logo
Gun bills draw a crowd to R.I. State House for seven and a half hours of testimony

Gun bills draw a crowd to R.I. State House for seven and a half hours of testimony

Yahoo15-05-2025

Advocates from opposite sides of the gun debate sign up to testify on the proposed assault weapons ban during a May 14, 2025, Senate Judiciary Committee hearing at the Rhode Island State House. (Photo by Alexander Castro/Rhode Island Current)
Dozens of Second Amendment and gun control advocates alike filled the Rhode Island State House rotunda, floors and halls Wednesday, many waiting hours to testify on a bill that would ban a wide array of semiautomatic weapons statewide.
It was also a long day for the Senate Committee on Judiciary, which heard seven and a half hours of testimony on 15 gun bills. But nearly every speaker addressed bill S0359 — also known as the Rhode Island Assault Weapons Ban Act of 2025 — sponsored by Middletown Democratic Sen. Lou DiPalma. Unlike most hearings, Senate staff allowed only a small number of people into Room 313 at a time, and only one row of chairs for people testifying. A Capitol police officer, senate staff, and a stanchion were stationed outside the door to control the flow of people entering the room.
As the hearing rolled into its seventh hour, Sen. Mark McKenney, a Warwick Democrat, subbed in for Committee Chair Sen. Matthew LaMountain, who had stepped out of the room momentarily. LaMountain and McKenney are listed as co-sponsors on the bill text.
Yellow is color of the day as gun rights advocates turn out to oppose assault weapons ban bill
'It sure would make life easier for us if we could simply make policy based on the T-shirt colors,' McKenney joked after one yellow-shirted Second Amendment supporter pointed out yellow shirts outnumbered the red and orange shirts of gun control advocates as they did in years past.
DiPalma's bill, plus companion House submission by Barrington Democratic Rep. Jason Knight, is one of two avenues Gov. Dan McKee is testing this year in an attempt to ban the sale and manufacture of firearms with military-style features. The bills' interpretation includes semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns equipped with accessories such as pistol grips, folding stocks, or threaded barrels.
The bills would build on prior reforms passed during McKee's tenure, like a magazine cap, an age 21-and-over carrying limit, and a ban on open carry of shotguns and large rifles — successful efforts DiPalma mentioned in his testimony to fellow senators.
'Some will say this is not going to do everything. You're absolutely correct. This is not going to do everything,' DiPalma said. 'It's yet another building block in the framework of gun safety and gun violence.
The push to forbid select semiautomatic weapons is old hat at the State House, but this year things have changed following the April 21 death of former Senate President Dominick Ruggerio — a longtime skeptic of firearm bans who had expressed a possible change of heart in his final months. Now, with Senate leadership refreshed, the fate of the bill depends upon the Senate Committee on Judiciary.
DiPalma said 24 senators have signed on to support his bill, or 64% of the 38-member body, now down one vote to 37 with Ruggerio's District 4 seat vacant. Another bill co-sponsor is Senate President Valarie Lawson, attended the hearing at various points.
'President Lawson personally supports an assault weapons ban,' spokesperson Greg Paré said over email Wednesday. 'She believes strongly in the committee review process and will let it play out.'
Judiciary has 10 members. Committee members Sen. Andrew Dimitri, a freshman Democrat from Johnston, newly elected Sen. Todd Patalano, a Cranston Democrat, and Sen. Leonidas Raptakis, a Coventry Democrat, voiced their opposition to the bill. Republican Sen. Thomas Paolino was mostly quiet during the hearing but has voted against similar legislation in the past.
'I think it's drawn confusion because we're referring to them all as assault weapons, when, in reality, this bill does not really distinguish actual, quote/unquote, assault weapons from handguns and certain kinds of shotguns,' Dimitri, a recreational bird hunter, said during the hearing.
Raptakis wondered if a study commission should be formed instead.
'I don't know what you would study beyond what's already been studied. It's either we agree or we don't it's the right time to do it,' DiPalma replied, gesturing with his hands.
