We don't think that. But consider what the country would be like now had this law not expired after ten years:
The Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act or Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB)
The primary difference would be that a lot more people would be having their civil liberties violated for the enjoyment of leftists.
So yeah, people who already had assault-styled weapons and large capacity magazines wouldn't have been affected. But think of all of those weapons and magazines which wouldn't have been sold in the ensuing fifteen years -- how many of the guns used by mass murderers in the last decade-and-a-half were bought on impulse in that time period?
Gosh! All of those civil liberties that the left didn't get a chance to violate for fun. What a tragic loss.
Yes, someone who is determined to kill as many people as possible, for whatever sick purpose, would try to find a way to accomplish this gruesome task -- but do we have to make it easy for them by providing them with guns designed after weapons of war?
The cosmetic appearance of the gun does not make it any easier to kill people with.
High velocity center-fired cartridges loaded into relatively short-barreled easily-carried guns
Those are characteristics shared by most hunting rifles.
equipped with pistol grips which can be fired from the hip at crowds?
Anyone would-be murderer who is ignorant enough to fire their gun that way is not going to kill very many people, if any at all.
There's a reason these special psychopaths choose these particular types of weapons to do the job. In 1966 the Texas Tower Sniper, using a hunting rifle, killed eleven people and injured thirty-one over the course of ninety-six minutes. The Dayton shooter killed nine and injured twenty-seven in less than ten seconds with an assault-styled weapon he had ordered online.
The pistol grip on the gun had nothing to do with the severity of the massacre.
The allegedly military appearance of the gun had nothing to do with the severity of the massacre.
There's no good reason for civilians, especially crazy ones, to have access to these weapons.
More importantly, there is no good reason to prevent
civilians from having access to them.
You may have forgotten the Constitution, but the NRA hasn't forgotten.
No other developed country has the rate of mass murder by guns as the USA and the minimal controls we have over the sale and distribution of guns results in this degree of unparalleled bloodshed.
That is incorrect. The bloodshed would be no less if those victims were killed with bombs.