this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2023
149 points (98.7% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7209 readers
321 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This court case isn't about automatic firearms it's about semiautomatic firearms that exhibit listed features.

This particular rulling also is only about if the law should be enforced while a the trial regarding it's constitutionality ensues.

[–] BaroqueInMind@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Then the headline is wrong because semi-auto firearms are not federally defined as assault weapons.

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They're operating off of the CA definition in the headline.

To the best of my knowledge the only federal definition of the phrase 'assault weapon' came from the 1994 ban which ceased in 2004. And that targeted semiautomatic guns too as it was based off of California's.

[–] BaroqueInMind@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Thank you for the correction. I am dumb

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No problem, we all have our moments.

[–] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

They just like fucking with definitions.