The Supreme Court on Monday turned away an appeal by a group of gun rights advocates seeking to overturn Maryland’s ban on assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines under the Second Amendment.
The decision, a major win for gun safety advocates, leaves in place a ruling by the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals which ruled that the state may constitutionally prohibit sale and possession of the weapons.
The state legislation, enacted in 2013 after the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting, specifically targets the AR-15 – the most popular rifle in America with 20-30 million in circulation. They are legal in 41 of the 50 states.
You must log in or register to comment.
Tf the point is? They gonna use another gun instead
So, let’s just do nothing about guns? Just give up and let public shootings happen as an unavoidable fact of life, but only for the U.S?
We are kind of past that point. In only two days we have seen what appears to be a Hamas terrorist attack at a pro Isael gathering and the murder of a prominent gay man. Republicans will say shit like ‘guns are a fact of life in the US’ and its absolutely true. We can see it in the fact that they called the cops requesting help and each time they where ignored and this shit happens regularly. No law will protect us from that only we can.
Turns out the people saying how we need guns to protect ourselves where the people we needed to protect ourselves from.
I used to think along the lines of the Churchill quote of “Americans can always be trusted to do the right thing, once all other possibilities have been exhausted.” Turns out that was giving us way too much credit.
Well, I don’t know what to tell you. Hell, not that long ago a deputy’s son shot up a school and everyday cops murder unarmed citizens. In the end I am pro gun control, but its going to take more then a law to solve this.
I am against guns, but I don’t believe the police brutality has to do with guns
Actually a bit disappointed in this. I mean, NOW of all times you think keeping “military grade” gear out of regular citizens hands is a good idea.
Well, yeah. NOW of all times is exactly when the fascists would want to disarm the populace.
I genuinely wonder if all the people I’ve had tell me Obama and Biden are going to ban all guns/they’re coming for our guns are going to have a moment of self reflection when the fascists in power come for their guns.
Or is it going to be a “only white people with no unnatural hair coloring and presenting as their birth cirtificate sex are allowed to have guns”
Take the guns first and due process later
This was 2018.
So on your question on if they will have a moment of self reflection, I’m going to go with a no.
So this just bans that “style” of rifle? Someone can just go buy some other semi-automatic rifle that doesn’t look as imposing or whatever but will still kill a person just as dead? I don’t really get what this accomplishes other than inconveniencing people who already own one of the guns this prohibits.
So this just bans that “style” of rifle? Someone can just go buy some other semi-automatic rifle that doesn’t look as imposing or whatever but will still kill a person just as dead?
According the language of the actual law the answer is either “no” or “not really, no”. The law calls out a couple dozen aspects of firearms that precludes most of the “style” concerns. The biggest one is a limit on magazines only containing a maximum 10 rounds. While, yes, 10 rounds can still do lots of damage, it requires more frequent reloading, more chances for error, greater amount of encumbrance of the shooter. Assuming a shooter was using a gun that complied with this law, it would allow more opportunities to intervene or for people to get away.
You’d think that if someone was about to slaughter as many people as possible they wouldn’t really be to worried about a 10-round mag law.
By that logic, why should anything be illegal?
That doesn’t follow logically at all unless you think a society with frequent mass murders is a foregone conclusion.
Well it doesn’t matter what you make illegal, because criminals will just get it anyway. That’s why every other country has the exact same gun death rate as the USA, even though guns are illegal in most of them, right?
I’m not saying don’t try to stop mass murders. I’m saying do it in a way that makes fucking sense. This part bans make no fucking sense, especially when they don’t grandfather in for existing owners. I wish we would put all the effort spent on supporting these piecemeal measures into pressuring legislators to provide access to a good education and medical / mental health services for everyone as I’m convinced lack of those things are the source of the violence, but all this stupid system can do is take from people and it bothers me to see people jump on that train so willingly when it happens.
