TIRED OF IT

I'm getting really tired of all the reactions to mass shootings in this country, aren't you? I know a lot of pro-second amendment people will cringe at this idea and probably lash out at me, but here goes:

Let's give the cry babies what most of them are demanding, even though it will likely do them no good; that is, ban assault rifles. Yes, I know, that is an arbitrary classification of firearms, all of which can be used for assault (among other things). Let's let them come up with a definition that doesn't mean giving up all semi-automatic firearms, something (admit it) we don't really need for normal self-defense in our homes, something we don't need to bring down a deer or a rabbit or squirrel or any other game animal. I suppose there are some engaged in stopping the wild boar from destroying crops and live stock and game animals who could benefit from a semi-automatic rifle like an AR15, but perhaps we could put caveat on any legislation allowing their use for this or other similar, legal, uses where nothing else really fills the bill.

Personally, I don't own an AR15 or anything like it, unless you count any semi-auto firearm as being similar. Therefore, I have nothing to lose in this proposal. I get that, but hear me out. I would not expect anyone to simply hand over their "assault rifles" without compensation. I would demand that if a law banning them were passed, and confiscation was a part of it, that the owners of said guns be reimbursed the full value of them. In my opinion, simply banning ownership of them would do little, if any, good. I know I wouldn't just give up something that cost me hundreds or even thousands of dollars just because someone else thought it was bad for society. I, and likely most others, would find  a market for them, legal or not, or they would simply keep them and hope they don't get caught. If these guns are still out there, and available through the black market, it will do no good to ban them. Confiscation is the only way this could positively affect the use of them for mass shootings.

We are already prohibited (for all practical purposes) from having fully automatic firearms, so this is just another thing we'd have to accept. Sure, it would be cool to have your own 50 cal machine gun and be able to use it, so would having your own howitzer or A-bomb, but let's be realistic; that's not something that will ever be legal for private citizens.

My proposition is this: let the leftists get a small piece of the pie, assault rifle ban, with the stipulation that part of the law prevents any further restrictions on our right to bear arms.  We could even put in a stipulation that if mass murders do not decrease significantly within a few years, the law is rescinded. If it doesn't do any good for society, then it is not worth restricting people's Constitutional rights.