Raptakis returned to the proposal of a study commission around 9:25 pm, right before the last five testimonies took the stand.
'Thank you,' a weary-sounding LaMountain replied after Raptakis shared the idea.
Other senators who sat in on the hearing were Majority Leader Frank Ciccone, who is a licensed gun dealer; Majority Whip David Tikoian, a former North Providence police chief who also served 23 years on the Rhode Island State Police; and the Republican leadership, Minority Leader Jessica de la Cruz of North Providence and Minority Whip Gordon Rogers of Foster.
Senate Republicans and a handful of Democrats took to the State Library an hour before the hearing to denounce the bill. The Democrats in attendance included Ciccone and Tikoian, who stood in the audience, as did Rep. Arthur Corvese of North Providence. Reps. Stephen Casey of Woonsocket, and Deborah Fellela of Johnston stood in the lineup alongside de la Cruz, Rogers, Patalano and gun rights advocates.
'If enacted, this ban would ban most weapons in common use here in Rhode Island, it would be a blatant violation of the United States Constitution as well as the Rhode Island constitution,' de le Cruz said.
Rogers blasted the bill's reliance on 'military-style' features to define an assault weapon, and held up a forward folding grip for the crowd.
'Same gun, same round, same ammunition,' Rogers said. 'but when you put a grip on it forward as an accessory, it becomes an assault weapon. Does that make it any more dangerous? No. Do we go around banning cars that have chrome rims and spoilers on because they look dangerous? No, we don't.'
De la Cruz and Rogers continued those lines of argument during the hearing, with both critiquing the bill's language as vague and unreflective of mechanical reality — as well as DiPalma's understanding of kinetic energy.
'The gun has a firing pin that triggers the bullet — the ammunition — that is where the kinetic energy comes from, not the firearm,' Rogers told DiPalma. 'So we bring up the kinetic energy and what it does. And I think you were very theatrical last year, or the year before, when that was brought forward.'
Rogers framed Rhode Island's proposed ban as a political outlier rather than a national standard. Only nine states have such bans, he said. 'That tells me 41 states haven't,' he added.
An hour-long expert panel brought sharply divided testimony from both sides, from constitutional precedent for bans to historical efforts to forbid sawed off shotguns and bowie knives.
If enacted, this ban would ban most weapons in common use here in Rhode Island, it would be a blatant violation of the United States Constitution as well as the Rhode Island constitution.
– Senate Minority Leader Jessica de la Cruz, a North Smithfield Republican
Jake McGuigan, senior director of government relations for the National Shooting Sports Foundation and a former adviser to Gov. Donald Carcieri, cited homicide data as a reason the bill would be narrowly focused and not accomplish much.
'If we look over the past 13 years, 0.6% — that's 0.6%, not even one percent — of all homicides in Rhode Island are attributed to rifles that will be banned by this bill,' McGuigan said. 'Why do we need a common-sense approach to address 0.6%?…That's not a problem, that's a rounding error.'
Greg Lickenbrock, a former gun magazine editor and firearms analyst with Everytown for Gun Safety, pushed back.
'Those are lives, not rounding errors,' Lickenbrock said.
After experts departed, a wider range of views emerged. Andrew Wright of Pawtucket criticized the measure as racially and socially exclusionary.
Gun control 'always just enforces a white supremacist status quo,' he said. 'Black and brown people, Asian people, queer and trans people are buying guns more now than they were before. They're the people who are going to be most affected by their inability to buy guns that match the weapons already in the hands of the people who want to do them harm.'
As the hearing stretched into the evening, more gun control advocates came forward, including Emily Howe a mother of three who described the fear she feels daily for her two kids still in school.
'I've never allowed my kids to wear light-up shoes because I'm really afraid that one day that will be the end of them,' she said. 'If there's a gunman, my kids will be quiet — but the light-up shoes would be one to set them off and let them know where they're hiding.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