Especially at a time where government agencies are committing acts of escalating terror against the population, like we’re seeing with ICE. It’s just so tone deaf.
You must be right since every other country who’s already solved this problem solved it in the way you’re saying doesn’t work.
You’ll never convince me that guns aren’t the problem, because places that don’t have guns don’t have the problem. The evidence is thoroughly and definitively not on your side.
So you are saying its easier to ensure everyone is happy nearly all the time than to pass gun regulation that minimizes the amount of guns in society? Tough sell don’t you think? Do you also think countries with lower gun crime are just happier in general? Do you think mental health isn’t an issue ib places like Australia?
A simple fact of life is that sometimes people get upset/sad/frustrated and then make mistakes. What tools are available at the time have a direct impact on how bad those mistakes are.
Americans are just like anyone else, with less guns we would still fight and argue but people wouldnt be put in a grave as often over it.
You’d think that if someone was about to slaughter as many people as possible they wouldn’t really be to worried about a 10-round mag law.
You’re missing the point of these laws entirely. No one is saying that passing a law like this is going to remove every possible avenue for someone to get the most destructive gun on the planet and do the most damage possible.
What these laws are intended to do is make it less likely someone will have access to the most destructive gun on the planet. If someone plans multiple years ahead, they can go to the far ends of the Earth to get the most destructive gun possible. However, if they got pissed off at their boss that morning and decide to commit this kind of crime they’ll only have wants available to that morning. If they were a legal gun owner when the day started, that means they’ll only have 10 round magazines at most. Even if they drive to the local store nearby, they’d only be able to buy more 10 round magazines.
Lets even say that higher capacity magazines are available in the next state over. That may mean hours of planning and travel just to get to the other state to get the high capacity magazines, then all the time it takes to get back home to commit their crime. That’s a lot of time for someone to consider what they’re doing, the impact it will have on others, and even their own lives.
Will some still do it with all of that planning and bother needed? Yes. Will everyone? Doubtful.
That seems like an awfully fringe and roundabout improvement for a law that ruins the fun for everyone else. But I guess this is the flip side of the same leadership that’s engineered a society in which so many people decide to be mass murderers in the first place.
That seems like an awfully fringe and roundabout improvement for a law that ruins the fun for everyone else.
Ruining the fun? That seems to be an incredibly weak argument for gun proliferation. I can see an argument for strong 2nd Amendment proponents as the Constitution grants rights and freedoms, and restrictions on those granted in the Constitution could be a pathway to a bad place. However, I can also see an argument that the evolution of firearms has outpaced our society’s safe use of modern firearms and that the freedom of victims of gun violence are also having their even stronger Constitutional rights restricted and spirit of our nation with the Declaration’s “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. In this conversation I’m not advocating a position either way, but I can see the valid arguments on both sides.
In neither one of those is “ruining” the fun" even a fraction of a thought to consider. You do you though.
Have a good night.
Ruining the fun? That seems to be an incredibly weak argument for gun proliferation.
Why, you have an issue with fun? You have an issue with a society where everyone can pursue their hobbies to the fullest extent, and find enjoyment in them? Do you not think it’s possible to provide responsible restrictions on firearms in a way that doesn’t prevent one from going out into the woods on a weekend with friends to merely enjoy nerding out on the intersection of machining and marksmanship? More importantly, do you not find it justified to argue for rights from the goal of having a good time? Fun isn’t covered in the constitution per se but I think this falls under the old “If I can’t dance, I don’t want to be a part of your revolution”.
Then do paintball.
Guns, particularly handguns and AR-15s are specifically designed to kill humans. Do you really need someone to walk you through why that’s different than sewing or riding bikes?
If you’re not even capable of understanding why your need to have instruments of death in order to have “fun” isn’t more important than other peoples’ lives and safety, then you have no place in modern society and should remove yourself and go live in the woods or something.
Here’s everything you need to know. CBS Sunday morning interviews a gun nut job. She states a demonstratively false statement about how many guns kill a people a year, and gets fucking zero push back. That’s how we got to where we are. It’s harder to get a driver’s license than it is to get a gun.
