this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2024
367 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4534 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The Virginia House of Delegates approved an assault weapons ban on a party line vote Friday.

Fairfax County Democratic Del. Dan Helmer’s bill would end the sale and transfer of assault firearms manufactured after July 1, 2024. It also prohibits the sale of certain large capacity magazines.

“This bill would stop the sale of weapons similar to those I and many of the other veterans carried in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Helmer said.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] -4 points 9 months ago

I was kind of hoping the rampant gun nuttery of Reddit would be one of the things that didn’t migrate over here. But, no such luck. So long, Lemmy. It’s been real.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 9 months ago (4 children)

What are the odds a court deems this unconstitutional?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

That's a word they'd use but the actual reasons would not be mentioned as mentioning them would be damaging to the collective American psyche.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

I'd argue that you could ban anything that you don't have to manually pack gunpowder into.

That's what was available when the constitution was penned.

You don't even need to ban the guns. Just ban bullets.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

A potential loophole: many rifle owners save money by pressing their own cartridges. The tools required are a bit pricey but not out of reach for the average person. You'd have to use some careful wording to ban home made bullets but not muzzleloaders.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago

That's a bad precedent to set. There are certainly reasons why this can be upheld, but saying that anything new is by default banned unless explicitly allowed is the opposite of what it states in the constitution.

That would allow for decisions like the freedom of speech doesn't exist on the internet because the internet didn't exist when the constitution was penned.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

that question depends on when glenn youngkin is up for re-election

[–] [email protected] -3 points 9 months ago

Only if the court is part of a well regulated militia

load more comments
view more: next ›