

[KenTheHunter]

Good for the NRA! (This is gonna seriously mess with some people's heads!)

Amid reports the Justice Department is weighing banning transgender people from owning firearms in response to last month's mass shooting at a Minneapolis Catholic church, the National Rifle Association said Friday it will oppose any blanket rule that limits Second Amendment rights.

Their declaration comes after CNN and other outlets reported that Justice Department leadership is considering whether it can use its rulemaking authority declare that people who are transgender are mentally ill and can lose their rights to possess firearms.

"The NRA supports the Second Amendment rights of all law abiding Americans to purchase, possess and use firearms," the organization said in a social media post."NRA does not, and will not, support any policy proposals that implement sweeping gun bans that arbitrarily strip law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights without due process."

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/05/politics/nra-transgender-gun-control

I have a major issue of lumping everyone in a group and penalizing them all ! This is what the anti gunners typically do. I doubt this would pass judicial muster. I have my personal opinions on trans issues, but they have the same rights as everyone else.

 

[Jim0001]

This^^^^You may not like certain people, but stripping their 2A rights over this would be unconstitutional.

Imagine if the Prez and DOJ said that black people shouldn't be allowed to purchase or possess guns because they are black. That wouldn't go over well. And this is the same thing IMO.

Race has nothing to do with a mental illness. Comparing apples to oranges....

 

[MelvinWalker]

Race has nothing to do with a mental illness. Comparing apples to oranges....

It depends on who is doing the defining... When your civil rights can be defined one way today and another way tomorrow, then it is an apples to apples comparison...Firearms ownership is a civil right.

Remember, it is literally still written in the body of the US Constitution in Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, that slaves were counted and considered 3/5ths of the population....It was only until the 14th amendment that undid and repealed this portion of the original Constitution....However it never changed to wording of the original constitution, it just repealed that section.

 

[Butzbach]

How can the state condone firearm ownership by individuals with a self-proclaimed mental illness? The NRA steps to the plate: swing and a miss strike three you're out.

 

[Telecaster]

IBTL!

 

[MelvinWalker]

How can the state condone firearm ownership by individuals with a self-proclaimed mental illness? The NRA steps to the plate: swing and a miss strike three you're out.

On another note, my dad was stationed in Butzbach, Germany during the Korean war...4th Infantry Division.