Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Steveesq t1_ixwpqus wrote

RI attorney here. As of the date... it isn't just fines... it's felonies. For EACH AND EVERY magazine over 10 rnds - 5yrs in prison, $5,000 fine. There is NO GRANDFATHER clause. Mere possession is a felony.

Yes there is a pending lawsuit... but it is essentially waiting on a similar case pending in the 9th federal circuit. The law in ri is unconstitutional on its face (7 clear violations), and is also in direct conflict with the US Supreme Court decision in "Bruen" which is the controlling standard.

From a legal standpoint, I would advise Not to turn anything in. The law is unconstitutional on its face, and any law in direct contradiction to the Constitution is null and void. This law will almost definitely be overturned as written, But the danger here is if you get caught with a magazine before it's overturned.

58

bigbadape t1_ixwvcp1 wrote

It’s a shame, I lost all mine in a boating accident recently.

35

anon45564556 t1_ixx1z7s wrote

Massachusetts has had a capacity ban for years and no one has successfully overturned that. So why would RI be different?

9

Steveesq t1_ixx2kw4 wrote

Simple... there is a new Supreme Court case from this summer that changes the standard. The California AWB (Assault Weapons Ban) is set to be decided within the next month or so... and it looks like it will be overturned.

The MA AWB is a carbon copy of CA. If the court rules the CA AWB is unconditional under this new standard... then ALL AWBs are by definition unconstitutional. I belive the MA ban is being challenged as well under this new standard but I'm not sure.

15

glennjersey t1_ixx7lb1 wrote

Small caveat.

The CA mag ban is under jurisdiction of the 9CA. A ruling there is not binding to anyone outside of that jurisdiction.

It would be great case law, but we'd need a victory in the 1CA to affect MA and RI.

3

glennjersey t1_ixx2dbt wrote

NYSRPA v. Bruen. Recent SCOTUS decision that not only got rid of the two step interest balancing judicial precedent, but also noted that the 2A is protected hlby historical analogs to the revolutionary period.

Show me a mag ban from pre civil war era?

The tl;dr is unless there were analogous gun laws on the books when the constitution was drafted/ratified, the gun law is unconstitutional.

That means no more AWBs or Mag bans in the near future, but the courts move at a snails pace.

9

pbNANDjelly t1_ixxnwvj wrote

You're a real lawyer giving out legal advice on the internet??

1

Steveesq t1_ixxq121 wrote

Actually... i am

9

pbNANDjelly t1_ixxqdax wrote

Alright, dope. I just kind of assumed a lawyer wouldn't advise strangers on the internet to take legal risks 🤔 What if this goes sideways for OP? Or someone reading?

Thanks for providing info on the subject

2

Steveesq t1_ixxrmjs wrote

It isn't really "advice"... it's my opinion. When someone pays my fee... then it's real advice.

This is opinionated information

14