Mass shootings in RI revive push to ban possession of ‘assault weapons’

• Recent mass shootings and a high-profile arrest have reignited the gun control debate in Rhode Island.
• Lawmakers have introduced new bills that would ban the possession of “assault weapons,” expanding on a previous law that only banned their future sale.
• Opponents argue the proposed ban is unconstitutional and punishes law-abiding citizens, while supporters say it is necessary for public safety.

Two mass shootings. The arrest of a Newport man practically daring police to come for him and his illegal firearms. The reintroduction of a full-scale “assault weapons ban” sparking fierce blowback from gun owners on social media.

The gun debate has come roaring back to the Rhode Island State House.

Truly, it never really cooled, but the Newport arrest, plus the reintroduction of legislation to ban the possession of “assault weapons” in Rhode Island, stoked the flames once again.

For example, Sen. Dawn Euer, D-Newport, cited the Newport man’s arrest as evidence that Rhode Island needs to go beyond last year’s compromise to ban the future sale of “assault weapons” and actually ban the possession of them in the state.

“The rise of racist and violent anti-government rhetoric is not surprising, but we must not normalize it. As a staunch advocate of common-sense gun laws, I believe that we need to pass a comprehensive ‘assault weapons’ bill to keep Rhode Islanders safe,” Euer said in an online statement, noting that the arrest came soon after mass shootings at Brown University and in Pawtucket.

Online commenters on the social media platform X jumped in, with some calling for the man’s release and others for better enforcement of existing laws, rather than restricting law-abiding gun owners.

Added Glenn Valentine, vice president of the Rhode Island Firearms Owners’ League: “Dawn knows this guy would ignore the AWB just like he did the [high-capacity] mag ban, 3d printed arms ban” and every other gun law.

New RI bill would ban the possession of ‘prohibited firearms’

On Feb. 27, a group of Democrats in the House and Senate introduced matching bills – H8073 and S2710 – to add a single word to the new state law banning the sale of “assault weapons” that takes effect on July 1, 2026.

The bills would add the word “possess” to this sentence, already in law: “No person shall manufacture, sell, offer to sell, transfer, or purchase a prohibited firearm, except as otherwise authorized.”

It would give any Rhode Islander who “lawfully possesses a prohibited firearm prior to July 1, 2026” an opportunity to sell, offer to sell, or transfer their prohibited firearm to a federally licensed firearm dealer, or to anindividual outside the state who may lawfully possess such weapon, by Dec. 31, 2026.

It restores the piece of the “assault weapons” sale ban that was stripped at the last minute to ensure passage.

Is a ban on the possession of ‘assault weapons’ in RI legal?

Rep. Jason Knight, the lead sponsor of the original House version of last year’s proposed “assault weapons” ban, said the compromise that emerged from the Senate last year accomplished more than some realize.

Knight said the final version of the bill recognized “the fact that there are existing assault-style rifles currently in the hands of citizens in Rhode Island, and it provided a grandfather clause … so that they could maintain possession of those weapons.”

Knight explained that the bill was drafted that way because of concerns that in suddenly making a swath of weapons people already owned contraband, “you would run into an issue with the takings clause” of the U.S. Constitution.

“So that’s a big, fat way of saying it might be unconstitutional just to institute a ban and not have a provision in there for existing weapons,” he said.

While banning future sales might have seemed like a concession, Knight said the bill that finally passed created “a universe of existing assault-style firearms that are still legal to hold in Rhode Island,” but “that universe of firearms is not going to get any bigger.”

Pushing back, Rep. Teresa Tanzi, the lead House sponsor of this year’s proposed possession ban, said: “There are going to be lots of lawyers who will have the final say in whatever should pass.”

She suggested there could be delays before the ban goes into effect “so that people have the ability to sell or destroy the gun appropriately. So there are ways around the takings clause without having to change our overall approach.”

The bill’s lead Senate sponsor, Brown graduate Sen. Tiara Mack, noted that at least eight other states have bans on possessing “assault weapons.”

Mack said she knows teachers, students, parents of young people and friends who have been affected by the December shooting at Brown University.

