Increasingly, states are passing just such laws. Our purpose should be to try to make sure those guilty of felonies are punished with laws meant for felons, not to apply felony laws to persons who commit misdemeanors. In most states, misdemeanor assault is any intentional touching without consent. That includes such things as poking someone with your finger. In a New Jersey case, a man was convicted of misdemeanor assault not for punching his girlfriend but rather the couch she was sitting on.
Some states allow misdemeanor assault convictions for yelling at someone.
Los Angeles hero Rodney King accused his wife of assault because she yelled at him in the car for not being able to read a map. All of these are wrong, which is why the law covers them. Ironically, one outcome of this might be that many prosecutors and judges would feel sorry for the defendant faced with a disproportionate penalty, and be tempted to let him or her go scott-free. Conceivably Clinton's proposal could keep guns out of the hands of some violent people, if we make the shaky assumption that violent people when turned away from stores won't just go out and buy their guns on the street. It's also true that we would keep guns out of the hands of some violent people if we forbade them for other arbitrary reasons, such as having blow-dryed gray hair and a bulbous nose.