Just before Easter weekend, a 20-year-old student opened fire inside Florida State University’s student union, killing two and wounding six others before being shot and apprehended by law enforcement officers. Recent reports suggest that the suspect suffered from significant childhood trauma related to his parents’ divorce and custody battles, and many of his classmates had previously expressed concerns about his alarming rhetoric. Almost immediately after the shooting, some gun control activists sought to cast the blame on supposedly “lax” gun laws, and they called for a slew of new restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms. It doesn’t matter to them, of course, that Florida prohibits individuals under the age of 21 from purchasing firearms or that the gunman used a handgun belonging to his stepmom, a sheriff’s deputy. Nor does it seem to matter that Florida’s permitless public carry laws apply only to people 21 or older, and even then, the law still prohibits the carrying of firearms on college or university campuses. Apparently forgotten, too, is the fact that Florida already imposes waiting periods on gun purchases and has so-called red flag laws that allow local law enforcement to disarm allegedly dangerous persons via court orders. At the same time, many of these gun control advocates refuse to acknowledge the very real barriers their preferred restrictions would place on the right of peaceable citizens to keep and bear arms—a right that often makes all the difference in the world for victims of violent crime. Almost every major study has found that Americans use their firearms in self-defense between 500,000 and 3 million times annually, according to the most recent report on the subject by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2021, a professor at the Georgetown McDonough School of Business conducted the most comprehensive study ever on the issue, and concluded that roughly 1.6 million defensive gun uses occur in the United States every year. For this reason, The Daily Signal publishes a monthly article highlighting some of the previous month’s many news stories on defensive gun use that you may have missed—or that might not have made it to the national spotlight in the first place. (Read accounts from past months and years here.) The examples below represent only a small portion of the news stories on defensive gun use during crimes that we found in March. You may explore more by using The Heritage Foundation’s interactive Defensive Gun Use Database. March 2, Houston, Texas: Police say that three armed teens broke into the home of a well-known online influencer and demanded access to her cryptocurrency account at gunpoint—allegedly pistol-whipping her out of frustration. Eventually, the woman led the intruders toward her husband, who was armed and waiting in a different part of the house. The husband opened fire at the intruders as they approached, wounding one and sending them all fleeing. Police tracked down and apprehended the suspects within several days, and they are now each charged with aggravated kidnapping and aggravated robbery.  March 4, Lake City, Florida: A former MMA fighter broke into the home of a person who had an active restraining order against him and “rushed” toward a resident in a threatening manner. Someone inside the home fatally shot the man in self-defense. Several children and adults were home at the time, but none appears to have been injured.  March 9, Channelview, Texas: After weeks of escalation, a man with a history of stalking and making threats tried to break into his ex-girlfriend’s home while armed with a handgun. The woman’s current boyfriend—who also lived at the home—grabbed his own firearm and fatally shot the armed would-be intruder before he could harm anyone. March 10, Chesterfield County, Virginia: Police say that a woman shot and wounded her boyfriend in self-defense after he assaulted and strangled her during a domestic violence incident. The boyfriend was charged with strangulation and domestic assault. March 12, Reading, Pennsylvania: When a resident saw that a parked car was blocking his driveway, he approached the driver to complain. The driver and an acquaintance then got out of the car and confronted the resident “with their arms raised.” The driver and resident exchanged punches until the driver pulled a knife and stabbed the resident. At that point, the resident drew a handgun and shot his assailant in self-defense. The knife-wielding driver had been charged with aggravated assault. March 13, Seattle, Washington: A man was walking his dog when another dog grabbed his fury friend by the neck and refused to let go despite the man’s attempts to separate the two dogs. The man ultimately drew a handgun and fatally shot the aggressive dog in defense of his own pup before calling 911. March 19, Memphis, Tennessee: While waiting outside his girlfriend’s apartment complex, a man saw a would-be car thief enter his car, which he’d left running. The man chased the thief as he tried to drive away, so the thief shot at him. Fortunately, the man was armed and returned fire, striking the suspect several times and severely wounding him. March 22, Clovis, New Mexico: A shotgun-wielding homeowner successfully fended off a would-be intruder, shooting and wounding an 18-year-old who tried to break into the house in the middle of the night.   