Davey Defense LLC

Category: 2A News

  • Assault Rifle vs. Common Semi-Automatic: A Clear Explanation

    Assault Rifle vs. Common Semi-Automatic: A Clear Explanation

    Assault Rifle vs. Common Semi-Automatic: A Clear Explanation

    In recent years, firearm terminology has become increasingly muddled, often intentionally. Words like “assault rifle” are used loosely to describe firearms that do not meet the technical or legal definition of the term. Precision matters, especially when laws, prosecutions, and public policy are involved. What follows is a clear explanation of what an assault rifle actually is, how it differs from a common semi-automatic firearm, and why that distinction matters.

    1) Quick Definitions

    Assault rifle (technical term): A select-fire shoulder-fired rifle using an intermediate-power cartridge and a detachable magazine. Select-fire means the ability to choose between semi-automatic (one round per trigger press) and burst or automatic (multiple rounds per press).

    Semi-automatic (mechanical term): Fires one round per trigger press, automatically cycles, and loads the next round. It will not fire again until the trigger is released and pressed again. This applies to rifles, handguns, and shotguns.

    Bottom line: “Assault rifle” is a select-fire military classification. “Semi-automatic” describes an action type used across many civilian firearms.

    2) Core Difference, The Fire-Control System

    • Assault rifle (select-fire): Has semi-auto and burst or auto modes. More than one round per trigger press is legally a machine gun under U.S. federal law.
    • Common semi-auto: No burst or auto. Always one round per trigger press, regardless of looks.

    3) Cartridges, “Intermediate” vs. Others

    • Assault rifles: Intermediate cartridges (for example, 5.56×45 NATO, 7.62×39) balancing recoil and range for military use.
    • Semi-autos: Any caliber. .22 LR plinkers, 9mm pistols, .308 hunting rifles, 12 gauge shotguns, and more. “Semi-auto” does not mean a specific caliber.

    4) Why People Get Confused, “Assault Weapon” as a Legal Term

    “Assault rifle” is a technical term (select-fire, intermediate cartridge, detachable magazine).

    “Assault weapon” is a legal and political term in some jurisdictions that restricts certain semi-automatic firearms based on features (pistol grips, adjustable stocks, flash hiders, barrel shrouds, threaded muzzles, and similar items). Those features do not change the rate of fire. They are ergonomics and accessories.

    Bottom line: A typical civilian AR-15 is not an “assault rifle” because it is semi-auto only. Whether it is an “assault weapon” depends on specific local or state law. That is a legal classification, not a mechanical one.

    5) Examples

    Assault rifles (select-fire, military): StG-44. AK-47 or AK-74 in select-fire configurations. M16 or M4 in military burst or auto configurations.

    Common civilian semi-autos:

    • Rifles: Ruger 10/22 (.22 LR). AR-15 pattern (semi-auto only). Mini-14 (5.56). Many semi-auto hunting rifles.
    • Handguns: Glock, SIG, S&W M&P, and similar platforms (most modern service pistols are semi-auto).
    • Shotguns: Semi-autos from Beretta, Benelli, Mossberg, Remington for sport, hunting, and defense.

    6) Rate of Fire vs. Appearance

    • Rate of fire is dictated by the fire-control system, not cosmetic features.
    • Adjustable stocks, pistol grips, rails, optics, lights, slings, or a flash hider do not make a firearm automatic.

    7) Operating Systems (High Level)

    • Gas-operated: The barrel taps gas to drive a piston or carrier (common on rifles).
    • Blowback or delayed blowback: Pressure drives the bolt or slide, with delay systems used for higher-pressure rounds (common on many pistols and .22 rifles).

    These describe how it cycles, not whether it is semi-auto or automatic.

    8) U.S. Legal Context (High Level, Not Legal Advice)

    • Under federal law, if a firearm fires more than one round per single function of the trigger, it is a machine gun.
    • Select-fire assault rifles fall under the National Firearms Act (NFA) and related statutes.
    • Civilian possession of newly manufactured machine guns has been federally restricted since 1986. Pre-1986 transferable guns are limited, regulated, and expensive.
    • Semi-autos are generally Title I firearms federally, but state and local laws vary, including “assault weapon” feature lists in some states.

