Phantom Tactical: Soldiers for the Second Amendment

With our 2A Member Perks program, we partner with local facilities that support your Second Amendment rights, while also offering you some great discounts. We’re excited to be partners with Phantom Tactical, a local gun shop that was created by veterans for the people.

Brimming with five-star ratings on their Facebook page, it’s clear that Phantom Tactical sees to it that when it comes to a customer’s experience, no stone is left unturned. Customers are their priority, and they make sure that every single one leaves with the ammunition needed to safely protect themselves and their family.

With your U.S. & Texas LawShield® membership, receive 10% off all self-defense ammunition and 10% off all holsters. Discount is valid in-store only, and you must show your LawShield Member Card. *Discount has no expiration date.

Veteran-Owned Business Serving Houston

Located in Webster, Texas, Phantom Tactical is a gun shop that prides themselves on being 100% veteran-owned and operated. And their main focus is on you, the customer.

Phantom Tactical is the brainchild of veterans. They wanted to create an environment for firearms that goes beyond the sale, but rather, the whole experience of owning a firearm. The name, Phantom Tactical was inspired by Operation Phantom Fury. Back in 2004, the original three owners of the store heroically fought in the battle of Fallujah—known to be one of the bloodiest battles of the Iraq war.

Their experience serving our nation is just one of the many reasons you can trust them with your firearm needs. Phantom Tactical General Manager, Jon Linhart, shared why it’s important for them to be part of your firearm experience. “It’s truly a passion of ours not just to sell you a gun, but to get you the tools and the training that you need to successfully defend yourself or your family in a life or death situation.”

Like us, they firmly believe in educating customers on how to safely use a firearm to defend yourself, if necessary. They do this by offering LTC classes on-site, twice a month. They also offer services such as scope mounting and optic zeroing—all done by veterans who have extensive knowledge and training. So, if you’re preparing for hunting season, stop by the store to ensure your next outing is successful.

For our out-of-state members, if you’re traveling to Texas, the Member Perk still applies to you. And while Phantom Tactical has no plans to open a second location in the future, they do have plans to build a 60,000-square foot, indoor shooting range near their current location.

What to Look For

Phantom Tactical prides itself on its veteran-friendly environment, although, the store is open to people from all walks of life. Whether you’re an experienced firearm user or novice, Phantom Tactical ensures your experience is the same. And with a plethora of opportunities for discounts on gear and on-site training, they’ll do their best to make you feel right at home.

  • 10% off all self-defense ammunition with U.S. & Texas LawShield member card.
  • 10% off all holsters with U.S. & Texas LawShield member card.
  • Buy, sell, and trade guns.
  • LTC permit classes, weapons-safety courses, gun cleaning, and basic firearms courses offered on sight.
  • Scope mounting services
  • Optic zeroing services
  • And much more!

Get Behind the Shield

Providing our member family with perks to some of your favorite shops, restaurants, and ranges is one of the many ways we say thank you for being part of the U.S. & Texas LawShield member family.

Be sure to take advantage of these perks and get a bigger bang for your buck. And as always, remember to stay connected, stay informed, and stay protected. Trust U.S. & Texas LawShield.

Defend Gun Rights in Florida’s Constitution by Speaking Up

Photo courtesy of Florida Constitution Revision Commission

Once every 20 years, Florida’s Constitution provides for the creation of a 37-member revision commission, called the Constitution Revision Commission, for the purpose of reviewing Florida’s Constitution and proposing changes for voter consideration. The Commission meets for approximately one year, traveling the State of Florida, identifing issues, performing research, and possibly recommending changes to the Constitution.

“Second Amendment supporters need to attend these hearings and speak up so that our rights to keep and bear arms are protected and even enhanced,” said U.S. Law Shield of Florida Independent Program Attorney James Phillips.

He said it’s likely that anti-gun groups will show up at these CRC hearings and demand that gun-control measures be added to our Constitution. “So gun owners should attend and speak up about keeping all gun-control measures out of Florida’s Constitution,” he added.

Click here to see an updated schedule of events. Hearings are already scheduled this week in Gainesville (April 26), Jacksonville (April 27), and on May 3 in Panama City.

Is Gun Ownership a Right? UCLA Law Prof Says 'Yes'


Is gun ownership a right for all Americans? Or just for a small militia? Eugene Volokh, Professor of Law at UCLA, explains what the Founding Fathers intended in this Prager University video. Video and transcript courtesy of Prager University.

And if you haven’t seen our Texas & U.S. Law Shield video about the history of the 2nd Amendment, click here to view it.

UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh:

Here’s what the Second Amendment says: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Now, it once seemed to me like that language only protected state militias and not individuals. Indeed, this is the view held by the four dissenting Supreme Court justices in the 2008 case of District of Columbia versus Heller, a landmark case dealing with gun ownership.

But the more research I did, the more I came to realize that my initial view was mistaken and that the Founders were, in fact, securing an individual right. The five justices who voted to affirm the right to own a gun in DC versus Heller had, indeed, made the correct decision.

Let’s look at the amendment one more time.

“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

We first need to focus on the phrase “the right of the people.” Note that the people are the only ones whose right is secured here, not the militia or a state government. This phrase “the right of the people” comes up a few times in the Constitution. For example, the First Amendment refers to “The right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government.” And the Fourth Amendment secures “The right of the people to be secure…against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

Why, then, if the authors of the Constitution felt so strongly about “the right of the people” to own guns, did they include language about “a well-regulated militia”?