March 24, Hardeeville, South Carolina: Police say that an armed man tried unsuccessfully to carjack a food delivery driver before fleeing on foot and finding a new victim. Unfortunately for the would-be carjacker, his second victim was also armed (and, apparently, a better shot). The two exchanged gunfire, and the victim’s rounds struck the carjacker at least three times, killing him. It appears that neither the first nor the second victim was injured. March 25, Parker, Washington: A resident was getting into his vehicle when he saw another car pull up with two younger men inside, one of whom made threats about harming people inside the resident’s home. After the younger men drove away, the resident returned to his house, informed a second resident about the threats. This second resident armed himself with a .40-caliber handgun and went outside. He saw the same car turn around and speed back toward the house with its headlights turned off, then returned fire at the younger men in the car when they began shooting at the house. The two younger men—who police later determined were brothers—were injured during the shootout and fled, only to be taken into police custody when they sought medical treatment at a nearby hospital. March 28, Los Banos, California: Several armed intruders forced their way into a home in the middle of the night, only to be confronted by a homeowner with a legally possessed firearm. The homeowner engaged the suspects in a shootout, avoiding their bullets while striking and wounding three of them. Police ultimately arrested four of the five suspects believed to have been involved in the home invasion. Nobody seriously doubts that what happened at Florida State University is a tragedy, the recurrence of which we are all invested in preventing. But any solutions must not come at the cost of overly burdening the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens, especially when those burdens threaten to interfere with the ability of innocent victims to protect themselves and others. The post 11 Defensive Gun Use Cases in March That Kept Citizens from Becoming Victims appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Americans are broadly supportive of the Trump administration’s battle with Harvard University, and majorities even support the federal government taxing the endowments of wealthy universities. This is according to a poll conducted by RMG Research and released by the Napolitan Institute on Wednesday. The major exception to the broad-based support for restricting funds to Harvard and taxing their endowments was Americans with postgraduate degrees. ?By a 45% to 34% margin, voters believe that billion dollar endowment funds at schools like Harvard should be taxed.?Most (52%) postgrads disagree. Only 34% of them think the endowments should be taxed.?As on many issues, post grads are out of step with the rest of the… pic.twitter.com/3TIAD0qio1— Scott Rasmussen (@ScottWRasmussen) April 24, 2025 About 14% of Americans have postgraduate degrees and 24% have a bachelor’s degree or higher according to 2020 U.S. Census data. The poll found that most Americans are in favor of restricting federal student loan money to universities with large endowments. Respondents were more evenly divided on the issues of revoking Harvard’s tax-exempt status and providing federal research grants. The poll found that just 36% of voters think universities with endowments over a billion dollars should be allowed to rely on the federal student loan program to help students pay for tuition. Of the poll respondents with postgraduate degrees, 52% say the schools should be able to rely on federal student loans. Harvard currently has, according to some estimates, a $53.2 billion endowment. According to an investigative report covered by Fox News, the school in aggregate “has more than $7 million per undergraduate student.” The Napolitan Institute poll found that Americans are roughly evenly divided on whether universities with sizable endowments should receive research grants or other kinds of federal funding. Of those asked, 40% said “yes,” 39% “no.” Those with only bachelor’s degrees were also evenly divided on the question and those without higher degrees were against the funding by a 42% to 36% margin. Two-thirds of those with postgraduate degrees said these schools should receive funding. By a 45% to 34% margin, Americans support taxing schools with billion-dollar endowments. Fifty-one percent of those with bachelor’s degrees and 54% of those without were in favor of the tax while 52% of those with a postgraduate degree said the endowments shouldn’t be taxed. Then senator, now Vice President J.D. Vance proposed in 2023 an excise tax of up to 35% of “net investment income of private educational institutions whose assets had an aggregate fair market value of at least $10 billion in the preceding taxable year.” President Donald Trump has threatened Harvard University with pulling nearly $9 billion in federal grants over what the administration says are violations of civil rights law. On April 11, the Department of Education sent Harvard a letter “demanding the school agree to a host of reforms, including adjusting and enforcing disciplinary processes, improving screening of international students for ‘hostile’ views, and auditing ‘programs with egregious records of antisemitism.’” Harvard President Alan Garber responded by saying that the university would resist the executive branch’s demands. Already, $2.2 billion in federal grants and contracts have been frozen by the Trump administration. The president even took his threats a step further, saying that his administration would consider ending Harvard’s tax-exempt status if they did not comply with demands to end diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and create more protections for students facing threats of antisemitism. “Perhaps Harvard should lose its tax-exempt status and be taxed as a political entity if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting ‘Sickness?’ Remember, tax exempt status is totally contingent on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST!” Trump wrote on Truth Social in mid-April. The Napolitan poll found that Americans are evenly divided on the issue of revoking Harvard’s tax-exempt status, with 41% saying “yes” and 41% saying “no.” Again, those with postgraduate degrees were more strongly in favor of Harvard. They said it should not be revoked by a 53% to 39% margin. Those with a bachelor’s as opposed to no degree were more supportive of ending Harvard’s tax-exempt status, with 45% approving the change and 39% opposing it. The post Americans Support Pulling Funds from Harvard, Taxing Endowments According to Poll appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Among the unusual clashes during this week’s Supreme Court case on Maryland LGBTQ school books involved “Pride Puppy!” During the oral arguments Tuesday in the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor, Justice Neil Gorsuch pressed Alan Schoenfeld, the laywer representing Montgomery County Public Schools, about the book, and its apparent reference to leather and bondage.  “Pride Puppy!” is a children’s story book about a family dog getting lost in a Pride parade. The book was used in the school district’s pre-kindergarten curriculum. The oral arguments involved at least five LGBTQ-themed childrens books that spanned curriculum of pre-K through the sixth grade. Listen to this insanity ? The Left is pushing radical gender ideology on kids in pre-k. A “Pride Puppy” book? This isn’t education—it’s indoctrination. To top it off, parents are being silenced by a no opt-out policy? This is a moral crisis & it’s time we fight back. https://t.co/UUM1ZmwM3I— Janae Stracke (@JanaeStracke) April 23, 2025 “And they’re being used in English language instruction at age three?” Gorsuch asked the school district’s lawyer.  “‘Pride Puppy!’ was the book that was used for the pre-kindergarten curriculum. That’s no longer in the curriculum,” Schoenfeld told the justice.   Gorsuch followed, “That’s the one where they’re supposed to look for the leather and things–and bondage–things like that.”  Schoenfeld replied, “It’s not bondage. It’s a woman in leather.” Gorsuch asked, “Sex worker?” “No. That’s not correct. No,” Schoenfeld. Gorsuch followed, “Gosh, I read it … drag queen?” Schoenfeld said “one of the words is drag queen.” The case involved a group of Maryland parents who sued to opt their children out of the instruction. The book was a rhyming alphabet book that allows readers to find items starting with each letter of the alphabet during the search for the dog while offering “a joyful glimpse of a Pride parade and the vibrant community that celebrates this day each year.” The post ‘Pride Puppy!’ Reference to Leather, Bondage Central in SCOTUS Arguments appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Usha Vance, the wife of Vice President JD Vance, appears to be making quite an impression during the couple’s visit this week to India, the original home of her parents. Despite her usually being a quiet presence at public events, the spotlight is now on Usha Vance as a cultural connector between New Delhi and Washington. Usha Vance told NDTV, an Indian media outlet, that the trip was of great importance to her, as the daughter of Indian immigrants. “My children have never been to India, which is a terrible oversight, but also just the circumstances of my husband’s campaigns,” she said. “Just allowing them to see all the things that they’ve heard about … and, of course, seeing sights like the Taj Mahal and meeting the [Indian] prime minister, those were very special.” JD Vance later joked of his wife during a speech on Indian-American relations, “She’s a bit of a celebrity, it turns out, in India. I think, more so than her husband.” Vice President JD Vance and wife Usha arrive in New Delhi, India, on Monday. (Kenny Holston/AFP via Getty Images) The joke was reminiscent of President John F. Kennedy’s remarks during his 1961 state visit to France with the Francophone first lady Jacqueline Kennedy, who was admired by Parisian crowds and newspapers. “I do not think it altogether inappropriate to introduce myself to this audience: I am the man who accompanied Jacqueline the Kennedy to Paris,” the then-president quipped during his visit. But the vice president did not travel to India merely to tell jokes. Vance announced during his visit that the United States had come to an agreement on terms of reference with India for trade negotiations, and applauded India’s government for its openness to cooperation. He also made oblique criticisms of other foreign partners. . @JDVance calling out China during India speech: “Our administration seeks trade partners on the basis of fairness and of shared national interests. We want to build relationships with our foreign partners who respect their workers, who don't suppress their wages to boost… pic.twitter.com/MGublDYHnt— Jack Poso ?? (@JackPosobiec) April 22, 2025 “Our administration seeks