This is TTAG’s weekly roundup of legal and legislative news affecting guns, the gun business and gun owners’ rights.
There’s one thing that happened this week that isn’t really legally related, but I just can’t resist writing about: the ＹＥＥT ＣＡＮＮＯＮ.
Hi-Point vs The Entire Internet
Hi-Point unveiled their new pistol at the SHOT Show. It was just a 3D-Printed model, but it showed some pretty cool features: a double stack mag, a threaded barrel, and the distinctive Mansfield brick styling we’ve come to know and… yeah.
Then Hi-Point unveiled their “name the nine” contest on June 12, where users could submit monikers for the new pistol. A couple days later, Hi-Point posted the most-submitted names, with a clear front runner: Yeet Cannon.
The internet was ablaze with legions of fans posting their desire to purchase dual yeet cannons upon their release. Then, on June 14, Hi-Point posted again, this time with a list of “finalists” for the pistol‘s name. Notably absent was the crowd favorite.
The comment section erupted. Hi-Point’s owner was purportedly responding to comments explaining that there was no way he would allow their newest product to be named something so dumb.
There was also a pretty profound misunderstanding of the definition of the term “yeet,” which I will not get into here. For most of the day, fans were 1-staring Hi-Point wherever they could. The internet wanted their yeet cannon.
H&K, Beretta and SCCY all got involved in a pretty stunning display, including H&K co-opting Hi-Point’s newfound fame and claiming the Mk23 is the “original” Yeet Cannon(?!?)
Hi-Point eventually backpedaled. Hard. They claimed that “it was all a trick!” and the final vote will be in a few weeks, with “the yeet cannon” vs. one of the incredibly lame names on their previous post.
Some are arguing that it was in fact all a 3D chess-level clever marketing trick. I’m not so sure. Having watched the comments sections since early in the ordeal, and reading the responses from Hi-Point, it seemed pretty clear the company originally had no interest in letting the name go forward. Possibly because the owner lived through the “street sweeper” debacle, the only time a firearm was added to the NFA more or less exclusively due to being named so egregiously.
NJ Sues Company for Trying to Sell NJ Residents Things They Want
Hi-Point wasn’t the only one struggling with the internet this week. New Jersey Attorney General Grewal recently revealed that the NJ government had been using “undercover state investigators online” (read: desk cops with Chromebooks) to try to purchase magazines that hold more than 10 rounds from out-of-state companies.
New Frontier Armory in Nevada, it seems, sent what they thought were customers the products they ordered. A shock! To think that a company operating within the law of their own jurisdiction might expect out-of-state customers to be informed about their own local laws.
Worry not, for New Jersey plans to sue every retailer in America to ensure they all enforce New Jersey’s laws for them.
NJ Joins CA in Push for Smart Guns
New Jersey first enacted a “smart gun” law in 2002, which required “smart guns” to be sold once such technology became viable. That has yet to happen, but a series of new bills signed into law by Governor Murphy will be requiring all licensed firearm dealers in the garden state to stock and advertise “smart guns,” a gun with an electronic interlock that only allows the licensed owner to fire it.
A host of sister bills passed at the same time, tightening the screws on gun and ammo purchasing, adding a whole host of misdemeanants to the category of people prohibited from owning a firearm in the state, among other things.
Sanctuary from 1639 in Washington State
We’ve talked about Washington’s Initiative 1639 a lot in recent weeks. There’s been as much tumult as you can imagine in enacting such a profound change of course in the state.
That said, city councilors in Yacolt, Washington unanimously declared the city a sanctuary from Initiative 1639 on Tuesday. This is the first local jurisdiction to establish sanctuary status from the bill, meaning local law enforcement will not provide any aid in enforcing the new law. It’s not a total fix, but it certainly communicates disapproval of the policy. Similar efforts are underway throughout the state.
New Zealand Wants a Discount on Guns They Banned
We’ve talked a lot about the Kiwis and their impressively unsuccessful firearm confiscation plan. Now New Zealand is offering a gun buyback, but residents are refusing. In droves.
Why? Well, a number of reasons, including that owners of now-illegal firearms feel massively ripped off by some of the “fair” prices being offered by the government. A New Zealand gun owners group announced this week it was exploring a plan to sue the government over its undervaluation of the newly banned arms.
Greg Abbott Vetos Airport Gun Ban
State Rep Rafael Anchia of Dallas put forth a bill purporting to give state officials the ability to carry their firearms in certain parts of the airport. So what’s the issue?
Well, according to Governor Greg Abbott, who vetoed the bill on Tuesday, “the Legislature may have intended simply to keep firearms off the tarmac, but the bill as drafted would newly prohibit carrying in any part of the airport terminal building, even ahead of the TSA inspection checkpoint.”
I’m glad someone is actually reading laws before they sign them. You can only glean so much from a bill’s title.