These opening words of the amendment might be called a “justification clause.” Such clauses are used to help explain why a right is being secured. But it’s the operative clause that explains what right is being secured. In this case, the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

And what was the word ‘militia’ understood to mean at the time?

Well, the Militia Act of 1792 defined “militia” to mean all white males 18 to 45. Today, of course, “militia” would include women and people of all races, but it was clearly not a reference to a small, National Guard-type group.

And what about the part of the amendment that says a militia is necessary “to the security of a free State”? What, the opponents of personal gun ownership ask, does a personal right of gun ownership have to do with that?

Again, historical context is key. In the 1790s, the phrase “free State” wasn’t used to mean an individual state like New York or Rhode Island. Rather, it meant what we’d call today a “free country”—a nation free of despotism. A “free State” is what the Framers wanted America to be. They saw an armed citizenry as, in part, a hedge against tyranny. Citizens who own weapons can protect themselves, prevent tyrants from seizing power, and protect the nation from foreign enemies.

This does not mean, though, that this right is unlimited. Free speech, for example, has long been subject to some narrow and reasonable regulations. But severe restrictions on owning a gun, like severe restrictions on free speech, would violate the Second Amendment as the Founders understood it.

Supreme Court Nominee Gorsuch Backs Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms


Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch


Under questioning before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this week, Supreme Court nominee and Denver resident Judge Neil Gorsuch backed the District of Columbia v. Heller decision as the “law of the land” which must be upheld. His comments were in response to intense questioning from Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca).

His comment on the decision demonstrates his firm belief in the separation of powers: “It’s not a matter of agree or disagree, it’s a matter of upholding the law.”

“The Heller decision was a 5-4 opinion delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia in 2008,” said U.S. Law Shield of Colorado Independent Program Attorney Doug Richards. “If that case had been before the court this term, it may have been 4-4. This illustrates the importance of Judge Gorsuch’s confirmation – he will be the swing vote and help decide cases involving 2nd Amendment Rights for decades to come.”

Gorsuch would likely keep the margin in similar cases 5-4, many gun groups have said.

“U.S. Law Shield members, therefore, should contact their representatives in Washington to make sure Gorsuch receives their full support,” Richards said.


Sen. Ted Cruz Calls 4th Circuit Gun Decision 'Lawless'

During a conversation with Mark Levin at the recently concluded 2017 Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Maryland, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) blasted a February 4th Circuit Court decision upholding a Maryland “assault weapon” ban, saying the decision was “nuts.”

Speaking with Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin, the Texas senator said, “The Fourth Circuit used to be the most conservative court in the country. The Fourth Circuit now, they’ve invented this new test for the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment doesn’t protect a weapon if it would be useful in a military context.”

The senator noted the absurdity of such a test, saying, “This test isn’t just sort of questionable, it isn’t just a little bit out there. It is nuts! The Second Amendment was designed explicitly to protect weapons that would be useful in a military context.”

“You want to know the first gun control law in America?” Cruz asked the audience. “The first Congress passed a law mandating that all able-bodied men must own a musket.”

“That’s an individual mandate we could live with,” Levin said.

He added, “If we were living back in 1789, your musket would be really useful in a military conflict!”

Congress to Review SSA's Gun-Stripping Rule as Early as This Week

In a follow-up to our previous reporting here and here, Congress has agreed to review a final rule by the Social Security Administration under the Obama administration that would wrongly strip law-abiding Americans of their Second Amendment rights.

The proposal was first announced in summer of 2015. Congress is now going to review the Obama administration’s unconstitutional ban under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). CRA allows Congress to dispose of any actions an outgoing administration initiates in its last six months. This final rule falls under that time frame, and the review process is expected to move forward in the House and receive a vote as early as this week.

“Last year, the Social Security Administration finalized a proposed rule to ban certain recipients of SSI or disability insurance because of a listed mental health impairment, who also have been assigned a representative payee to manage their benefits because of the person’s mental condition,” said Gordon Cooper, an Independent Program Attorney at the Walker & Byington law firm in Houston. “This ill-conceived action stripped the right to keep and bear arms without due process from some of the most vulnerable Americans.”

Reps. Sam Johnson (R-TX) and Ralph Abraham (R-LA) lead this effort in the House.

Breitbart News reported that “Democrats cannot stop these reversals if Republicans stick together. Because the resolutions only require simple majorities to pass, they will probably sail through the House and then pass the Senate, where Democrats, the minority party, cannot mount a filibuster against them.”

“If you are a Member and have questions about this rule and how it might affect someone in your family, please give us a call at the non-emergency number (281) 668-9957, and our attorneys will explain your options,” Cooper said. “Or send us an email at If Congress acts and revokes the rule, however, then this will no longer be an issue.” — Texas & U.S. Law Shield Staff

Sexual Assault Survivor Advocates for the Second Amendment


Ten years ago, when Kimberly Corban was a 20-year-old student at the University of Northern Colorado, a man broke into her Greeley, Colo., apartment and sexually assaulted her for nearly two hours. Now, Corban has become an advocate for the Second Amendment. In The Daily Signal interview linked below, the mother of two talked about the importance of gun rights. Shared with permission of The Daily Signal.

Sexual Assault Survivor Advocates for the Second Amendment


Ten years ago, when Kimberly Corban was a 20-year-old student at the University of Northern Colorado, a man broke into her Greeley, Colo., apartment and sexually assaulted her for nearly two hours. Now, Corban has become an advocate for the Second Amendment. In The Daily Signal interview linked below, the mother of two talked about the importance of gun rights. Shared with permission of The Daily Signal.