    Always verify current federal, state, and local laws before purchase, transport, or modification.

    9) Quick FAQ

    Is an AR-15 an assault rifle?
    No. Typical civilian AR-15s are semi-auto only.

    Do features like pistol grips or flash hiders make a gun “assault”?
    No. They are features and ergonomics. They do not change the fire mode.

    Are semi-auto handguns “assault weapons”?
    Generally no, but terminology depends on jurisdiction. “Assault weapon” is legal language, not mechanical.

    What makes something a machine gun?
    Firing more than one round per single trigger function, including burst modes.

    Takeaway

    An assault rifle is a select-fire military weapon. A common semi-automatic firearm is not. This is not a semantic debate, it is a factual boundary. When that boundary is crossed by politicians or media figures, it is done intentionally to mislead. Clarity is the antidote, and accuracy is the standard that exposes manipulation every time.

    Call to Action

    This is not about liking a particular firearm. It is about refusing to let false language dictate public policy. Assault rifle and semi-automatic are not interchangeable terms, and pretending they are is how people are misled, intentionally or otherwise.

    As gun owners, we do not get to opt out of this responsibility. We have no choice but to correct misuse every time it appears. Silence is permission. Accuracy is resistance.

    As an instructor, I consider this part of the mandate. As a gun owner, it is only fair to insist on correct terminology being used, even if you do not own one of these common, everyday semi-automatic rifles yourself.

    If you believe rights should be defended with facts instead of slogans, stand with me and insist on correctness.

    Note: This post is for general information only and is not legal advice. Laws and definitions can change, and details vary by jurisdiction. For questions about your specific situation, consult a qualified attorney.

  • Minnesota Cities Are Quietly Trying To Pass Illegal Gun Ordinances

    Minnesota Cities Are Quietly Trying To Pass Illegal Gun Ordinances

    From the Instructor’s Chair

    Cities across Minnesota have started to take quiet steps toward regulating firearms at the local level. Some call it safety. Some call it community protection. On paper, these proposals look tidy. They sound good in a room full of people who have never handled a firearm, never studied the law, and never stood next to a nervous student who is trying to understand what real safety feels like. But tidy ideas on paper do not always survive contact with real life.

    Minnesota already solved this problem decades ago. Our state put all firearm regulation under one authority, the State of Minnesota. The purpose was simple. No resident should have to follow a different set of rules every time they cross a city line. No police department should have to enforce many local variations of the same subject. State preemption exists to keep citizens safe through clarity, not confusion. It exists because safety works only when people understand the rules well enough to follow them.

    When a city creates its own firearms ordinance, it is not only violating state law. It is creating a patchwork that puts law abiding citizens at risk of breaking rules they never knew existed. None of this helps public safety. None of it prevents crime. What it does is send a message that appearance matters more than results.

    The wider issue is simpler. Cities are writing these ordinances without talking to the people who actually understand firearms. Instructors. Trainers. Range officers. Law enforcement. The men and women who stand beside nervous beginners, who have to explain the difference between fear and respect, who have watched panic melt away the moment a student finally understands how a safety mechanism works. These are the voices that never get invited to the table. Instead, cities create rules that look good from a podium but fail in the moments that matter.

    I have taught students from every background. Nurses. Teachers. Construction workers. Retirees who inherited an old pistol and simply want to unload it safely. Young adults who are not gun owners and do not plan to be. People who come into my range trembling because the only thing they know about firearms is what they have seen on television or social media. They arrive with fear. They leave with respect, clarity, and confidence.

    That transformation does not come from legislation. It comes from education.

    A classroom allows a person to ask questions without being judged. A range allows a person to learn what safety feels like in their own hands. They learn how a firearm functions. How ammunition behaves. How to recognize a safe condition and how to avoid an unsafe one. Those skills cannot be legislated. They can only be taught.