“I could not look at those individuals and I could not live with myself in this position of power and not introduce something to make a difference,” she said.

“I wanted to be a part of the solution and not just continuing to turn my sorrow and mourning into inaction.”

Who is opposing the RI ‘assault weapons’ ban?

Republican Rep. Michael Chippendale, the House minority leader, said the arrest in Newport proves Rhode Island’s gun laws are working.

“Law enforcement was able to identify the individual, investigate his activity, and charge him under multiple existing state statutes,” he said. “Piling additional restrictions onto the books would not have changed that situation. Criminals, by definition, do not follow the law.”

He said attempts by other lawmakers to claim that the Newport arrest proves the state needs to “ban possession of firearms outright” is “either pure ignorance of the very laws they themselves passed, or an attempt to shamelessly use recent tragedies as a political vehicle to advance a broader agenda.”

“It is also irresponsible,” he told The Journal, “to conflate that case with the recent shootings at Brown University and the Pawtucket hockey rink. Those incidents involved individuals with severe and documented mental health issues.”

“Lumping all of these events together in order to justify sweeping new gun bans is not serious policymaking,” Chippendale said.

Will the ‘assault weapons’ possession ban pass?

As the Senate majority leader, Democratic Sen. Frank Ciccone rates the chances the legislature will pass another gun bill this year as “50-50.”

“I think the sentiment of last year was that we’re going to pass a bill that’s going to be a compromise that everyone can live with,” said Ciccone, a licensed gun dealer, when asked his views on the latest run of gun bills.

“So now, unfortunately, you look at the shooting at Brown. The staff told them that there was a guy snooping around the building and nobody did anything. All right. Then you’ve got the one at the arena. I mean, not going to get into it, but obviously there was some issues with that person.”

In the Newport case, he said the man effectively told police “to come and get him. He’s got illegal guns in the house. I mean, what is that telling you? Is it suggesting that ‘before I do something, come and get me?’”

“We’ve got some of the strongest gun laws around” he said. Will passing another one “stop the flow of guns illegally?”

Asked if he nonetheless believes the two mass shootings this winter will fuel the push to do something more on guns, Ciccone said it would likely be a “media frenzy.”

“But I think we’ve done enough,” he said. “There are enough laws.”

Social media sites erupt over prospect of ban

Despite the potential political and legal roadblocks ahead for the revived effort to ban “assault weapons,” Reddit and other social media platforms erupted with the outraged comments of gun owners after the new bills came in.

Most of the comments are peppered with expletives, such as this fairly moderate one: “10 years in prison for something I purchased legally, store correctly, and have done no wrongdoing with is absolutely [expletive] insane … I knew this was coming but I didn’t expect it so soon.”

Another poster proposed this wording for a deluge of identical letters to lawmakers that would say:

“Dear Representative, I am a Rhode Island resident and am writing to express my concern regarding H 8073 … While I understand and respect the intent to reduce gun violence, I am deeply concerned about language that would criminalize possession of firearms that may currently be lawfully owned by responsible citizens.”

How many firearms-related bills are in the General Assembly? Here’s a few.

So far this session, 41 firearms bills have been introduced – 21 in the House, 20 in the Senate.

Few have supporters on both sides of the divide, but S 2086 does. It would waive the 7% sales tax on firearm safety equipment, storage devices, gun safes, gun cabinets, gun vaults, gun cases, strong boxes, cable locks, trigger locks and biometric locks.

In addition to the “assault weapon” possession ban sought by some legislative Democrats, other bills would, for example:

Republicans and Democratic allies have also proposed legislation that would:

• Allow gun owners with concealed-weapon permits from out of state to bring their weapons into Rhode Island if their home states reciprocated (H8075)
• Allow Rhode Island residents 21 years of age or older to carry a concealed handgun without a permit (S2155)
• Reduce the potential penalty for a first violation of Rhode Island’s high-capacity magazine ban to a misdemeanor (S2314)
• Entitle anyone licensed to carry a gun who is injured physically, emotionally or economically in a shooting in a gun-free zone to sue any person or entity that barred them from entering their property with their own firearm (S2283)