Semi automatics need to be outlawed

[better]

16. Actually, defining semi-automatic is quite easy, if you actually know how firearms work.

It's a weapon in which the energy expended by firing a round is harnessed to chamber the next shot automatically, and where the trigger must be released before another round can be fired. It really is that simple. A revolver generally falls technically outside this classification because while no action other than pulling the trigger is necessary to chamber the next round, a revolver chambers the next round mechanically by the trigger action rather than by harnessing the expanding gasses, and before the round is fired, rather than after. And actually, if we want to be super-technical, we would include that a semi-automatic fires only one round per trigger pull, and get into things like a 3-round burst-fire mode found on some select-fire weapons, but you get the idea.

Part of the problem we have getting effective legislation passed is that many on the left mistakenly believe that "semi-automatic" means "machine gun", when in fact it quite explicitly means not a machine gun, specifically because the trigger must be released before another round can be fired. Rounds firing continuously as long as the trigger is held is what actually defines a machine gun.

As a nearly lifelong gun owner and a solid liberal, I really wish that more people on our side of the aisle would invest the effort to understand enough about firearms to be able to tell the difference between legislation that is scientifically sound and would make a difference and legislation that targets the wrong thing. I post explanations like this despite it often being perceived as "gunsplaining" because in order to regulate something well, it is important to understand it well enough to be able to differentiate between regulating it well and regulating it poorly. And the same holds true to an extent for supporting legislation.

As I've said many times before, the real problem is not AR-15's or semi-automatics in general. A semi-automatic, even an AR-15, is perfectly reasonable to allow civilians to own, for a variety of lawful uses. Where the real problem lies, and what is not reasonable for civilians to own, are high-capacity magazines. The AR-15 is the weapon of choice in mass shootings primarily because it is the weapon for which high capacity magazines are most common. Outlaw all magazines above a reasonable capacity, and an AR-15 is no more unsuitable for civilian use than any normal old ranch or hunting rifle.

At the end of the day, we're probably not ever going to see a ban on semi-automatic weapons, because there are legitimate reasons for civilians to be allowed to own them, and the arguments against them are almost entirely founded upon an inadequate and often completely incorrect understanding of what they are and how they work.

Extended capacity magazines, on the other hand, we actually do stand a reasonable chance of being able to outlaw, in no small part because even those of us who support lawful gun ownership can and will acknowledge that unlike some of the famously targeted characteristics like pistol grips, extended capacity truly does have a direct correlation to a weapon's suitability for assault, and none of the lawful uses for which most reasonable gun owners want to own semi-automatics justifiably require high capacity. Being able to fire 30 rounds before reloading is important in combat, but not for hunting, competition, or target practice, and honest, reasonable, law-abiding gun owners will admit that. There are of course many who would still oppose it, but enough would accept it that it might actually be achievable, and it really would make a difference.