From Leader of Radical Vegan, Trans Cult to Second Amendment Defender

There are some people you look at and think, “I hate that you’re on my side.”

This is true for people on every part of the political spectrum. These are usually the more extreme people out there, but often it’s not even a matter of political position versus one doing a terrible job of representing an ideology.

And then you have the people who, at least on the surface, seem to stand for everything you despise, but then make one stand that sounds like you uttered the words.

That’s what we’ve got here.

For those unfamiliar with a group of people–a cult, really–called “Zizians,” you’re in for a treat. They’re a radical cult driven by veganism, weird opinions about technology such as AI, and trans ideology. They’ve been linked to multiple homicides over the last couple of years, and now, the leader of this cult is trying to convince the court that the gun charges against him are unconstitutional.

Transgender. Vegan. AI-obsessed. And now… “gun nut?”

Alleged cult leader Jack “Ziz” LaSota — described by law enforcement as the central figure in the fringe “Zizian” movement — is advancing a sweeping Second Amendment argument that leans heavily on conservative, originalist jurisprudence.

The Zizians are a fringe, tech-centric extremist group built around apocalyptic beliefs about artificial intelligence while blending in strict veganism and radical gender identity practices.

LaSota is currently facing a federal felony charge in Maryland for possession of firearms and ammunition while a fugitive from justice.

…

When federal agents arrested LaSota in Maryland, they recovered a 9 mm pistol, a .50 caliber Lynx sniper rifle retailing for roughly $20,000, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition. Prosecutors contend LaSota was legally barred from possessing the weapons because of fugitive status.

LaSota’s attorney, Gary Proctor, argues the federal “fugitive in possession” statute is unconstitutional under the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

In Bruen, the court’s conservative majority held that modern gun regulations must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. The ruling significantly expanded the analytical framework for Second Amendment challenges and has since been used by criminal defendants across the country to contest federal firearms prohibitions.

Proctor is now attempting to apply that same reasoning to LaSota’s case.

“At Bruen’s first step, the Second Amendment’s ‘plain text’ entitles ‘the people’ to the right to keep and bear arms, and nothing in that text or the Supreme Court’s cases suggests that fugitives are not among ‘the people,’” Proctor wrote in a federal filing.

The argument rests on the claim that there is no historical tradition, at the time of the nation’s founding, of categorically disarming individuals based solely on nonviolent charges.

“The charges for which Ms. LaSota might be considered a ‘fugitive’ are nonviolent offenses, consisting largely of misdemeanors. No historical tradition supports disarming someone for nonviolent crimes,” Proctor argued.

First, let me say that I despise so much of what LaSota has been part of that I literally hate that this individual is making a pro-gun argument here. However, with that said, I don’t entirely disagree with the stand.

I don’t like that someone could be considered a fugitive and be deprived of their gun rights, when there’s little more due process than what’s required for an arrest warrant, which isn’t much at all. In fact, people could be in possession of a firearm as fugitives and not even know they’re fugitives, particularly if the charges are misdemeanors, as is alleged here.

On the flip side, Rahimi made it clear that a domestic violence restraining order was sufficient to make someone prohibited, and that due process isn’t dissimilar to an arrest warrant, really.

Plus, if a case can be made that those who knowingly run from prosecution are dangerous individuals, I suspect LaSota’s case may well fall apart.

And, honestly, I hate everything about this case because the Zizians are bat-guano crazy extremists who have allegedly killed numerous people, including at least one federal law enforcement officer. They think some monstrous AI called Basilisk is going to rise up and start punishing anyone who didn’t aid in its creation, for crying out loud. That’s not a real threat; it’s bad science fiction.

For anyone that nuts to be trying to use gun rights to get themselves out of trouble bothers me on a visceral level.

And I hate that I can’t just dismiss the arguments when the only grounds I have for doing so are that this is a terrible person from everything I can see.

LaSota was also found with drugs in the vehicle, and the attorneys are claiming that it was a violation of LaSota’s Fourth Amendment rights, so they want that evidence blocked. Hopefully, if nothing else, that’s what lands him in prison for years to come and the gun defense just kind of fizzles until we get someone a lot more sympathetic and a lot less inclined to think their fever dreams is a great basis for building a group.

Editor’s Note: President Trump and Republicans across the country are doing everything they can to protect our Second Amendment rights and right to self-defense.

Help us continue to report on their efforts and legislative successes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.