Please define your definition of Assault Weapon

First your argument doesn't make any sense. You lump a fully automatic firearm that can fire up to 1,000 rounds per minute in the same category of a semi automatic firearm which can fire up to 60 rounds per minute. By that very standard alone a fully automatic firearm (which is HIGHLY regulated since 1934 and only 1 person since WWII has committed a crime with one) causes significantly more damage than a semi auto. Also, ALL firearms are meant for killing. That's what they do. What makes a semi auto less dangerous than a pump shotgun? Or a revolver? or a bolt action? They all fire bullets! And to be honest a pump shotgun which fires 00 buckshot (which is 9 .33 caliber pellets with one trigger pull) is immensely more devastating than an AR-15 which fires .223 or 5.56 mm rounds at the distances of Aurora or Sandy Hook. I can fire 12 rounds in 30 seconds from a pump action which includes reloading. That's 108 projectiles being sent in 30 seconds or less traveling 1,600 feet per second. But lets stick with semi auto since that's what's actually being discussed as being banned and lets leave out the fact that semi auto technology is over 100 years old because well that would just kill any argument you would have since what we are talking about has been around long before you were born.... The ban being proposed doesn't do anything! It didn't do anything in 1994. Zero. Limited magazine sizes didn't stop any crime. Banning features didn't stop anything either. Not to mention NONE of the features banned has anything to do with the functionality of the weapon. Dont believe me? Lets take the AR-15 variant rifle... take away the flash suppressor, pistol grip, bayonet lug, collapsable stock... what do you get... A Ruger Mini 14 which shoots the exact same ammo at the exact same rate of fire with comparable precision. And the Ruger Mini 14 is ALLOWED under the new proposed ban. So what are they trying to ban? Something that "looks" scary to those who never used a firearm. Mad men, you say? Yes some people out there are not wired right. I agree. As a responsible firearm owner I dont want a bad person to have a firearm. I also practice safe handling and I ensure my firearms are properly locked and secured. However, it seems the growing sentiment from a lot of people who choose not to own firearms is that all firearm owners are crazy. That is just not the case. Firearm owners are from all walks of life. Nurses, to teachers, to accountants, to farmers, to construction workers, etc. I agree the current process we have now needs work. For several reasons: 1) The NICS is not strong. It doesnt have enough data to ensure the buyer is properly mentally capable because mental illness data is not uploaded. Do you support strengthening this process with mental illness data? Also, if someone fails a NICS check that person should be reported and investigated within a week! 2) Firearm safety is not stressed enough. I suggest a firearm safety class being part of owning a firearm. As a hunter I am required to have a 16 hour safety course before being issued my license. This process is paid from taxes on ammunition. I suggest this also be a requirement being paid from the same funds for new gun owners. Possibly a refresher course every 3-5 years like a defensive driving class. 3) Possibly mandating background checks for all transfers. However, this only sounds great on paper. Enforcement of this is extremely difficult. Very hard to ensure all private sales have a background check. 4) Stronger penalties and ZERO plea bargains for those who commit violent crimes with firearms. No brainer. Now let me ask you this.... why is it when something like this happens the first response is to encourage the criminals (media coverage) and disarm the future law abiding victims (banning of various things)? I just dont get it. The legislation should be to empower future victims NOT make them more susceptible to future crime! How do we empower future victims: 1) stronger penalties on criminals like I mentioned above 2) uniformity of self defense laws. In many states if you protect yourself which results in the injury or death of the attacker (normally a home invader) the victim who successfully defended themselves in charged with a crime or is allowed to be sued by the attacker in a civil court. Seriously. Lets make it if you perform a home invasion or are robbing a store and you get hurt or die... and the investigation leads to a justified homicide.... No crime charged to the successful victim. Makes the criminal think twice about doing something that would result in their own demise or injury. 3) Gun free zones... get rid of them. If it's public land and you have a legit CCW permit... carry is ok. If it's private land or building it's up to the owner. There's no way you can legitimize an argument that gun free zones work... when all these mass shooting occur in these zones. 4) CCW license should be recognized in all states. Just like a drivers license. Make it a uniform course. In fact make it so you have to take the course over every year or a refresher course to qualify 2x a year. This will generate money for the state/federal gov't, force CCW holders to be at a high skill level, and allow carry in all 50 states. It's a known fact that those states that allow CCW and issue them see the benefit of lower crime rates. Why? Because even if you choose not to carry the thought process by criminals is that EVERYONE is carrying. Like it or not a firearm is a right to own in our country. It is a right because we as citizens are free to protect ourselves from those out there who would do us harm. Police based on the Supreme Court Ruling of Castle Rock v Gonzales even admitted that the police do NOT have the responsibility to provide a person protection. So it is up to you to protect yourself and use police as your back up. Will we be able to stop everyone to obtain a firearm if they are the bad guy? No. Nothing is absolute. But as you can see above I don't advocate to do nothing. But empower those that would be victims and strengthen the controls we have to actually work to deter, proper enforcement and prosecute.