trade partners on the basis of fairness and of shared national interests. We want to build relationships with our foreign partners who respect their workers, who don’t suppress their wages to boost exports, but respect the value of their labor,” he said. Meanwhile, India’s relationship with neighboring Pakistan has also become increasingly contentious. On Tuesday, at least 26 tourists were killed by gunmen in an Indian-controlled area of Kashmir, a territory which both nations have wrestled over for decades. Vance extended his and the first lady’s sympathies to India. “Usha and I extend our condolences to the victims of the devastating terrorist attack in Pahalgam, India,” he wrote on X. “Over the past few days, we have been overcome with the beauty of this country and its people. Our thoughts and prayers are with them as they mourn this horrific attack.” Usha and I extend our condolences to the victims of the devastating terrorist attack in Pahalgam, India. Over the past few days, we have been overcome with the beauty of this country and its people. Our thoughts and prayers are with them as they mourn this horrific attack. https://t.co/cUAyMXje5A— JD Vance (@JDVance) April 22, 2025 India will likely be a major focus of the administration going forward, as it seeks to decrease trade reliance on China and shift more of its military and diplomatic resources toward protecting interests in Asia and the Pacific.  As such, Usha Vance’s role as a cultural connector between New Delhi and Washington might prove invaluable going forward. The post Usha Vance Making Her Mark in India appeared first on The Daily Signal.

President Donald Trump will sign a presidential memorandum Thursday launching an investigation into ActBlue for potentially illegal methods of fundraising for Democrats, The Daily Signal has learned. The memo directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate and take appropriate action concerning allegations regarding the use of online fundraising platforms to make “straw” or “dummy” contributions and to make foreign contributions to U.S. political candidates and committees. ActBlue is currently under congressional investigation for alleged laundering of foreign money.  Federal Election Commission records show that in recent elections, some elderly Americans made thousands of small donations to Democrat fundraising political committees through ActBlue, The Daily Signal previously reported. Individuals may have made numerous donations through ActBlue without their consent or knowledge that their names, addresses, and money were being used for these donations, Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., co-chair of the Election Integrity Caucus, told The Daily Signal.  The presidential memorandum notes that a congressional investigation revealed significant fraud schemes using ActBlue and, over a 30-day period during the 2024 election cycle, hundreds of ActBlue donations from foreign IP addresses using prepaid cards, despite it being illegal for foreign nationals to contribute to U.S. elections. ActBlue came under fire on Oct. 29 because of its donor-verification policies. In a letter that day to ActBlue, House Administration Committee Chairman Brian Steil, R-Wis., said foreign actors from Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and China could use the platform to launder illicit money for use in U.S. political campaigns.  The Democratic fundraising platform admitted in 2023 to Steil that it didn’t require contributors to use a card verification value, or CVV, to donate on its website with a credit card. Those security codes are meant to ensure that the person making a purchase physically possesses the credit card.  The memo instructs Bondi to report the results of the investigation to Trump through the Counsel to the President.  ActBlue may have raked in millions through fraudulent donations, according to the testimonies of elderly Americans who said federal election records do not reflect their giving, The Daily Signal has reported. Eighteen registered Democrats in Connecticut, all over the age of 70, appear to have donated $1.9 million to Democratic causes, including ActBlue, through hundreds of thousands of small donations from 2016 to 2024, according to a review of Federal Election Commission filings by Dominic Rapini, cybersecurity company CEO and a former Connecticut Republican candidate for office.  Curious about the donation patterns, Rapini tracked down some of the Connecticut residents and asked them if they really did make thousands of small donations, sometimes multiple in a day, through ActBlue. Several of the supposed donors told Rapini they did not make any of the reported donations, nor did they know anything about how their names were being used, Rapini told The Daily Signal. ActBlue did not immediately respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment about the forthcoming investigation. ActBlue CEO and President Regina Wallace-Jones sent an email to Democrats on Wednesday warning about rumors of the executive order. “The current strategy of distraction and exhaustion is effective. We see this across the country and are not immune to this ourselves,” her email said, according to Punchbowl News. “The flow-on effect from the initial innuendo of the EO caused many in the ecosystem anxiety and distress.” The post Trump to Investigate Democrat Fundraising Platform Under Scrutiny for Alleged Money Laundering appeared first on The Daily Signal.