Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Indy_420 t1_j6u2x9n wrote

Its crazy how 2 months ago 3 of those gun laws didnt exist.

38

kyle_spectrum t1_j6u8jo8 wrote

Yeah crazy how we cant have "large" magazines but an off duty cop can shoot at teenagers during road rage and be found not guilty.

63

pushad t1_j6uc30o wrote

Lol are you refrrring to the cop in the white truck and the kids at I think a pizza shop? Can’t believe he didn’t get charged

21

kyle_spectrum t1_j6ucg9s wrote

Yeah but even our national guard here in Rhode island can get "large magazines" the way I see it if we can't have 30 round mags shouldn't either because why do they need more than 10 if they aren't facing threats of large magazines. Unless there are still those magazines used by criminals in which case proves the laws don't work.

13

pushad t1_j6udc4h wrote

All gun laws are infringements.

6

kyle_spectrum t1_j6udp1p wrote

I thibk people forget that 1. Gun rights are rights not privileges 2. The actual reason for the 2nd amendment which is defense of an enemy foreign or domestic. And 3 that police has no duty to protect citizens according to the Supreme court.

10

rick_n_snorty t1_j6utq4v wrote

It’s public knowledge how nuclear fission works. Getting the resources to do so is a bit tougher. But go ahead and go try to build a nuclear missile.

>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

Your back yard and drinking buddies don’t count as a well regulated militia… they tried that in Oregon.

States absolutely have the right to make laws that contradict federal laws. I can go to two public stores and buy a schedule 1 drug that is federally on the same level as heroin, and I can do it legally 5 minutes from my house. Oklahoma made it illegal to have an abortion before you can even know your pregnant before Rowe v wade was overturned.

Guns are fine, you’re a fucking idiot for thinking it’s a great idea for the government to let billionaires have nukes for shits n giggles because you’re scared you’ll need to take on the us government with your Glock and semi auto ar.

State judges can totally challenge or go against federal laws, then it moves up the court system. Why are you citing an amendment (literally designed to be amended) without having a basic understanding of how state and federal laws work?

−7

weednpornnpolitics t1_j6vjbb2 wrote

Can you post a technique vid to youtube on the mental gymnastics u use? Shits impressive. Tyrrany could mean the govt too genius...muskets were used to kill deer sure but we killed a lot of fucking english with them. Any fudd that argues civilian arms are just for sport needs to read a history book. You need to read several.

3

Indy_420 t1_j6vcibs wrote

guess you never heard of the constitution. super seeds all state laws.

2

rick_n_snorty t1_j6vgkki wrote

Super seeds? Are those what they’re growing down the street from me and the federal government is doing nothing about it?

Any state can ban any type of firearm, it doesn’t matter if there’s an amendment about it or not. If you think otherwise, go buy a fully automatic m16 in RI and we’ll see how that plays out.

Laws change over time, the right to bear arms to fight a tyrannical government was a tad bit different back then. You’re saying musk, , North Korea, the Chinese, and saudis should be able to buy 100 acres in Nebraska, and start building thermonuclear weapons in the middle of the country and that’s totally fine because in America everyone has the god given right to bear arms? Bit different than the musket on musket warfare the amendment was made for, no?

5

Indy_420 t1_j6vzmve wrote

you can own an automatic rifle with a tax stamp. you know nothing.

−2

rick_n_snorty t1_j6w29ie wrote

So if there are no gun restrictions at all in the us what’s your issue?

5

rick_n_snorty t1_j6w25xg wrote

>§ 11-47-8. License or permit required for carrying pistol — Other weapons prohibited.

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to possess a bump-fire device, binary trigger, trigger crank, or any other device that when attached to a semi-automatic weapon allows full-automatic fire. Individuals who possess these items shall have ninety (90) days from the enactment of this section to either sell, destroy, or otherwise remove these items from the state of Rhode Island. Every person violating the provisions of this section shall, upon conviction, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten (10) years, or by a fine up to ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or both, and, except for a first conviction under this section, shall not be afforded the provisions of suspension or deferment of sentence, nor a probation.

Mmkay

3

rick_n_snorty t1_j6w2qky wrote

Just fucking say you like guns and wanna shoot ‘em, that’s a totally valid reason to like em. The whole “there should be no limits to people arming themselves, chemical weapons are totally fine. If musk straps a nuke to his rocket, that’s totally cool”

The entire idea of “any weapons laws are an infringement on my god given rights” is just fucking absurd and clearly not how the law was intended. We didn’t have chemical weapons in 1776.

3

emaildylan99 t1_j6wkqyh wrote

You can’t get a tax stamp in RI… for example, we’re all screwed here when that pistol brace rule goes into effect. No way for us to register like in many other states.

