Zackey Rahimi, the Texas criminal defendant challenging a federal gun law before the Supreme Court on Tuesday, said this summer that he no longer wanted to own firearms and expressed remorse for his actions that got him in trouble with the law.

“I will make sure for sure this time that when I finish my time being incarcerated to stay the faithful, righteous person I am this day, to stay away from all drugs at all times, do probation & parole rightfully, to go to school & have a great career, have a great manufacturing engineering job, to never break any law again, to stay away from the wrong circle, to stay away from all firearms & weapons, & to never be away from my family again,” Rahimi, who is being held at a Fort Worth jail, said in a handwritten letter dated July 25.

He continued: “I had firearms for the right reason in our place to be able to protect my family at all times especially for what we’ve went through in the past but I’ll make sure to do whatever it takes to be able to do everything the right pathway & to be able to come home fast as I can to take care of my family at all times.”

  • Tb0n3
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    Shall not be infringed.

    • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      So you can buy any weapon in any manner of firing, including full auto or are there laws in place to prevent this?

      • Tb0n3
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        You should be able to but there are infringements in place like the originally excessively expensive $200 tax stamp for fully automatic weapons.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Even for people with a history of gun violence? Does this also prohibit separate penalties of disarmament when someone is found guilty?

          You understand how this interpretation of the law can’t have a positive effect on society right?

          • Tb0n3
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            1 year ago

            If they’re too dangerous to be trusted in polite society then why are they released? If they just so happen to try it in a polite society that’s well armed we won’t have to worry any longer.

              • Tb0n3
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Then if they’ve served their time don’t steal their rights for the rest of their lives.

            • mindbleach
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You let your kids play on the front lawn, so you must trust them with uzis. Freedom and trust are famously all-or-nothing.