General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: People on here should not be allowed to advocate for health care reform [View all]AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)You would not want to see the same article if the shooter had used an AR-10.
I'll answer your question slightly differently. If we're going to ban some guns, we need to ban a scope of features. To meaningfully restrict the two indicators you highlighted (power and firing rate) we basically need to do all semi-auto long guns. Possibly all semi-auto handguns, if you think back to Virginia Tech.
Speaking to power only, there is no cartridge sufficiently weak enough to be fired at humans and be less problematic from a murder/death standpoint. SO maybe we do need to ban them all. I don't personally like that answer, but if that's a conversation we need to have, then lets have it. 'Lets ban AR-15's' is counter-productive and will not increase public safety in any meaningful way, AND it will harm our ability to explore meaningful regulation in the future.
As Bill Clinton noted after his mid-terms due to the passage of the CAWB and the fallout from that, it may further erode our ability to pass legislation AT ALL.