Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Kids and Guns: Shootings now the 3rd-leading cause of death for US Children [View all]krispos42
(49,445 posts)Because, after manufacturers modified their production of guns to move them from "assault weapon" to "not an assault weapon" category, there was a lot of bitching and whining and gnashing of teeth about how they were "exploiting a loophole" or "circumventing" the law. It was blindingly obvious what they would do ("can't have a bayonet lug AND a pistol grip? Okay, grind off the bayonet lug!" and it exposed the uselessness of the law. Which you want to reinstate but want other people to define "assault weapon".
And if it's so obvious, then why have some states had to expand the definition of "assault weapon"? My state, Connecticut, did after the Sandy Hook shooting. Not that it's helping the body count in Bridgeport or New Haven or Hartford, but hey, another victory in the culture wars, right?
But in a way, you're spot-on although you may not realize it: you really can't figure out what an "assault weapon" is because any definition is both arbitrary and based on accessories... unless you go after the operating system itself.
A ban on semi-automatic long guns, without exception, would be the way to go to avoid the "loopholes" that your side (who defined what an assault weapon was to begin with) complain about.
Now, this simply means that things like pump-action tactical rifles (they make, for example, a pump-action AR-15) would take off to replace the now-banned AR-15s and such, but hey, you'd have something new to complain about at the next school shooting BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T ADDRESSED THE PROBLEM.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):![](du4img/smicon-reply-new.gif)