GOP House Homeland chairman Green to retire from Congress early

timean hour ago

GOP House Homeland chairman Green to retire from Congress early

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- The House Homeland Security Committee's chairman, Republican Rep. Mark Green of Tennessee, announced Monday that he will retire from Congress once the House votes again on the sprawling tax and budget policy bill backed by President Donald Trump. In a statement, Green said he was offered a private sector opportunity that was 'that was too exciting to pass up' so he informed House Speaker Mike Johnson on Monday of his retirement plans. The move comes more than a year after Green announced he wouldn't run again in 2024, but changed his mind when fellow Republicans implored him to stick around. Green's next election would have been in 2026. Green voted for Trump's sweeping legislation when it passed the House last month. The bill is now in the Senate's hands, and would need to return to the House for agreement on any changes. Trump wants the bill on his desk for his signature by July 4. Green's delayed departure could help with the GOP's narrow margins in the House. Republican leaders need every vote they can get on their big tax bill, which they managed to pass last month by a single vote and will have to pass again once changes are made in the Senate. They now have a 220-212 majority. 'It was the honor of a lifetime to represent the people of Tennessee in Congress," Green said. "They asked me to deliver on the conservative values and principles we all hold dear, and I did my level best to do so.' Green's seat will be decided in a special election. The timing will depend on when he leaves office. Ahead of his 2024 reelection, Green had announced that February 2024 he would not run again. The decision was revealed a day after the impeachment of then-President Joe Biden's Homeland Security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. But many fellow Republicans had called on him to reconsider, and he jumped back into the running just two weeks later. He was unopposed in the Republican primary and then defeated Democrat Megan Barry — the former Nashville mayor who resigned in 2018 in scandal — by more than 21 percentage points in November 2024. Green, 60, has served since 2019 in the 7th Congressional District, which was redrawn in 2022 to include a significant portion of Nashville. The city was carved up three ways in the 2022 redistricting so Republicans could flip a Democratic district in Congress that had covered Music City, which they successfully did. Green previously served as an Army surgeon and in the state Senate and is from Montgomery County. Green flirted running for governor in 2017, but suspended his campaign after he was nominated by former President Donald Trump to become the Army secretary. He later withdrew his nomination due to criticism over his remarks about Muslims and LGBTQ+ Americans.

Trump heads to Fort Bragg while facing criticism for deploying military at Los Angeles protests

timean hour ago

Trump heads to Fort Bragg while facing criticism for deploying military at Los Angeles protests

WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump plans to speak at Fort Bragg on Tuesday to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army as he deploys the military in an attempt to quiet immigration protests in Los Angeles. Fort Bragg, located near Fayetteville, North Carolina, serves as headquarters for U.S. Army Special Operations Command. Highly trained units like the Green Berets and the Rangers are based there. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Army Secretary Dan Driscoll will also be at Tuesday's event, along with service members, veterans and their families. Trump has promoted the Army's anniversary as a reason to hold a military parade in Washington, D.C., on Saturday, which is also his 79th birthday. Tanks and other vehicles will roll down city streets in a reminder of how the Republican president is reshaping the armed forces after returning to the White House this year. Trump, who sees the military as a critical tool for domestic goals, has used the recent protests in Los Angeles as an opportunity to deploy the National Guard and U.S. Marines to quell disturbances that began as protests over immigration raids. Trump has authorized the deployment of 4,000 National Guard soldiers to the city over the objections of Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom. About 700 Marines were also due to formally deploy to Los Angeles. California sued Trump over the deployment, with the state attorney general arguing that the president had 'trampled' the state's sovereignty. California leaders accused Trump of fanning protesters' anger, leading crowds to block off a major freeway and set self-driving cars on fire. 'We're gonna have troops everywhere," Trump said over the weekend. 'We're not going to let this happen to our country.' Fort Bragg has been in the middle of a cultural tug-of-war over the military. It was named after a Confederate general, then renamed to Fort Liberty two years ago. Hegseth brought back the Bragg name, but said it was being used to honor an Army paratrooper who served in World War II.