    A city imposed rule does not stop a violent offender. It does not prevent a theft, a robbery, or an assault. It does not change criminal behavior. What it does change is the behavior of the people who were already following the law. The man or woman who was trying to do everything right now has to guess whether something that is legal under state law has suddenly become illegal inside one city block. That is not safety. That is instability. It creates uncertainty where clarity is required.

    There is a better way forward. Every city that wants to improve public safety can do it without violating state law. Hold an open forum with certified instructors. Invite law enforcement to explain how the law actually works. Offer community education nights where residents can learn safe handling practices. Provide real information instead of symbolic rules. If cities want to make their communities safer, they must replace fear with understanding.

    Education costs little. It saves time. It saves mistakes. It builds calm instead of chaos. It strengthens neighborhoods instead of dividing them. People make better decisions when they are informed. That is true in every discipline. Firearm safety is no different.

    If Minnesota is going to have an honest conversation about safety, then cities must respect the law as written. Preemption is not a loophole. It is a safeguard. It ensures that every citizen has one clear set of rules to follow, no matter where they live or work. That consistency is what keeps people safe, because it removes confusion and fear from the equation.

    Real safety will never come from sudden ordinances that appear without expert input. It comes from teaching. It comes from clarity. It comes from men and women willing to sit down with their neighbors and help them understand something they have never learned before.

    Education is how we build responsible communities.
    Legislation is not a substitute for understanding.
    If we want safety, then we must start with knowledge.

    [signature]

  • Cut Through the Spin

    Cut Through the Spin: A 3-Question Fact-Check

    Use this anytime you see a stat in the news or on social. It works for firearms, crime, health—anything.

    1. What’s actually included in that number?

      • Are they counting all categories together (suicide + homicide + accidents + police)?
      • Is it per year, per 100,000 people, or a lifetime risk?
      • Does “homicide” include justified self-defense or only criminal murders?

    2. Where did the number come from?

      • Primary sources (CDC, FBI/UCR/NIBRS, DOJ) are the baseline.
      • If the claim can’t point to a primary source, treat it as opinion until verified.

    3. What’s missing from the comparison?

      • Are they mixing categories (e.g., “gun deaths” that include suicides vs. “homicides” from other causes)?
      • Is a single city being compared to the entire nation?
      • Are other relevant categories (knives, blunt objects, drowning, vehicles, medical errors) being left out?

    Quick Pocket Version

    • Inside the box? (What’s included/excluded?)
    • Source of truth? (CDC/FBI/DOJ or just a headline?)
    • Missing context? (Fair apples-to-apples?)
    How to sanity-check a stat in under 5 minutes
    1. Identify the exact terms used (e.g., “gun deaths,” “firearm homicides”).
    2. Search the primary table (CDC WONDER or FBI UCR/NIBRS) for the same term and year.
    3. Compare the raw figure to the claim. If it doesn’t match, note what’s different (definitions, categories, time frame).

    Instructor’s note: Facts live in the source tables. Framing lives in headlines. Teach yourself—and your students—to tell the difference.

    [signature]

  • Standing Firm – The Second Amendment Belongs to Everyone

    Standing Firm – The Second Amendment Belongs to Everyone

    By John Davey – no spin, no sugarcoating.

    St. Paul’s talk about flipping on “local gun restrictions” the second state preemption lifts is exactly the kind of overreach the Constitution forbids. The right to keep and bear arms is not granted by government – it is recognized and protected by the Constitution, and it shall not be infringed. Politicians don’t get to decide when, where, or how peaceable citizens may exercise a fundamental right.

    Equal rights mean exactly that

    The Second Amendment doesn’t care about your skin color, creed, religion, gender, or who you love. Black, white, brown, Asian. Gay, straight, trans. Male, female. Every peaceable person holds the same natural right to keep and bear arms for self-defense and to resist tyranny. Chip away at that right for one group – you’ve chipped it away for all.

    What this means for our community

    Local bans on commonly owned firearms, parts, or accessories are unconstitutional, unworkable, and unfair to the very people who follow the law. These measures don’t touch criminals – they burden responsible citizens. We won’t pretend otherwise.

