Gun Owners of Arkansas

10/19/2026

As anticipated, when anti-gun lawmakers realize they may lose the fight to ban so-called “assault weapons,” they look for other ways to restrict our rights.
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee’s H.R. 127 proposal sought to impose licensing and registration requirements on fi****ms and am******on.
This is why Arkansas Issue 2 matters!
We can’t stop lawmakers from introducing anti gun legislation, but we can strengthen the constitutional protections available to challenge it in court.
Our current Arkansas Constitution protects the right to keep and bear arms for “their common defense.” Issue 2 would strengthen that protection by explicitly recognizing our right as natural, fundamental, and individual, declaring that it “shall not be infringed,” and protecting fi****ms, am******on, accessories, and components for lawful purposes.
Anti-gun lawmakers will keep looking for ways to restrict our rights. Arkansas needs stronger constitutional protections to fight those battles in court.
Don’t wait until our rights are under attack to strengthen their protection.

🇺🇸 VOTE YES ON ARKANSAS ISSUE 2! 🇺🇸

10/15/2026

LAWFUL PURPOSE

Under our current Arkansas Constitution, our right to keep and bear arms is protected by this language:
“The citizens of this State shall have the right to keep and bear arms, for their common defense.”

That’s the constitutional language we have to rely on when challenging gun control laws in court. Look at Washington, Oregon, Colorado, and other states to see how fi***rm restrictions can expand despite existing constitutional protections.
Now look at what Arkansas Issue 2 changes.
Issue 2 recognizes the right to keep and bear arms as a NATURAL, FUNDAMENTAL, AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHT THAT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. It also expressly protects the right for common defense, lawful hunting and recreational use, and any other lawful purpose.
Can lawmakers still pass anti-gun laws? YES.
But passing a law and having that law withstand a constitutional challenge are two different things.
Issue 2 would give Arkansas citizens stronger constitutional language to challenge restrictions that infringe upon their rights. It would also make clear that the right is not limited to hunting, recreation, or common defense alone.
What about the words “lawful purpose”?
It does not mean every law lawmakers pass automatically becomes constitutional. The constitutionality of a restriction can still be challenged in court. The words “any other lawful purpose” recognize that the right extends beyond the specific purposes listed in the amendment.
Will Issue 2 guarantee that every gun law gets struck down? No. But it gives citizens stronger constitutional grounds to fight restrictions that violate their rights.

Our current Constitution provides limited language to defend our right to keep and bear arms. Issue 2 provides more explicit protections and a stronger constitutional foundation for challenging government infringement.
Don't confuse the government's ability to pass a law with its authority to enforce a law that violates the Constitution.

VOTE YES ON ARKANSAS ISSUE 2! 🇺🇸

10/12/2026

Oral argument set for the 28th of this month.

In Anderson v. Raoul, the federal lawsuit challenging Illinois' flat-out ban on fi***rm suppressors (silencers), Judge David W. Dugan of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois dismissed the case on September 5, 2025, ruling that suppressors are not "arms" protected by the Second Amendment.

Current Status and Update

• Appeal: The plaintiffs (backed by the American Suppressor Association Foundation and Silencer Shop) appealed the dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
• Oral Arguments: Oral arguments are scheduled for October 28, 2026.
• Core Legal Dispute: The plaintiffs argue that suppressors are common hearing-safety and noise-reduction devices protected under the Second Amendment, while the State of Illinois maintains that suppressors do not constitute "arms" and can be outright prohibited as a Class 3 or Class 2 felony

10/12/2026

This is one reason why Issue 2 is vital.

Numerous changes to Massachusetts gun laws are linked together in this one measure, which was approved by the state Legislature in 2024. It includes penalties for so-called "ghost guns," allows school administrators or healthcare providers to ask a court to remove someone’s fi****ms under the state’s red flag law, expands the definition of a "machine gun," and requires the creation of a public dashboard for state fi***rm data. A yes vote would keep the law on the books and a no vote would repeal it.

With our population growing it will change Arkansas in the future.

10/12/2026

“SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” — THEN WHY ARE WE STILL ARGUING OVER HOW MUCH OF OUR RIGHT THE GOVERNMENT CAN TAKE AWAY?
We already have those words. Yet the fight over what they actually protect continues.
The problem isn't whether the words sound strong. The problem is how courts interpret and enforce them.
Issue 2 builds on our existing Constitution by explicitly defining the right as NATURAL, FUNDAMENTAL, AND INDIVIDUAL, while addressing restrictions involving am******on, fi***rm components, accessories.
The phrase “shall not be infringed” should mean that the government cannot burden, limit, or condition the exercise of a protected right through laws that undermine its core purpose. Yet courts continue to debate whether restrictions are permissible, how much regulation is acceptable, and which lawful arms or related items receive protection.
If “shall not be infringed” is all we will ever need, why not strengthen the constitutional language and give courts clearer direction?
A constitutional right should be more than powerful words on paper. It deserves meaningful protection in practice.

