The Real Threat to Gun Rights? It’s Not D.C. — It’s Your State Capitol

Tom McHale, editor of American Handgunner Magazine, didn’t mince words in the opening of his recent video: just because the White House has changed, doesn’t mean your Second Amendment rights are suddenly safe. In a new episode of American Handgunner Insider, McHale sat down with Adam Kraut, Executive Director of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), to talk about how SAF is staying ahead of anti-gun laws, especially at the state and local level.

According to Kraut, the real danger to gun owners isn’t always coming from D.C. “The threats now are mostly at the state level,” he explained, pointing to blue states like California and New York that are crafting new restrictions specifically designed to work around recent Supreme Court rulings like Bruen. As far as he’s concerned, complacency is the enemy of gun rights.

Three Buckets: How SAF Picks Its Legal Fights

During the interview, Kraut broke down SAF’s legal strategy into what he calls “three buckets”: strategic, reactive, and opportunistic litigation. Strategic lawsuits are the big ones. SAF looks at how the law is currently written, where the courts are favorable, and what issue needs to be challenged to build a strong precedent.

Kraut said SAF doesn’t just sue randomly. They plan carefully, choosing where to file based on the issue and the strength of the court. For example, if they’re going after an assault weapons ban, they’ll pick a state that has one in place – obviously, you can’t challenge a ban that doesn’t exist. On the other hand, for federal ATF rules, they can go anywhere in the country. As McHale pointed out, this kind of strategy is how you win landmark cases.

Reactive Lawsuits: Fighting Back When States Overreach

The second kind of litigation SAF brings is reactive. This is where states pass new laws specifically to get around pro-gun rulings, like what happened after Bruen. Kraut said that after the Court ruled in favor of public carry rights, states like New York and California added “sensitive places” where carrying a firearm was banned – basically making it impossible to carry anywhere.

That kind of legal bait-and-switch doesn’t sit well with SAF. They jump in immediately with lawsuits to block those laws from taking root. As Kraut explained, “It acts as a total ban on carry anyway,” so SAF treats it like a direct constitutional threat. Their job, he says, is to respond fast and keep the pressure on.

Opportunistic Cases: When the Public Reaches Out

Sometimes, SAF gets involved because an individual citizen reaches out. Kraut said these are the opportunistic cases – when someone calls or emails saying they’ve been impacted by a bad law. If SAF thinks the case has merit and can benefit others too, they get involved.

Kraut describes SAF as a public interest law firm, meaning their goal is broader than just helping one person. They want their lawsuits to set a precedent that helps all gun owners. McHale emphasized this point by noting how SAF doesn’t just fight battles in one town – they aim to reshape the law nationwide.

Avoiding Bad Precedent at All Costs

One of the biggest challenges in gun rights litigation, Kraut noted, is avoiding bad precedent. If a court rules against you, that decision can be used in future cases – and worse, adopted by other courts. That’s why SAF is careful about which lawsuits they take on. They want to win, not just fight.

Kraut explained that circuit courts often “borrow” from other circuits, so if one appeals court upholds a bad law, others may follow suit. Eventually, you need the Supreme Court to weigh in. But as he dryly observed, “We see how much they love to weigh in on Second Amendment issues – not much.”

55+ Active Lawsuits – and Counting

At the time of the interview, SAF had over 55 active lawsuits in play across the country. Kraut said that number is growing, with more cases in development that haven’t even been filed yet. He admitted that managing this massive caseload wasn’t what he envisioned when he first got involved in gun rights work.

Now, instead of directly litigating each case, Kraut oversees a team that handles SAF’s legal strategies. “I didn’t want to be a lawyer,” he joked to McHale. “Now I run an organization with over 55 active cases.” But that’s what the fight requires: full-time commitment, constant planning, and relentless legal pressure.

New Administration, Same State-Level Threats

McHale asked Kraut how the change in presidential administration might affect gun rights litigation. Kraut’s answer was clear: “Not much.” While the federal government may no longer be actively hostile toward gun owners, the gridlock in Congress means few major laws, good or bad, are likely to pass.

So the danger shifts back to the states. Kraut cited Colorado, which is currently considering an assault weapons ban, as one example of the ongoing state-level push against gun rights. He expects many more such battles to come, especially in blue states where officials view themselves as resisting federal inaction.

Winning the Culture War – One Shooter at a Time

Toward the end of the interview, both Kraut and McHale made a passionate case for something often overlooked in the gun debate: personal outreach. Kraut shared a story about how he grew up in an anti-gun household but changed his views after learning to shoot in the Boy Scouts. Eventually, he even convinced his own father to go to the range – something that completely changed his dad’s views.

“Every time you take someone shooting,” McHale added, “they come back with a smile. They get it.” They argued that culture change starts small. Invite people. Share the experience. Let them understand what gun ownership really means, beyond what they see on the news.

SAF Isn’t Just Playing Defense – They’re Winning Battles

What stood out most in this interview is how intentional SAF is. This isn’t about reacting in panic. Kraut made it clear: they play the long game. They know how to choose the right fights, in the right places, at the right time. That kind of precision is what makes SAF one of the most effective pro-2A legal forces in the country.

To me, the most fascinating part is how they juggle all three approaches – strategy, reaction, and opportunity – like a legal version of a special ops team. They’re not just stopping bad laws; they’re building a stronger foundation for gun rights long-term. It’s a lot like how chess grandmasters don’t just think one move ahead – they think ten.

How You Can Help SAF Stay in the Fight

Kraut and McHale both emphasized that legal victories don’t come cheap. Donations help, of course – over 90% of SAF’s funding comes from individuals, not corporations or government grants. But there’s more you can do: vote, share their message, and get involved locally. Kraut encouraged people to spread awareness about SAF’s work, sign up for their newsletter, and follow their updates.

And maybe most importantly, introduce someone to shooting. Whether or not they become gun owners, they’ll understand the issue better. Sometimes all it takes is a trip to the range to turn someone from anti-gun to pro-rights – or at least to neutral. And that shift, multiplied across thousands of people, could change the entire political landscape.

The Fight for Gun Rights Never Stops

The Second Amendment Foundation isn’t waiting for someone else to save gun rights. Under Adam Kraut’s leadership, they’re in the trenches every day, filing lawsuits, watching legislation, and creating legal wins that benefit everyone, whether you live in California, Texas, or New York.

As Tom McHale summed it up: “If enough people picked up the torch, maybe one day, the SAF wouldn’t need to exist.” But until then, we need them – because rights only exist if someone’s willing to defend them. And right now, that defender is the Second Amendment Foundation.