Personally, I am all for the Assault Weapons ban. However, I recognize the difficulty in getting such a ban implemented. We had one that was poorly written, worst of which was that it had built in a time limit. Back in the 1930’s when machine guns were banned in response to the gangsters’ activities of the time, machine guns did not disappear the day the ban went into place. It took time for all the bad guys with machine guns to be rounded up. It took more time for all the machine guns that were passed on to be rounded up. It took time for the machine guns to simply start to fall apart and ammo impossible to obtain. It worked simply because there was no time limit. The ban plus time eliminated the machine gun in the public sector.
The poorly written Assault Weapons ban gives ammunition to the pro-gun lobby to fight against a new ban. It is easy for them to now say, “It doesn’t work.” Not because it could not have, but because it was so poorly written it didn’t stand a chance. With that failed effort as evidence, there is little chance of such a ban to be created anytime soon.
That said, I will gladly let the Assault Weapons ban slip by, provided we get a maximum clip capacity regulation. It isn’t the type of gun as much as how many times it can fire before the shooter must stop to reload. If we had a ten-bullet per clip capacity limit, I would gladly allow the ownership of assault style weapons, not that I would be friends with anyone who felt the need to own such a thing.
It isn’t what the gun’s style is, or how big it might be, it comes down to how many pieces of lead it can throw without stopping.