    Our lane at Davey Defense

    We train shooters to be safe, skillful, and responsible. We also make sure our students understand their rights – what they are, why they matter, and how to exercise them lawfully. Stay alert. Know your rights. Don’t let unconstitutional overreach convince you otherwise.

    Signed,
    John Davey – Owner / Lead Instructor
    Davey Defense LLC

    Published: September 4, 2025

  • A Victory for Gun Owners in Minnesota

    A Victory for Gun Owners in Minnesota

    A Victory for Gun Owners in Minnesota

    In a major win for the Second Amendment and responsible gun owners across the state, the Minnesota Supreme Court has officially ruled that privately made firearms do not need serial numbers under state law — unless federal law requires one.

    The case, State v. Logan Vagle, challenged an aggressive legal tactic used by prosecutors to charge citizens with felonies for possessing homemade firearms without serial numbers — even when those firearms were perfectly legal under federal law.

    That strategy just got shut down.

    ⚖️ What the Court Said

    “Minnesota has not adopted its own independent firearm serialization law… our laws do not require that privately made firearms be serialized.”

    Let’s be clear — this ruling clarifies the law and slams the door on years of overreach by prosecutors, the state AG, and anti-gun legal clinics who pushed a false narrative.

    If you build a firearm for personal use, and there’s no federal law requiring a serial number, you’re not in violation of Minnesota law.

    🔍 What This Means for You

    • If you’ve built a firearm at home (like an 80% lower), this case confirms your rights.
    • Charges filed against people for unserialized, homemade firearms may now be subject to dismissal or appeal.
    • Law-abiding gun owners in Minnesota now have strong legal footing to stand on — and one less thing to worry about.

    📎 Read the Full Ruling

    You can read the entire opinion here:
    👉 MN Supreme Court Opinion – State v. Vagle (PDF)

    💬 Final Thoughts from Davey Defense

    For years, Minnesota gun owners have dealt with confusion and fear over home-built firearms — largely thanks to bad interpretations of the law. This ruling restores clarity, confidence, and constitutional common sense.

    Stay trained. Stay ready.
    – Davey Defense

  • Understanding Minnesota’s Firearm Carry Laws for 18–20-Year-Olds

    Understanding Minnesota’s Firearm Carry Laws for 18–20-Year-Olds

    Updated: June 2025

    Author: Davey Defense

    What Changed in Minnesota?

    Due to a federal court ruling in 2023 (Worth v. Harrington), Minnesota was forced to stop enforcing its ban on issuing permits to carry to adults aged 18 to 20. This ruling aligned with the Second Amendment and declared that a complete ban on young adults carrying firearms in public was unconstitutional.

    The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) responded by updating permit training and issuing guidance for sheriffs and instructors statewide. As of now:

    • Adults age 18–20 can apply for a Minnesota Permit to Carry.
    • The same training and qualification requirements apply.
    • Sheriffs must accept and process these applications like any other.

    BCA Guidance and Official Policy

    While Minnesota law has not yet been formally rewritten by the legislature, the BCA has issued instructions to local permit offices making clear that age-based restrictions must no longer be enforced as a matter of constitutional compliance.

    This change is not a loophole — it’s the result of a federal court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment, and it carries full legal authority.

    Important Notes for 18–20-Year-Old Applicants

    • You must still complete a certified Minnesota Permit to Carry training course.
    • Your application must be submitted to the sheriff in the county where you reside.
    • If any sheriff refuses your application based solely on age, you have grounds to challenge that denial.

    💬 Final Thoughts

    Young adults in Minnesota now have a recognized constitutional right to carry — just like older adults. As always, responsible firearm ownership and training are key.

    Questions? Contact Davey Defense for certified carry permit training and legal updates.

    Sources: Federal Court Decision in Worth v. Harrington (2023), MN BCA Firearms Division, June 2025

  • Minnesota Gun Storage Law Faces Sheriff Opposition

    Minnesota Sheriffs Push Back on Proposed State Gun Storage Law

    Date: June 2025

    Several county sheriffs across Greater Minnesota are publicly opposing a proposed mandatory firearm storage law expected to be reintroduced in the 2026 legislative session. While the bill stalled earlier this year, it’s gaining traction again with support from metro-area DFL lawmakers.

