Rhode Island: Providence Passes Resolution Banning Semi-Automatic Guns

[Cavalier Knight]

On Thursday night, the Providence City Council passed a resolution banning all semi-automatic firearms in the city. This resolution passed with 8 votes, 6 opposed and 1 abstention. This sweeping gun ban proclamation is an all-out assault on the Second Amendment rights of Rhode Islanders.

ARTICLE LINK

 

[unclenunzie]

Not quite. It is a resolution urging the state assembly to re-introduce a bill to ban semi-autos.

Correction: To reintroduce a bill to remove state preemption of firearms law, and urges support of a ban on semi-autos.

http://council.providenceri.com/efile/138

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText12/senatetext12/s2573.pdf

 

[bikerdoc]

Pandering local pols of despicable character try to enhance their pathetic ambitions.

 

[Sam1911]

Well, which is it? The NRA-ILA link simply says what mrreynolds said, word-for-word. I don't know RI law, and whether or not the City Council has anything like that kind of power, but I'd like to see a bit more info to know whether this is a resolution to press the state legislature to act, or if it is a ban on ownership that is enforceable.

Somebody provide a cite?

 

[JohnBT]

www2.turnto10.com/news/2013/jan/04/providence-council-passes-gun-ban-resolution-ar-1299924/

I'll save you the trouble of watching the video. It's a resolution. It has to go before the state assembly. They're hoping to get something passed by 2014, etc.

Actually, watching the video is entertaining if you enjoy hearing a seemingly educated person state that single shot rifles and shotguns won't be affected and they're suitable for home defense.

John

 

[unclenunzie]

correction with links added to post #2.

 

[Sam1911]

Oooooh, nice! So they're vying to kill state preemption? Oh that's lovely. Somehow I think the legislature will decline to acquiesce with their suggestion.

 

[Rob G]

Oooooh, nice! So they're vying to kill state preemption? Oh that's lovely. Somehow I think the legislature will decline to acquiesce with their suggestion.

Agreed Sam.

If there's one thing you can count on in politics it's that your average politician would never voluntarily relinquish any power that they hold. The state legislature will keep state preemption in effect just because it gives them more authority. This resolution is DOA at the state level.

 

[Sam1911]

...DOA at the state level ...

... but the good folks on the city council can tell their concerned constituents they tried to "do something." Too bad the nasty meanies who represent the rest of the state's citizens wouldn't let them.

I believe that's what we call playing to the crowd.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Better than the Oak Harbor, Washington City Council who all but one member, on December 18, 2012 , acted against the advice of the city attorney and chief of police and voted "no" to amend municipal code to remove an illegal ban against carrying firearms in city parks and marina. Remember Seattle, when the Washington State Court struck down their ban in city parks?

I am currently working on filing a criminal complaint against the members of the Oak Harbor City Council that voted to continue to violate state law and their own municipal code and continue to restrict the rights of the public to carry firearms, protected by our state preemption statute.

Their reason.... "we don't feel comfortable with the state law". One council member even admitted, on video, that he KNEW their code was "not consistent" with state law and Federal law, but he would not amend the code to come be in compliance.

 

[unclenunzie]

I just don't understand how that municipal code could be enforced from day one. Wouldn't the state Attorney General be required to order all LEOs statewide to adhere to state law?

 

[k_dawg]

Just some local bigots tired of waiting for some new Jim Crow II laws. Be glad that they took their hoods off.