@Dragon and Strawberry: Yes, there will always be a truck. Or bombs. Or a screwdriver or anything, but assault rifles are far, far more efficient at death.

Dragon: An assault rifle is no good for hunting because it destroys the meat. If you're talking about trophy hunting, well, that's an entirely different discussion we can have. A rifle and an assault arm have different uses with different efficiency. There's a reason the military uses the latter and not single-shot long arms anymore. Personally, I'm for regulation (not bans) on all guns. It's simply too easy to obtain them in a country living on edge. If fire was destroying us nationwide, wouldn't we get to work trying to control the spread of flame?

Chicago - the poster child for no guns = shootings - is a complicated situation and almost certainly not caused by gun-free zones and restrictive laws. You can't simply tell people punishment is harsh for using a gun - the gun has to be removed from the equation. It's not a weapon of logic and thought. Obviously. Not to mention the spate of "responsible" gun owners accidentally killing themselves and family members. There an interesting article on the Chicago situation: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/18/us/chicago-murder-problem.html?_r=0

@Dragon: Assault rifles specifically because 1), they are meant for killing; not hunting, not defense against bobcats, not home defense where the last thing you want is to spray hundreds of bullets. THey are weapons designed, built and used for war. And 2), because they have been the exclusive weapon of choice in every mass shooting over the last several years. Not handguns, not knives, not axes or bats. Assault rifles. The problem is in their very name.

@Oconnor have you consider that they can be used for hunting, the only thing that different from a rifle is the mag size. The SKS rifle, a 10 clip carbine could do as much damage as an assault rifle. according to your logic because it is semi automatic (some assault rifles are too) that it is safe? Have you considered that generally the shootings have been in gun free zones. Look at Chicago, strictest gun laws but look at the crime...some how the bad people have guns...

Well US provided assault rifles to people in the Middle East to overthrow a regime that does not represent them. And the US says there is no need for US citizens to have assault rifles. See the hypocrisy?

@Oconnor Bad people always have ways to get guns...If good people do not have equal or better than there is no deterrent, a bullet proof vest can stop lower calabers but not AR.

Why assault rifles? Sure they have a lot of power but a cop could be just as easy killed by a handgun...No need to ban stuff because bad people do not follow rules.

Is that the choice, curzeling? I have to care about the police OR civilians? 'Ccause I'm pretty sure that's how we got here.

curzeling i odnt , im just saying why dont oyu answer the question

if you ban rifles they just gonna use a truck and drive people over...

the middle east guns went to an army, not joe bloogs

or they could use hand guns...

@Buddy Were you there?