Yes, gun banners want to confiscate items currently owned legally

https://www.gopusa.com/rhode-island-ban-on-high-capacity-firearm-magazines-is-constitutional-judge/

how many times have we seen gun banners claim that no one is coming for "your guns". All they want is to ban future sales. But here a democrat legislature, and a democrat appointed judge have conspired to turn people into felons for merely owning normal capacity magazines

 

People won’t turn them in. Period

 

I wonder if anyone will get shot as a result-either a homeowner whose neighbor rats him out or some LEO who tries to take them. The supreme court has to get involved in this. Lots of the anti gun types pretend that it is OK to ban the future sales of such things(I Just bought two 24 round Glock Mags today at 30 bucks a piece)-things that many of us gun owners have no idea how many we own-but deny they support confiscating currently owned items and trying to pin felony convictions on someone for owning a 25 dollar item that hurts no one.

 

Everyone who supports red flag laws supports confiscating guns from the law abiding.

 

I know its hard to see right now. But this is actually a good thing. There is a case law you should learn called Caetano vs mass. Because its going to be a strong basis for appeal. The supreme court has already ruled that stun guns, which are in the hands of around 200,000 us Civilians are considered covered by the second amendment as Common use. Caetano vs mass express rejectes the states argument that Stun guns meet the definition of "dangerous and unusual" as only 200,000 are in civilian hands. Imagine making the case about the millions of "Large" Capacity 15-30 round magazines there around the country. This will likely get overturned.

 

Doesn’t make it constitutional

 

Pretty sure TD is familiar with Caetano v Massachusetts, and Maloney v Singas, too.

SCOTUS citing Bruen has already remanded Duncan v Bonta, sending California's magazine capacity limitation back for review. I'm sure TD is aware of that one, too.

 

Indeed I do and this law is both unconstitutional and dangerous

 

Red flag laws exist to allow the legal SWATing of gun owners. This is, in fact, their sole purpose.

 

Trump already confiscated / destroyed firearms so we know the government and the gun owners of America will cave to it.

 

which ones?

 

Trump made a rule that forced them to destroy or turn in the bump stock. A stock that under a Trump era rule made it a machine gun. This violated multiple amendments including the second and the 5th amendment (private property rights).

 

Well sure, theres clearly some deranged folks out there who fantasize about watching govt agents savage peaceful gun owners in their homes for the mortal sin of self defense. But their fantasy would require a far larger police force than they will ever be able to afford to create.

 

how many were actually turned in. you did see what happened
https://www.npr.org/2023/01/07/1147698112/bump-stocks-ban-struck-down-court

 

I seen what happened and it’s still not overturned. The number turned in doesn’t tell the full story because it also allowed for willful destruction.

 

it was certainly a disgusting move by Trump but after Vegas, if Hilary had been president, what do you think she would have done? and would you rather have Kavanaugh Gorsuch and Barrett on the Court or three Merrick Garlands?

 

Bump stocks are not firearms, and the 5th circuit overturned the ban.

 

Not according to the trump rule. He classified that stock as a machine gun and even if it’s not a firearm it’s still a firearm related confiscation or destruction order made by Trump that people in the gun community made excuses for and it repulses me

 

5th circuit dealt with this.
That is, because Trump said it does not mean anything.

 

It’s not dealt with yet. The federal government will appeal it

 

I'm -sure- the current USSC will side with the Government.

 

What guns are RI govt officials coming after? I read your link but didn't see anything mentioned about the guns they were coming after.
MA implemented a high capacity mag ban as well as an "assault" weapons ban in 1994. Both were grandfathered for those currently owned. Meaning those who owned high capacity mags and/or "assault" weapons were allowed to keep and use them. No govt official has come for anyone's gun in the 29 years since these silly bans.
For the record, I am AGAINST...AGAINST any of these types of bans.

 

the RI law makes it a felony to continue to possess say the 15 round magazine that was issued with the DCM carbine a citizen bought from the federal government. You apparently didn't read that part

 

I never claimed getting caught possessing a 15 round mag wasn’t a felony . You apparently are seeing things that aren’t being posted.
So again, what guns are RI govt officials coming after?

 

why are you essentially defending the actions of that idiot judge and the RI legislature. I haven't read the complete bill but anyone who says something as stupid as this (the judge did) should be removed from office I never said the RI government was coming for guns but magazines and I used that FACT to attack claims by gun banners that they don't support confiscating items already owned.

The judge also wrote that large-capacity magazines easily be used to convert handguns into semi-automatic weapons capable of rapid fire.