EDIT: As we all know “knives and blunt objects” are obviously used to kill more people than assault rifles.
Everyone acknowledges that the problem is mental health, everyone is convinced that solving guns is the answer.
You wanna know what I can make using styrofoam (or soap) and gasoline? Fucking napalm. You wanna know what will cause a lot more harm than a gunshot? Fucking napalm.
It must be the 90s again to see someone saying that styrofoam and gasoline makes napalm lol. That is not actual napalm. It could hurt people, but it’s more like being lit on fire in modern plastic clothes than it is napalm.
Having easy access to guns is just objectively stupid.
Dude it’s stuff that I can set on fire that will stick to you, and that’s not including all of the other things that can hurt you like cars that are infinitely easier to access and operate. People like you would have us ban everything for no other reason than you’re afraid.
I’m not afraid and don’t think they should be banned. I like going shooting in the woods for fun. Cars require registration and a license like guns should.
Easy access to guns is objectively stupid. Read what I say without implying things.
Napalm is not styrofoam mixed with gas, full stop.
Red iron oxide and aluminum flakes. Fiber optic drone for around 1-1.5k.
None of that is regulated and I can do far more damage with that than a gun. Give me enough time and I can do better because it’s already being done in other countries like Ukraine.
You wanna regulate red iron oxide and drones now that I’ve put the spectre of thermite drones into your mind? Oh, sorry — you’re too fixated on the not napalm to realize the point. My mistake.
Put the meth down.
Thermite is only dangerous in very specific situations. You aren’t some scary bad ass because you think you know how to make bombs. Bigger and better explosives are made with other things that get you put on a list for buying to much of.
Guns need to be regulated is such a broad statement. Its meant to allow dumb people to interpret it however they want. Easy access to guns is objectively stupid.
What makes you think I’d be using thermite as a bomb?
Ok, Mr. “I know what I’m doing and you don’t” - I’m not going to continue elaborating on how unregulated materials can easily be used in destructive ways. Apparently someone remotely causing a wildfire in a neighborhood just can’t compare to a crowd getting shot.
Beyond anything I’ve said, one thing is clear - you’re advocating for a fascist government continuing to seize individual firearms.
My opinion on gun control has changed over the years.
I used to be very anti gun. didn’t really see the point of regular people having them.
Today though, me giving up my guns would be like Ukraine giving up their nukes but smaller.
There’s no good reason to need a high powered semiautomatic rifle, anything you need can be done with a bolt action rifle.
Yeah, but what if TWO fascists attack you?
Shotgun shot to the legs.
Ok yeah but what about three fascists
funny seeing Authoritarians ITT and in cm0002’s crosspost.
I complete see you.
You’re a fucking idiot for celebrating this, if you are, under a fascist regime. You’re literally fucking brain mush.
And how exactly will an AR-15 help you against a fascistoid government?
Same way ak47s did for Afghanistan when they were being invaded
Through the acute, ballistic application of lead.
The government has much more affective atoms to use against us.
If we’re at that stage, I’m not sure I’d try fighting back.
Same way the IRA, the Vietnamese and the Afghans did.
Pew! Pew! Pew!
Haven’t you seen Rambo II? The AR-15 is how we won Vietnam.
Do you think a bunch of couch potatoes will stop fascism with AR-15s? They are the SAME people who VOTED for fascism! Buy a clue.
There’s only two kinds of American
-
Couch potatoes who won’t do anything, no matter what
-
Tankie extremists who nobody likes because they want to do too much
That’s why I’m putting all my money on the liberal vanguard I know I can trust: Cops.
The only way to stop fascism is to call the police and report it, while staring out your window and sneering.
-
Single issue ammosexual voters allowed all our other rights to be stripped, watered down, limited and degraded while they deified their gun fetish.
Leopards are indiscriminate.