In their own words: Trump, Newsom trade insults and barbs over National Guard in Los Angeles

time2 hours ago

In their own words: Trump, Newsom trade insults and barbs over National Guard in Los Angeles

The swiftly evolving situation in the Los Angeles area over protests surrounding immigration enforcement actions has also cued up a public spat between President Donald Trump and Gov. Gavin Newsom, the California governor who has been one of the Republican president's most vocal Democratic critics. After Trump on Sunday called up 2,000 National Guard troops to respond, Newsom said he would sue the administration, a promise on which the state followed through a day later. Trump cited a legal provision that allows him to mobilize federal service members when there is 'a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States." The president also agreed with one of his top advisers that maybe the governor should be arrested. Here's a look at back-and-forth between Trump and Newsom in their own words: 'You have violent people, and we're not gonna let them get away with it.' — Trump, Sunday, in remarks to reporters in Morristown, New Jersey. ___ Newsom's ire has been elevated over Trump's decision to, without his support, call up the California National Guard for deployment into his state. In a letter Sunday, Newsom called on Trump to rescind the Guard deployment, calling it a 'serious breach of state sovereignty.' The governor, who was in Los Angeles meeting with local law enforcement and other officials, also told protesters they were playing into Trump's plans and would face arrest for violence or property destruction. 'Trump wants chaos and he's instigated violence,' he said. 'Stay peaceful. Stay focused. Don't give him the excuse he's looking for.' In an interview with MSNBC, Newsom said Sunday he had spoken with Trump 'late Friday night,' after the protests had begun, but said deploying the National Guard 'never came up.' "We talked for almost 20 minutes, and he — barely, this issue never came up. I mean, I kept trying to talk about LA, he wanted to talk about all these other issues," Newsom said. 'We had a very decent conversation.' 'He never once brought up the National Guard,' Newsom said of Trump, calling him 'a stone-cold liar.' Saying, 'I did call him the other night,' Trump told reporters Sunday that he told Newsom in that call: ''Look you've got to take care of this. Otherwise I'm sending in the troops.' ... That's what we did.' On Monday, Trump posted on social media that Los Angeles would have been 'completely obliterated' without his intervention and referred to Newsom as 'Newscum,' a pejorative moniker he has used to refer to the governor. 'We are suing Donald Trump. This is a manufactured crisis. He is creating fear and terror to take over a state militia and violate the U.S. constitution.' — Newsom, Monday, X post. ___ As Newsom promised, California officials sued the Trump administration on Monday, with the state's attorney general, Rob Bonta, arguing that the deployment of troops 'trampled' on the state's sovereignty and pushing for a restraining order. The initial deployment of 300 National Guard troops was expected to quickly expand to the full 2,000 that were authorized by Trump. Late Monday, Trump authorized an additional 2,000 National Guard troops. Ahead of that move, Newsom accused the president of inflaming tensions, breaching state sovereignty and wasting resources, while warning protesters not to 'take Trump's bait.' Teasing the suit, Newsom told MSNBC that he saw the deployment as 'an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act.' Asked Monday about the lawsuit, Trump said it was 'interesting' and argued 'that place would be burning down' without the federal government's intervention. 'I'm very happy I got involved," Trump added. "I think Gavin in his own way is very happy I got involved.' 'I think it's great. Gavin likes the publicity, but I think it would be a great thing." — Trump, Monday, in remarks to reporters. ___ Tom Homan, the Trump administration's border czar, previously warned that anyone, including public officials, would be arrested if they obstructed federal immigration enforcement. Newsom's initial response to Homan, during the MSNBC interview and in subsequent posts on his own social media: 'Come and get me, tough guy.' On Monday Trump seemed to agree with his border chief, telling reporters, 'I would do it if I were Tom.' 'I think it's great. Gavin likes the publicity, but I think it would be a great thing,' Trump added. "He's done a terrible job. Look — I like Gavin, he's a nice guy, but he's grossly incompetent, everybody knows." Homan later said there was 'no discussion' about actually arresting Newsom, but reiterated that 'no one's above the law.' wrote Monday on X that they represented 'a day I hoped I would never see in America' and said Trump's call for his arrest marked 'an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store