this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2025
503 points (98.6% liked)

News

29908 readers
3385 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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 are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] pahlimur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

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?

[–] pahlimur@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Keep talking past the point all you want, i guess. Doesn't make anything you say more correct.

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] pahlimur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] pahlimur@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] pahlimur@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I keep wondering when you will ask what i mean by easy access to guns. Dumb people always take several steps back into their beliefs before fighting back.

Yes. Fascists don't need to seize guns and have a complicated relationship with them. Nazi Germany is the easiest example. Gun ownership for true Germans and completely disallowed for 'the other'. It does vary though, which is part of the difficulty in defining fascism and identifying fascists.

I'd argue you are more of a debate lord. Telling me you won't respond, then making more false stupid statements.

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Why would I ask that?

In order to purchase an AR-15 in Maryland you need to be 21 years of age and have an HQL. HQL requires firearms safety training and ends up taking about 30 days outside of that. After that, assuming I haven't missed anything, you need to go through another background check that takes about two weeks.

For a gun that needs to be broken apart to reload it.

You have claimed they should be banned. You do understand that every time you've called me dumb whilst these things have been simultaneously true counts as projection, right?

You do not understand what you're talking about, so I'll repeat myself with a little added bonus. Fuck fascists, fuck you, and fuck the people who agree with you.

Here's a little quote from Hitler, since you seem to love him so much. Let's see how you interpret words from the man himself.

“And so, I established in 1919 a programme and tendency that was a conscious slap in the face of the democratic-pacifist world (…) [We knew] it might take five or ten or twenty years, yet gradually an authoritarian state arose within the democratic state, and a nucleus of fanatical devotion and ruthless determination formed in a wretched world that lacked basic convictions.

Only one danger could have jeopardised this development – if our adversaries had understood its principle, established a clear understanding of our ideas, and not offered any resistance. Or, alternatively, if they had from the first day annihilated with the utmost brutality the nucleus of our new movement.

Neither was done. The times were such that our adversaries were no longer capable of accomplishing our annihilation, nor did they have the nerve. Arguably, they furthermore lacked the understanding to assume a wholly appropriate attitude. Instead, they began to tyrannise our young movement by bourgeois means, and, by doing so, they assisted the process of natural selection in a very fortunate manner. From there on, it was only a question of time until the leadership of the nation would fall to our hardened human material. (…)

The more our adversaries believe they can obstruct our development by employing a degree of terror that is characteristic of their nature, the more they encourage it. Nietzsche said that a blow which does not kill a strong man only makes him stronger, and his words are confirmed a thousand times. Every blow strengthens our defiance, every persecution reinforces our single-minded determination, and the elements that do fall are good riddance to the movement.”