The Supreme Court just proved that its gun rulings have been a disasterjeffw@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world – 288 points – 3 months agomotherjones.com45Post a CommentPreviewYou are viewing a single commentView all commentsConfused what the complaint is here, they ruled that you can't be a criminal and own a firearm. We have a bigger issue that abusers are rarely forced to give up their firearms. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3120094/Did you read the article? It’s mostly about how Rahimi relates to Bruen and why that makes it so problematic. Nowhere do they condemn the outcomeSo it's more bullshit take on the Bruen ruling that anti-2a groups are still salty from? This has nothing to do with the Rahimi ruling at all...14 more...14 more...14 more...
Confused what the complaint is here, they ruled that you can't be a criminal and own a firearm. We have a bigger issue that abusers are rarely forced to give up their firearms. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3120094/Did you read the article? It’s mostly about how Rahimi relates to Bruen and why that makes it so problematic. Nowhere do they condemn the outcomeSo it's more bullshit take on the Bruen ruling that anti-2a groups are still salty from? This has nothing to do with the Rahimi ruling at all...14 more...14 more...14 more...
Did you read the article? It’s mostly about how Rahimi relates to Bruen and why that makes it so problematic. Nowhere do they condemn the outcomeSo it's more bullshit take on the Bruen ruling that anti-2a groups are still salty from? This has nothing to do with the Rahimi ruling at all...14 more...14 more...
So it's more bullshit take on the Bruen ruling that anti-2a groups are still salty from? This has nothing to do with the Rahimi ruling at all...14 more...
Confused what the complaint is here, they ruled that you can't be a criminal and own a firearm.
We have a bigger issue that abusers are rarely forced to give up their firearms.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3120094/
Did you read the article? It’s mostly about how Rahimi relates to Bruen and why that makes it so problematic. Nowhere do they condemn the outcome
So it's more bullshit take on the Bruen ruling that anti-2a groups are still salty from? This has nothing to do with the Rahimi ruling at all...