Life long dem. Obama twice--Joe this time. Well over six decades on this earth. But no. Why? Lots of reasons. The latest being Russian colusion and Orange shitstains storm troopers and batshit crazy base. Sorry. Find another way. Look to root causes. Not bans.

wrong Group.

This would make every semi-automatic pistol and rifle illegal which is probably a step too far.

The number one type of gun used in homicides, suicides and accidental shootings is a pistol and semi auto pistols are the vast majority of pistols in circulation at present.

That still leaves revolvers that can carry up to 8 rounds, maybe more for small caliber .22s. If you can't defend yourself and your home with 8 rounds of 9mm you aren't qualified to have a gun.

The 'step too far' has been the downfall of attempted legislation. There is no way to accommodate the 2nd Amendment crowd so I say we simply stop trying.

Australia succeeded. We can too if we just elect representatives with courage and service.

That is the gun accessory that correlates to lethality the most directly.

High-cap mags are also quite difficult to manufacture in your garage.

The trouble with "assault rifles" is that there are few other features like that. They don't have the biggest bullets, they don't have the most muzzle velocity, they don't have the longest range, they aren't the most concealable, etc. They are "goldilocks" guns that are well-purposed for taking out infantry. Even the rate of fire can be matched by some hunting rifles. Well, that makes legislation difficult.

If the Dems keep the legislation to just high-cap magazines and not introduce other weak links like the 1994 ban did, it will stand the test of time better.

Gun nut here trying to help.

Yeah, high cap mags are low hanging fruit. But there's a workaround; 3d printed magazines. It is truly 'feel good' legislation. As long as there is a gun to put them in there's no point is legislating against them. The AW ban kinda worked but once again there's a workaround. However an AW is defined the gun makers will tweak it to by-pass the purpose of legislation.

If those who are truly knowledgeable about firearms would negotiate in good faith there might be compromise. Since the gun industry took over the NRA, a once venerable organization dedicated to gun safety and education, there is no compromise. Not one inch. Because of this I have come to the conclusion that those of us seeking to reduce gun violence must deal from the same starting point.

Since the carnage cannot be eliminated we have to diminish it. To do that the best starting place is the lethality of weaponry available. Hence my beginning, end end, point is just get rid of semi auto guns with removeable magazines. You may believe it can't happen. I know it can't if nobody demands for it.

Had gun owners like yourself begun dealing in good faith 30 years ago we wouldn't be having this discussion now.

BTW, lapsed C&R licensee with a collection. I'm not scared of guns, I'm scared of people who can't leave home without one.

I'll have to research this more, but I wouldn't lump it in with "feel good" legislation just yet. If it were a felony to manufacture or print them, it would certainly have a throttling effect.

A bonafide example of "feel good" legislation would be restricting bayonets. How many people get killed in the US with bayonets?

impossible. Hence my call to address the central issue of lethality, rate of fire and reloading magazines.

I have no issue with semi auto guns. SKS rifles have a fixed mag and must be reloaded through the breech. I'm fine with that. A .22 with a 15 round tube mag is okay with me.

Find a way to decrease lethality without what I've proposed and I'm all ears.