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.
Dude, read the article - this isn’t regulation, it’s a ban.
Holy shit I’ve been arguing with someone that claims to be able to build bombs but can’t manage to determine the content of an article that’s been paraphrased for them. If you’re basing whether or not guns should be regulated using yourself as a baseline, then god damnit – you got me, I have to agree with you.
Banning some guns is part of regulation, unless you don’t understand how regulation works.
My ‘wut’ is about you fundamentally misunderstanding how regulation works. I’m not allowed to drive a semi because I don’t have a class A license. Just like I shouldn’t own an AR-15 to control the local deer population.
Oh, I didn’t realize there was a license you could apply for that would give you the right to use assault weapons!
Please, produce it for me so I can get started. I will wait.
Edit: 😂😂 I don’t understand how bans work when you’ve conjured up a nonexistent license. Incredible. Wait wait wait, don’t tell me - it’s up to the govt you’ve deemed too inept to handle the licensing?
Keep talking past the point all you want, i guess. Doesn’t make anything you say more correct.
And you’re virtually indistinguishable from a fascist, so who cares what your point is?
Edit: also no, I did address your point. You seem to believe competent regulatory procedures will be developed by an incompetent govt, and fully support their seizure of firearms. Ding ding ding, fascism.
Fascism does sometimes include siezing of guns. But it’s not a required component. The talking point about guns saving us from Fascism is a sales pitch from the 50s and 60s. Guns don’t save anyone from Fascism. It does drive sales up though.
Every fascist dictatorship seizes guns. This is not a ‘some do, some don’t’ situation. They all do.
I also find it very amusing how hard you’ve argued against guns, without ever acknowledging that education and mental health are the real problems that need solutions. You sure were quick to downplay everything else I said, but you didn’t touch that one.
People like you are transparent. I’m done here, fuck you and the people that agree with you.
Gun people have sanitized history to support improved sales in the past. Its completely accepted these days that removing guns from a population under fascism is required.
Expanding the argument doesn’t disagree with my point, easy access to guns is stupid. Never disagreed with mental health or education. Stupid people tend to imagine who they are arguing against, which is why you imagined i disagreed with you on those points.
Did you seriously just try to suggest that fascist governments seizing guns is sanitized history?
Debatelords are disgusting people. Refer back to my last comment.