    🔒 What the Proposed Law Would Do

    • Require all firearms to be stored locked and unloaded when not in use.
    • Make violations a gross misdemeanor if a child gains access or the gun is used in a crime.
    • Backed by supporters as a way to reduce accidental shootings and teen suicides.

    🚔 Sheriffs Respond

    Sheriffs from multiple counties, including Meeker County (Sheriff Brian Cruze) and Clay County (Sheriff Mark Empting), voiced strong objections during a June 8 press roundtable hosted by the Minnesota Sheriffs’ Association in Alexandria.

    “We will not support laws that punish rural families who store their guns in a way that makes sense for them.”

    They argue that the law:

    • Threatens the right to armed self-defense inside the home.
    • Is unenforceable without infringing on personal privacy.
    • Criminalizes responsible gun owners instead of targeting criminals.

    🏛️ Political Implications

    This bill is shaping up to be a major issue heading into the 2026 state elections, potentially dividing urban legislators and rural law enforcement. Supporters say it mirrors gun storage laws in places like California and Oregon — though similar laws have faced legal challenges in federal courts.

    Source: Minnesota Sheriffs’ Association, June 2025

  • Public Data Request: MN Permit to Carry Fee & Discount Information

    As part of Davey Defense’s commitment to public education and transparency, we’ve reached out to all 87 Minnesota county sheriff departments requesting updated Permit to Carry fee information — including whether they offer discounts for veterans or first responders.

    Below is the full message sent to each department:



    Subject: Permit to Carry Fees – Veterans/First Responder Discount Review

    Dear Sheriff [Last Name] or Administrative Staff,

    My name is John Davey, and I represent Davey Defense LLC, a certified Minnesota firearms training organization serving students across the state. As part of our commitment to public education and civic transparency, we have compiled and published current Permit to Carry fee information for all 87 Minnesota counties — including whether discounts are offered to veterans and first responders.

    You may view the compiled listing here:
    👉 View County Fee Data Table

    We extend our sincere appreciation to the many county offices that responded professionally and courteously during this effort — and to those that offer discounted fees as a tangible show of support for veterans and first responders. These policies not only reduce financial barriers, but also send a strong message of gratitude to individuals who have dedicated themselves to the greater good of our communities.

    To help ensure this public resource remains accurate and up to date, we kindly ask departments to confirm or provide the following:

    • The best contact email for your department regarding permit-related inquiries
    • The URL for your official sheriff’s or permit department page
    • A direct link to the section of your site that outlines Permit to Carry information and associated fees

    We respectfully encourage counties that do not currently offer veteran or first responder discounts to consider doing so. As you are aware, under MN Statute § 624.714, Subd. 3 , counties have the authority to set Permit to Carry fees up to a maximum of $100. Many counties have used this flexibility to recognize those who have served in military or emergency roles.

    Thank you for your service and ongoing commitment to the safety and well-being of your community. Please don’t hesitate to reach out if clarification or updates are needed.

    John Davey
    Owner, Davey Defense LLC
    📧 [email protected]
    📱 507-276-8484
    🌐 https://dev.daveydefense.com

    A digital version of my business card was included with each correspondence for reference

    We will continue to update the database as new responses are received. For questions, corrections, or to submit updated information, please contact us via the email listed above or the site’s contact page.

    Last updated: June 8, 2025

    Related Resources:

  • Minnesota firearms law updates for permit holders

    Minnesota firearms law updates for permit holders

    Important Minnesota firearms law updates for permit holders

    [dd_byline]

    As part of my responsibility to students, I want to highlight Minnesota firearms law changes that directly affect everyday gun owners and permit holders. This is not political commentary. This is practical guidance so you can avoid serious legal trouble after class.

    Laws change. Ignorance is not a defense. Staying informed is part of being a responsible permit holder.

    0. Red flag law (Extreme Risk Protection Orders), effective January 1, 2024

    Minnesota’s Extreme Risk Protection Order law took effect on January 1, 2024 and remains in effect today.