10/11/2026

Some people think the U.S. Constitution is enough. If that were true, why have Americans spent generations fighting in court to defend the rights it guarantees?

Having a right written in the Constitution doesn't automatically mean government will respect it. The wording matters. How courts interpret it matters. And the strength of the legal protection matters.

Arkansas has its own Constitution for a reason. We shouldn't settle for the bare minimum when we can strengthen the protections for our fundamental rights.

That's what Issue 2 is about. Strengthening Arkansas's Constitution so our right to keep and bear arms is more clearly recognized as a natural, fundamental, and individual right that shall not be infringed.

We shouldn't wait until our rights are threatened to strengthen our Constitution. Protecting our rights starts with strengthening the language that guarantees them.

10/11/2026

Why the Standard of Review Matters Under Issue 2

Many citizens are not aware of the different levels of Judical Scrutiny which is very important on how the courts will use which level, with the recent Bruen v New York and Heller v Washington DC, SCOTUS has changed those terms from a rational basis to a higher level. Issue 2 would also create a higher level within our Courts.

Under Arkansas’s current Constitution, courts may apply a deferential standard of review to certain challenges, giving the government considerable leeway to defend its laws.

Rational-basis review: The government generally needs a legitimate reason for a law and a rational connection between the law and that reason. It does not have to prove the law is the best solution.

Higher scrutiny: The government faces a more demanding legal test and must provide a stronger justification for restricting a protected right, depending on the standard applied.

What could Issue 2 change?

Issue 2 expressly identifies the right to keep and bear arms as a natural, fundamental, and individual right that shall not be infringed.

That language would strengthen arguments for greater judicial protection and make it harder for the government to justify certain fi***rm restrictions.

The bottom line: The issue isn't whether government has legitimate public safety concerns. It's whether those concerns are enough to justify restricting a constitutional right.

Issue 2 would give Arkansas courts stronger constitutional language to consider when deciding whether government restrictions violate your right to keep and bear arms and making it much harder to do so.

10/11/2026

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1CQyjsA4Kp/

Just because Congress passes a law does not mean it is constitutional. Today I filed a lawsuit against the DOJ asking a federal judge in the Northern District of Texas to decide whether Congress exceeded its authority in 1968 when it passed the Gun Control Act.

The Act requires my clients to obtain a DOJ license to make and sell silencers. The stated purpose of the license is to allow sales across state lines. My clients have no desire to sell across state lines; they want only to sell to Texans as Texas law allows.

Getting the license would force them to complete extensive paperwork, imposing an extreme burden on their small business. They believe the red tape would consume up to one-third of their time solely because they hold a license for interstate sales they do not make.

Our complaint alleges that, as applied to my clients, the Gun Control Act violates the Commerce Clause. Anyone who studies its original intent understands Congress lacks authority to regulate commerce wholly within a state.

Stay tuned.

10/11/2026

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19jB6Yp5dg/

Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway filed suit against the ATF, claiming federal registration rules on suppressors and short-barreled ri**es violate the Second Amendment.

10/10/2026

THIS IS ANOTHER REASON ARKANSAS ISSUE 2 MUST PASS!

The recent ATF position regarding enforcement of certain National Fi****ms Act (NFA) items is another reminder of why Arkansas needs strong constitutional protections for our Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
Federal policies, enforcement priorities, and interpretations can change. What one administration chooses to enforce today may be treated differently tomorrow. Arkansas gun owners should not have to depend solely on the changing positions of federal agencies to protect a fundamental right.
That is exactly why Arkansas Issue 2 matters.
Issue 2 strengthens our state Constitution by expressly protecting the right as natural, fundamental, and individual. It specifically protects not only fi****ms, but also am******on, fi***rm accessories, and fi***rm components. And it makes clear that this right shall not be infringed.
This is about more than today's headlines or one federal agency's position. It is about establishing stronger protections for Arkansas citizens, giving our rights a firmer foundation in our own state Constitution, and protecting future generations from government overreach.
We cannot control every decision made in Washington, but we can strengthen the protections written into our own state Constitution.
Gun Owners of Arkansas has worked for three years to bring this amendment forward because we recognize the weaknesses in our current constitutional language. Issue 2 is an opportunity to correct those weaknesses and establish stronger protections for the rights we hold dear.
Don't wait until those rights are threatened to decide they need protection.
Vote YES on Arkansas Issue 2 this November. Protect our rights, preserve our heritage, and leave future generations a stronger constitutional foundation.

Gun Owners of Arkansas, Fighting for your rights, today and for generations to come.