More gun control

I'm glad you accept my definition of small arms and that we don't require a dictionary. I see that your claim is based on how much damage can occur before police arrive. I have an article about a killing spree in China. 33 people dead and 130 injured in 2014. All of this damage done with knives. (2) I think this just goes to show that blaming mass murder instances on the gun not the people is a dumb premise. I understand my reference to the middle east might not be palatable. I think that's just because we've had time to heal from the Vietnam war. The Vietnamese were just as ruthless in some cases. I would agree that Muslim culture is subject to much more scrutiny than others and for obvious reasons. I feel the tactics could be compared to yet another modern army. The IRA used primarily small arms and IED's. Using small arms they defeated the British and gained independence. Using small arms and IED's they gained equal rights in Northern Ireland. Perhaps this example will be more palatable. Another weapon our founding fathers had access to is the Belton flintlock rifle that could fire 16 rounds in 20 seconds. So not only did they know about repeating rifle's but if you read the article they we're actively funding its development. (3) So this idea that the founding fathers were thinking about guns statically is a false narrative. So what is an assault rifle? AR stands for armalight not assault rifle. So an AR-15 is armalight model 15 not assault rifle number 15. What about it is it that makes this type of rifle one that assaults? Aren't all guns capable of assault? Why the frankly new wordage over a gun? What about one semi-auto rifle makes it an assault rifle while others semi-auto's are for hunting? Is an M1A1 grand an assault rifle? It uses revolver technology in the form of a stripper clip. Is a gun from ww2 going to be banned because it's a semi-auto rifle? Where you draw the line is incredibly important to a debate about gun control and I think it's something you should have well thought out before you just start harping randomly on guns. I'm pretty sure the length of the barrel isn't going to create a different affect on someones own brain. If you're wondering how someone would do it I guess just watch full metal jacket. Your solution for people wanting to commit suicide is building gates? Are you the same person who suggested suicide nets at apple? You are only looking at the symptom not the root of the problem. The root of the problem is sad people not guns or buildings. You have to address the people who commit suicide not just how they decide to go. Now before you say oh well then that's why we need a vetting process for gun ownership. 1in5 Americans suffer from some kind of mental illness. (4) That's 43. 8 million people you'd disarm. Most of whom haven't committed a crime. How do you think people are going to react to the disarmament of 43. 8million people? I'll tell you right now I wouldn't be having any of it. Also think of the precedent you'd be setting. You're essentially saying that a group of people is going to be in charge of who can and cannot own guns. Not based on someones criminal history just based on an hour session. Also, Logic would dictate that you prove your reasoning with quantifiable facts. Since I'm contradicting you hyperbole with real numbers I expect a real answer not an exaggeration. Your floor.