Never thought i would say this, but i actually agree with Ketch about the AR-15's. However, maybe a ban on large magazines (that can be fitted to many semi-automatic weapons) would be more effective than banning the AR-15 in itself.
The Ar-15 has been described as a weapon designed to kill people with maximum ease and efficiency. It was used by the gunman who shot dead 26 children and adults in Sandy Hook Elementary in 2012, then recently used again in Orlando.
"Gun control campaigners say there is no legitimate civilian use for the AR-15 semi-automatic weapon; its size and firepower mean it is a liability for home defense. And yet, say activists, it is repeatedly the weapon of choice for those who embark on deadly attacks on civilians."
"The AR-15 trademark is still held by Colt, but other patents have expired and clones (colloquially known as AR-15s) are made by several manufacturers - not just Remington. The difference in terms of 'selective fire' between the semi-automatic AR-15 and most M-16s used by the US military is not the ability to switch between semi and auto, but rather semi and 3-shot burst. Only some minority variants of currently issued M-16 have an 'auto' option, since this is not judged to be very effective. The 'receivers' (main body) on recent AR-15s have been re-designed so that M-16 trigger components can't be dropped straight in to convert easily to fully automatic.
There is no doubt that the AR-15 is marketed as a military style 'black rifle', but its action and characteristics are very similar to a large number of sporting semi-automatic rifles. Perhaps one could say that it is less practical for legitimate purposes than say a stock hunting or target rifle, but it does not fire any more quickly or use more lethal ammunition."
I am also a big supporter of the rights to bear arms but i am in favor of tougher gun laws in the USA. Banning semi-auto guns I would agree with, however, banning these guns will not stop terrorists from acquiring them..That is a fact.
