My opinion for assault weapons legislation: KEEP IT SIMPLE!
Remember the KISS Principle: Keep It Simple, Stupid!
One of the big problems with the previous assault weapons ban that has since expired was that it had a big, complicated definition of what is and isn't an "assault weapon".
There was a definition that used combinations of features such as telescoping stocks, pistol grips, etc, as well as a long list of specific models of guns.
There were enough loopholes that the gun manufacturers simply changed the designs a bit to sidestep the law. The law got ridiculed and didn't have much legitimacy in the public eye.
So I say keep it simple. Don't even use the term "assault weapon".
Make a simple law. I'd suggest the law address the property of a weapon that correlates best with its deadliness - it's ability to fire large numbers of bullets in a small amount of time.
Think about it. Even the NRA hasn't been able to remove the restrictions on the most insanely deadly firearms, full-auto machine guns (with the exception of those with Class III licenses, who pay huge taxes when they buy such weapons, and pretty much keep those weapons as collectors items. You don't see nearly as many low-class criminals or deranged school shooters that have actual full-auto weapons.) The firearms available to most mere-mortals are semi-auto. One pull of the trigger fires one bullet. No rat-a-tat, unless you don't mind ten-year prison terms.
So, I'd say the magazine cap is a good thing to bring back. You can only fire ten shots before you have to reload. Not a perfect solution, but maybe it will turn the mayhem down a notch.
I don't care if the gun has collapsible stocks, laser sights, pistol grips or racing stripes, as long as it's not capable of firing more than ten bullets at a time between reloads.
That should actually be a simple bill to write. Getting it signed into law will be insanely difficult...
= new reply since forum marked as read
Part of the reason why the Brady Assault Weapons ban failed was because it had a clumsy, complicated definition of an "assault weapon", and the Gungeoneer types immediately ridiculed it. It didn't resonate with the public, it didn't feel legitimate, the gun-makers sidestepped the ban and created weapons which were still very deadly.
If you want to implement gun control (and I do. I don't want to ban guns entirely, but I think restricting high-capacity weapons and licensing owners is perfectly reasonable, given how many people keep getting killed,) I'd suggest doing some research. Learn about the various types of guns that are available to the public, how they work, how they're used.
My suggestions:
Ten round magazine cap on rifles and semi-automatic pistols.
Five round cap on semi-auto and pump-action shotguns.
Certainly, no more magazines like these...
Revolvers, on the most part, are self-limiting. Most designs give you five or six shots between reloads, some as many as eight. A revolver that can hold more shots than that would be ridiculous. And in my personal experience, it's a bit harder to fire them fast - they have a long, heavy trigger pull (unless you cock the hammer first, but if you're rapid-firing, you're not going to cock before firing every round. Old-West-era single-action revolvers could be fired by fanning the hammer, though that's incredibly inaccurate, unless you're insanely good. Fanning also can damage your revolver.)
