blibla@slrpnk.net to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 days agotime to starr shootin some AI execsslrpnk.netimagemessage-square80linkfedilinkarrow-up10arrow-down10
arrow-up10arrow-down1imagetime to starr shootin some AI execsslrpnk.netblibla@slrpnk.net to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 days agomessage-square80linkfedilink
minus-squareElDuderino@lemmus.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 day agoTechnically, they are not assault rifles as they cannot do selective fire or fully automatic fire. And most states where people actually live have plenty of restrictions.
minus-squareByteJunk@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·1 day agoTechnically. Plus couldn’t you just buy it off someone with literally none of those restrictions?
minus-squareElDuderino@lemmus.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 day agoNot in CA - you still need a federally licensed dealer to mediate the sale. Many other states have similar restrictions.
minus-squareDoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·1 day agoSCOTUS: “restrictions on weapons of war? not for long” They’re likely going to overturn the assault weapons ban that any state has had for the reasoning of the 2nd amendment
minus-squareElDuderino@lemmus.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 day agoThat’s what I hear. Private citizens shouldnt be banned from having arms that we let policemen use against civilians.
Technically, they are not assault rifles as they cannot do selective fire or fully automatic fire. And most states where people actually live have plenty of restrictions.
Technically. Plus couldn’t you just buy it off someone with literally none of those restrictions?
Not in CA - you still need a federally licensed dealer to mediate the sale. Many other states have similar restrictions.
SCOTUS: “restrictions on weapons of war? not for long”
They’re likely going to overturn the assault weapons ban that any state has had for the reasoning of the 2nd amendment
That’s what I hear. Private citizens shouldnt be banned from having arms that we let policemen use against civilians.