Any attempt to sneak in a new "assault weapon" ban piece by piece will likely fail on the House floor.

(answering Just A Bozo)

...years ago Civil War reenactors were filing off the front sights from their muzzleloaders if the reenactment was in New Jersey, for that very reason?

(Bayonet hooked onto the front sight)

Not sure if they still do that.

I'd hate to see museum-pieces being altered.

...they were.

But not cheap, either!

...about gun control, whether it is floating the idea of a new "assault weapon ban," or some version of universal background checks -- with no real followup to it beyond talking about it.

I believe that Hillary is smart enough to have learned from what happened to Bill when he helped usher through the first so-called assault weapons ban -- huge Democratic losses (even though it is an article of faith that the subsequent losses were because of any other reason, any other reason at all). Bill knows it was a mistake, he even admitted to it -- I think she'll learn from his mistakes.

...preferring to gain temporal, localized advantage by bawling about gun bans. They have neither the desire nor the belly for a protracted campaign to regain strong Democratic Party presence in the House.

The House isn't going to give in on anything without major concessions from the Clinton White House, for example to get Federal background checks at the state level, the House is going to want nationwide CCW reciprocity, the removal of silencers from the NFA, etc. And if something does pass, expect court challenges from both sides.

Keep in mind that even if the Democrats regain control of the Senate, that doesn't mean there will be votes there for more gun control.

About a single piece of gun control legislation she has mentioned. She'll probably try to get PLCAA repealed after she's spent so much time beating Bernie over the head with it but that's about it. And let's not pretend Heller is some new impediment - Dems never got anything done on gun control pre-Heller and they won't post, even if it goes away

is nothing more than pandering to a portion of her constituency. They are talking points for political advantage. She's too savvy to push the issue too far, and I think she is realistic enough to understand that going to far would hit her and the Democratic Party in a very negative way.

Support for any big changes. She could make some small executive order tweaks that don't do much.

They probably already figure she'll never see a Democraitic House from 2016-2020 so pushing the issue will just guarantee bigger Republican gains in the 2018 midterms. They probably already expect the Republicans to retain or regain the Senate in 2018 anyway if Hillary is President so that will factor in as well.

of proud rhetoric.