Future assault weapon ban?

I agree with what you are Stating here...

But lets Correct the Basic Flaw in what the Anti Gunners are calling "Assault Weapons"

None of them are "Assault Weapons" Full Auto Weapons have been Banned since 1934...

An AR-15 fires .223 Cal...Semi-Automatic and M-16/M4s fires a 5.56MM NATO Round, FULL AUTO...

A 5.56 won't fit in a .223...

An AK-47 fires a 7.62X39 Round Semi Automatic...You can not purchase a Full Auto...

"ALL ASSAULT WEAPONS ARE FULL AUTO"...

The last two Mass Killings were done with illegal weapons...

They became illegal weapons the moment they Killers stole them...

The last one Killed the Legal Owner "His Mother" while stealing them...

He did not use the Bushmaster to Kill anyone...

It was locked up in the Car the whole time...

He used the Hand Guns...

The Medical Examiner is Lying at the insistence of the White House...

In their Gun Grab to DisArm the American Population...

Can't Control an Armed Population...

Of course we see the problem of mental illness, and that needs to be addressed- but in addition to gun control. It doesn't revoke your 2nd amendment right to not allow assault rifles, it's not like all guns are being banned. All it's doing is making it harder to obtain especially lethal weapons, which have no real need to the average person. Why the hell would you need an AK-47 to go hunting, or for protection? You don't.

Also, I highly doubt the army is going to start shooting citizens. I don't know what you're thinking.

No. The republicans who administration the homestead could by no ability positioned it on the schedule. The senate could vote no by utilising a huge margin. The president has publicly suggested that he's against any greater rules on gun administration. the only potential branch of government who could be for it is Romney who positioned the everlasting attack weapons ban in place in Massachusetts. in spite of the undeniable fact that, even Romney is professional gun this week. it won't be able to happen.

That is one of the reasons the Founders included the Second Amendment. They knew an armed citizenry was necessary to prevent tyranny. That is why those who advocate for bigger government walk in lockstep with those who hate gun ownership and do whatever they can to restrict that right. Of course, they also try to restrict speech, but only the speech they disagree with (i.e., "hate speech"), which is why the First Amendment was also written; to protect speech people disagree with.

why not ban handguns? most are done by handguns. the people who want to get rid of assault rifles are afraid of them because they look militaristic. some people want to hunt with assault weapons, in some states its not illegal to hunt with them. i wanted two assault weapons and i got them for protection and to hunt.

even if that were true, which doesn't sound likely, what does it matter?

mass shootings aren't an issue we have to deal with, shootings are an issue, all shootings, regardless of the scale or who is involved

You make way too much sense. You would never be able to be a politician.

cool story Bro