    This law allows law enforcement and certain family or household members to petition a court for an order that temporarily prohibits a person from purchasing or possessing firearms during a crisis period. If granted, the court can require surrender of firearms for the duration of the order.

    Practical takeaway for students: this is a court order process. If an ERPO applies to you, it is enforceable. This is not advisory language, and it is not optional.

    Minnesota DPS overview of ERPOs
    https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/bca/bca-divisions/administrative/Documents/ERPO-fact-sheet.pdf

    1. Straw purchases are now a felony

    Buying a firearm for someone who is prohibited from possessing one has always been illegal. What changed is how the state proves it.

    Under current Minnesota law, prosecutors no longer have to prove that you knew the person was prohibited. They only need to show that a reasonable person should have known.

    This is a major shift.

    What this means in plain language

    • If the firearm is not for you, do not buy it.
    • If someone gives you money and tells you what to buy, do not do it.
    • If someone cannot pass a background check and asks for help, walk away.
    • “I did not ask” or “I was just helping” is no longer a defense.

    This applies even if the person is a friend, partner, or family member.

    Minnesota Statute 624.713, Prohibited persons, transfers, and possession
    https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/624.713

    2. Binary trigger ban status update

    Minnesota passed a law banning binary triggers effective January 1, 2025. That law is currently not enforceable due to a court ruling.

    The law was struck down not on Second Amendment grounds, but because of how it was passed. The court ruled that placing a firearms ban inside a large omnibus bill violated the Minnesota Constitution’s single subject requirement.

    Current status

    • Enforcement is blocked by a permanent injunction.
    • Possession is not enforceable at this time.
    • The Minnesota Attorney General has appealed the ruling.
    • The issue is not settled and could return in a corrected form.

    Do not assume this issue is permanently resolved.

    Minnesota Statute 609.67, Dangerous weapons and trigger activator definitions
    https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.67/pdf

    Court ruling coverage for context
    https://minnesotareformer.com/2025/08/18/judge-strikes-down-minnesotas-binary-trigger-ban-suggests-invalidating-2024-omnibus-bill/

    3. Permit to Carry eligibility for 18 to 20 year olds, effective 2025

    As of April 21, 2025, Minnesota can no longer enforce the prior age restriction that prevented 18 to 20 year olds from obtaining a Permit to Carry.

    The current BCA approved directive is to process qualified 18 to 20 year old applicants the same as any other applicant. This applies to training, application, and issuance.

    Applicants must still meet all other statutory requirements. This change only affects age eligibility.

    Local sheriff offices control processing timelines and administrative procedures.

    4. Permit to Purchase vs Permit to Carry, what is actually required

    A Permit to Carry is not required to purchase a handgun in Minnesota.

    What is required for many handgun purchases and transfers is either:

    • A Permit to Purchase, or
    • A Permit to Carry, since a carry permit also serves as a purchase permit.

    This distinction matters, especially for first time gun owners and private party transfers.

    Minnesota BCA firearms permit information
    https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/bca/bca-divisions/administrative/Pages/firearms.aspx

    5. Cannabis use and Permit to Carry application language

    Minnesota law now explicitly states that a sheriff may not deny a Permit to Carry solely because an applicant is enrolled in the medical cannabis registry or because a person 21 or older lawfully uses adult use cannabis products.

    This language was added to clarify one specific reason that cannot be used as the sole basis for denial.

    Important clarification for students:

    • This does not override federal law.
    • This does not permit carrying while impaired.
    • This does not remove other statutory disqualifiers.

    Minnesota Statute 624.714, Permit to Carry eligibility language
    https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/624.714

    Instructor guidance

    Your permit does not protect you from bad decisions. Good intentions do not override statutory language. “If I had known” does not matter when the standard is “should have known.”

    If there is hesitation, the answer is no.

    If you have questions about how a specific situation applies to you, consult a qualified firearms attorney. Do not rely on social media posts, group pages, or secondhand advice.

    Responsible gun ownership includes understanding the law.