3

rick_n_snorty t1_j6vi38z wrote

If the fbi found your you were stockpiling Sarin gas, you’d be arrested for plotting a terror attack. You absolutely do not have the indiscriminate right to bear any armament I’m the US. And yes state laws can absolutely restrict banning any types of weapon.

Source: nyc hun laws, RI gun laws, California hun laws.

3

Finnbalt t1_j6vmn8y wrote

You just made fun of the bloke's spelling mistake, now you're talking about Huns? Is Attila going to come back from the dead and raze D.C. to the ground if access to firearms and firearm accessories aren't restricted?

Do NYC and California have some sort of racist laws preventing miscegenation between normal people and Huns?

3

StreetStatistician t1_j6yf2ug wrote

Wait until I give the mongols AR15s and they hear about this steppe tribe discrimination.

1

rick_n_snorty t1_j6vnty4 wrote

Got me, I fat thumbed it. I at least made a joke out of the typo, kept it on topic and had a solid argument though….

0

orm518 t1_j6upv8w wrote

He got charged, but he got a not guilty verdict after trial.

8

the_falconator t1_j6vjw34 wrote

He did get charged, he just went to trial and wasn't convicted. Didn't help that the victim wasn't exactly sympathetic, jury essentially said "we don't care that he was it the wrong that kid deserved to get shot"

2

Space_faces t1_j6xy06w wrote

Daniel Dolan? The guy who shoots people for no reason? That Daniel Dolan? Who dives drunk before shooting people? I'm making him very Google-able.

2

kyle_spectrum t1_j6u8pkz wrote

Also on the whole ghost gun thing, let's say it wasn't a landlord but an actual intruder, would they still charge them for possession even if it was a valid self defense case?

5

thehillshaveI t1_j6uyg3z wrote

they would. there's basically no way you're skating on tbe gun charge no matter how legitimate whatever else you did was.

edited to add: if the facts as presented are true it was still an intruder, even if she owned the place. kicking in the door armed with goons isn't her right even if the person in there wasnt the legal tenant.

8

weednpornnpolitics t1_j6vjmqa wrote

Eyyupp. Just like this new pistol brace thing where we in ri cant have NFA items...the atf's free amnesty tax stamp means nothing here. You'll see those cases getting prosecuted in the future too. Re the ghost gun thing here tho, clearly Mr. Watson opted to be judged by twelve instead of carried by six. Prohibition DOES NOT WORK. Of anything. Ever.

7

sbaz86 t1_j71dsfx wrote

Well, doing time is better than being buried I guess.

1

degggendorf t1_j6u6igf wrote

Too bad they weren't enforced sooner or a life may have been saved

−21

StreetStatistician t1_j6u7yul wrote

So the guy would have been defenseless against an armed group of vigilantes at best trying to throw him out into the street in winter.

20

degggendorf t1_j6u8n2y wrote

I guess it wasn't clear...I also think that laws regarding evictions, threatening with a deadly weapon, etc. ought to be enforced too.

−9

StreetStatistician t1_j6uci0i wrote

The problem is that enforcement of gun laws by both practice and design exists to enable vigilantes and punish "undesirables" who are often the people who actually need guns to defend themselves like this man.

Like why aren't any of the vigilantes being charged but the one guy who fought for his life is?

7

degggendorf t1_j6uf2yf wrote

>Like why aren't any of the vigilantes being charged but the one guy who fought for his life is?

Well, because one is dead and the others are being pursued as we speak. I hope they're found and charged too, for sure.

2

weednpornnpolitics t1_j6vju6l wrote

Oh, i see, so the evections should be enforced by guys with guns. Against people who no longer have guns. Seems like the guns are kinda important and everybody should have them

3

kyle_spectrum t1_j6u8eov wrote

Lol what you want to do no knock raids on people who bought magazines in the past? You want another Brenna Taylor incident? I doubt the guy shot more than 10 times lol. Also they just throw charges to see what sticks. You're allowed less than 16 inch barrel if it's on a pistol.

10

emaildylan99 t1_j6un9d5 wrote

Interested in the 16 inch barrel charge as well. Wonder if it was actually a stock or they are trying to make the charge stick on a pistol brace.

4

degggendorf t1_j6u8xkq wrote

I mean, obviously not. Are those really the only two options you see, either murder civilians, or ignore laws?

−9

kyle_spectrum t1_j6u95oa wrote

So then how do you enforce these laws? You can make as many unconstitutional laws as you like but if you can't enforce them then isn't it just for show? Kinda like the straw laws lol

0

degggendorf t1_j6u9dx8 wrote

> So then how do you enforce these laws?

I don't, because I'm not in law enforcement

> You can make as many unconstitutional laws as you like

No I can't, I'm also not in the legislature anymore

−5