Governor McKee’s Anti-Gun Circus: The Truth About Rhode Island’s Assault Weapons Ban Push

The renewed assault weapons ban in Rhode Island follows a well-worn playbook: politicians grandstand, anti-gun groups stoke emotional fears, and the media buries dissenting voices under a flood of one-sided narratives. A cursory glance at the Providence Journal makes it seem like everyone supports the ban—except for a handful of misrepresented figures and marginalized voices.

A Manufactured Crisis

This isn’t just about so-called “military-style” firearms. It is an All Weapons Ban. The bill’s vague and overreaching language would outlaw nearly all modern firearms, including common semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and even some shotguns, along with certain antiques. This legislation is designed to disarm law-abiding citizens under the false pretense of public safety.

At their staged press event, officials cited tragedies from across the country, pushing the illusion that banning certain firearms in Rhode Island would somehow prevent criminals in other states from committing acts of violence.

Proponents, including Governor McKee and his allies, claim the ban is necessary for reducing crime, yet they ignore the fact that these firearms are rarely used in violent crimes. According to FBI data, more people are killed annually with hands, fists, feet and blunt objects than so-called “assault weapons.” Instead of addressing real crime issues, they rely on misleading statistics and emotionally charged anecdotes from unrelated tragedies to push their agenda.

Ignoring Legal Precedents and Reality

The Supreme Court’s Bruen decision set a clear standard: gun laws must be rooted in America’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Rhode Island’s proposed ban falls well short of this benchmark. Supporters dismiss Bruen by falsely claiming that similar bans have stood the test of time, even as judicial scrutiny has tightened. With legal challenges like Snope v. Brown (Deleware Assault Weapons Ban) and the closely tied Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island (RI’s own magazine ban) case already underway—challenging past, shady legislative maneuvers—it’s increasingly likely that this overbroad ban will falter in court.

Media Bias and Misrepresented Numbers

Media coverage, particularly in the Providence Journal, plays a critical role in shaping the narrative. The article in question misrepresents key data by citing only 16,000 gun owners in Rhode Island. In reality, the number is upwards of 160,000—about 14.9% .

This tenfold discrepancy isn’t a minor oversight; one has to wonder if it isn’t a deliberate minimization of a significant constituency. The correction has been made but how many people have already read the article? By burying accurate figures and giving anti-gun activists and government officials disproportionate space, the media effectively sidelines robust opposition and exaggerates the mandate for disarmament.

The truth is, politicians and their media allies are not interested in data or statistics. Most everyday people don’t care about numbers either, facts alone won’t bring them to our side. Gun rights advocates waste time debating statistics when the reality is that emotional narratives and fear-driven messaging dominate public discourse. The real battle is not in charts and studies, but in direct political action and electoral consequences.

Where The Anti-Gun Rights Politicians Are Most Vulnerable

Rhode Island’s anti-gun politicians are not motivated by public safety; their priority is political survival. They rely on gun control to pander to their base, assuming progressive voters will support them without question. Their vulnerability lies in several key areas:

• Weak competition in general elections: Many run unopposed, meaning their real battle is in the Democratic primary.
• Razor-thin primary victories: Most incumbents secure their positions by just a few hundred votes, making them highly susceptible to an organized opposition.
• Reliance on a controlled electorate: Politicians manipulate voter registrations and redistricting to shield themselves from accountability.

This makes them extremely vulnerable to a strategic and mobilized voting bloc ready to shift the balance against them and the battleground is the Democratic Primary.

The Disaffiliation Strategy: Hitting Politicians Where It Hurts

For too long, Rhode Island gun owners have been on defense while politicians steadily chip away at their rights. The tide is turning. The disaffiliation strategy is designed to:

• Apply direct electoral pressure: Lawmakers pushing unconstitutional bans now face real consequences. They must weigh their support for these measures against the risk of alienating a mobilized voting bloc.
• Force political recalculations: This strategy ensures politicians understand that pandering to anti-gun special interests may cost them their beloved seats in the next election.
• Expose political weakness: Anti-gun politicians rely on a controlled voter base. By shifting voter registrations, gun owners can disrupt their foundation and have thier voices heard.

Gun owners are no longer passive observers. This is not just a protest—it is a coordinated effort to erode their opponents’ stronghold, mobilize voters, and reshape Rhode Island’s political landscape in favor of constitutional rights.

The Bottom Line

This assault weapons ban isn’t a sincere effort to enhance public safety; it’s a power grab cloaked in fear-mongering and misinformation. By misrepresenting key statistics and exploiting emotional narratives, politicians and the media aim to legitimize a ban that targets the rights of law-abiding citizens while ignoring facts and constitutional safeguards. Rhode Island gun owners have had enough. Through legal challenges, grassroots activism, and strategic voter mobilization, they are determined to push back against these tactics.

The Second Amendment is not up for negotiation, not now, not ever! Stand with us, speak out, get involved, and help us tell lawmakers that our rights will not be trampled.