Estimated reading time: 2 minutes
In a new video, Colion Noir is pushing back hard on claims that the Department of Justice is “weaponizing” the Second Amendment.
The controversy stems from reports that the DOJ has moved gun rights enforcement into its Civil Rights Division and is asking the Supreme Court to review Hawaii’s restrictive gun laws. Critics argue it’s a calculated strategy to dismantle state-level gun regulations nationwide. Noir sees it differently.
“Trump is building a federal enforcement machine to protect a constitutional right,” Noir says. “Oh no, the horror.”
SEE ALSO: Sig P211 GTO Review – Flat, Fast, Relentless
He frames the move not as radical, but logical. A civil right, he argues, is an individual right protected from government interference and enforced through the courts. Voting rights. Free speech. Equal protection. So why, he asks, should the Second Amendment be treated differently?
“You don’t get to scream civil rights when it’s voting… or speech… but when it’s the Second Amendment, suddenly it’s a conspiracy,” Noir says. “No, it’s consistency.”
The legal backdrop is the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which held that modern gun regulations must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
According to Noir, that ruling didn’t “blow up gun safety laws,” as critics claim. It reinforced that states can’t deny carry rights based on subjective or arbitrary standards.
He zeroes in on Hawaii as a test case, arguing that while some states technically allow concealed carry, in practice they denied most applicants before Bruen. If the Supreme Court sides with the DOJ, Noir says, other restrictive states could face similar scrutiny.
SEE ALSO: Ruger American Gen II Predator Review That Hits Sub MOA
He also calls out what he sees as ideological inconsistency. Pointing to arguments over voter ID versus multi-layered licensing schemes for carrying a firearm.
“Breuen didn’t say no gun laws,” Noir says. “It said if you’re going to restrict a right, you need historical grounding. You can’t just invent modern excuses to deny people their rights.”
Critics warn that this approach could nationalize concealed carry standards without Congress. Supporters say it’s simply enforcing a constitutional guarantee that already exists.
What say you?
Is the DOJ elevating the Second Amendment to its rightful place among protected civil rights? Or is this, as critics argue, a strategic attempt to federalize gun policy through the courts?
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
Available on GunsAmerica Now
is a seasoned outdoorsman, lifelong hunter, and the kind of guy who’d rather track whitetails than scroll social media. As an editor for GunsAmerica, he’s got a sharp eye for spotting both solid gear and bad gun laws. Whether he’s deep in the woods or deep in editorial deadlines, Larry brings a no-nonsense, tell-it-like-it-is approach to firearms, hunting, and the great American tradition of self-reliance. If there’s a hot debate on gun rights or the latest in hunting tech, you can bet Larry’s got an opinion—and it’s probably backed up with both facts and field experience.
Experience:
– Licensed Bowhunter, Hunter, and Trapper – Experienced in ethical hunting and wildlife conservation.
– Concealed Carry Permit Holder (NYS & AZ) – Trained and licensed to carry in multiple states.
– 2A Journalist – Covering firearms legislation, Second Amendment issues, and gun rights for over a decade.
– Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) – Certified to provide emergency medical care in the field.
– Field-Tested Gear Reviewer – Hands-on experience with firearms, optics, and hunting tech.
there is a reason for the 2A, we drove out british rule/occupation with an armed population and it was deemed so important that they made it the second amendment not the 4th or 11th or put it last.