The Rhode Island House Judiciary Committee held a hearing for the Rhode Island Assault Weapons Ban Act of 2025 on March 26, offering a forum for debate on a bill that restricts the manufacture, sale, purchase and possession of assault weapons, which include AK- or AR-style rifles and certain shotguns.
The bill was introduced in the Rhode Island General Assembly in February following Gov. Dan McKee’s inclusion of an assault weapons ban in his fiscal year 2026 budget proposal.
Rep. Jason Knight (D-Barrington, Warren), one of the bill’s sponsors, said the legislation is “not different” from the assault weapons ban in McKee’s budget. He added that McKee included the ban in his budget so that it “tracks with” the bills in the General Assembly.
McKee did not respond to a request for comment.
Legislators have been pushing for an assault weapons ban for years, but Knight said “this bill has a particular kind of momentum this year that it hasn’t had in the past.”
“The majority of Rhode Islanders, legislators and in fact, Americans support banning assault weapons,” wrote Melissa Carden, executive director of Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence, in an email to The Herald.
At the hearing on Wednesday, opponents of the bill testified that the weapons ban infringes on their Second Amendment rights.
In response to these claims, Knight said that assault weapons are not protected by the Second Amendment because “they are military-style weapons designed for sustained combat operations that are ill-suited and disproportionate to the need for self defense.”
“The right to bear arms is and must be subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public safety,” Carden wrote.
She added that assault weapons are “weapons of war designed to kill as many people as quickly as possible and have no place in our communities,” noting that educating Rhode Islanders about gun safety is a priority.
Though Rhode Island Rifle and Revolver Association Secretary Brenda Jacob also expressed support for gun safety education, she opposes the assault weapons ban.
“Gun safety is huge for us. People look at us as bad people because we own guns, so we make sure we’re ultra-safe,” Jacob said in an interview with The Herald, adding that RIRRA organizes free classes on gun use and employs safety officers and gun coaches.
But “we’re extremely against this bill because it is very deceptive,” Jacob said, claiming that legislators are trying to expand the commonly understood definition of an assault weapon.
At the hearing, Knight clarified that the bill does not affect “all guns or all weapons" and noted that he is considering removing language about weapons that can be readily modified to accept detachable magazines from the bill's definitions.
He also confirmed that pistols will not be affected by the bill. “We have a concealed carry regime in the state. I certainly am not interested in getting rid of it, and this bill wouldn’t touch it,” he said in the hearing.
Jacob also worries that the bill could put gun stores out of business, hurting the state’s economy. At the hearing, gun store owner William Worthy testified that, if passed, the weapons ban would affect “approximately 60% of all the firearms” he sells.
Worthy, who is also the president of the Glocester Town Council, said the legislature’s focus “should shift towards addressing the root cause of violence” instead of banning specific firearms.
“This could include improving mental health services and forcing the penalties for illegal possession of firearms,” Worthy added.
Following Wednesday’s hearing, the bill was held for further study.
Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that Rep. Jason Knight was considering removing weapons with detachable magazines from the definition of the bill. At the hearing, Knight stated that he was considering removing language about weapons that can be readily modified to accept detachable magazines. A previous version of this article also incorrectly stated that the hearing was held on Friday. The meeting was held on Wednesday, March 26, 2025. The Herald regrets these errors.
