PCShogun said:
In part, an "Assault Weapon" is a:
"semiautomatic weapon(s) for which there is no fixed magazine with capacity of twenty-one or more rounds available." How do they determine is such a magazine is available? If it is in your possession?, in your truck? In your home or in the state? Perhaps if it exists in the dealer catalog somewhere?
...
Why not look at the firearms violence sources as we know them:
To answer the former, I suspect that "available" means that anyone, at anytime, has manufactured a 21+ round magazine. For example, there is a carbine conversion kit available for the 1911 and the Glock. There are also 21+ round mags or drums available for each. A prosecutor could make the argument that a Glock or 1911 is an assault weapon under this law. Likewise, there are mods that allow the Remington 700 to accept aftermarket mags. Assault weapon.
The reason why they are not looking at solving firearms violence is because they are either:
1) Stupid. Do not OVERestimate* these people's intelligence. If you have ever discussed this issue with a hard core anti-gun zealot you will rapidly realize that facts, logic, and reason are irrelevant. It is all about emotion and feeling. You can also refer to these types as "useful idiots." They get elected to office sometime. Rep Hank Johnson (D-GA) fears that the island of Guam might literally sink into the ocean if more troops are stationed there. Rep Larcenia Bullard (D-FL) thinks that "animal husbandry" is a form of bestiality (having sex with farm animals).
2) Evil. They know that the measures they push will not do jack to address violence. That doesn't matter, because their objective isn't to reduce violence. They hate you on a very personal level and want to punish you. They hate that you exist, that you feel some measure of independence as demonstrated by trying to exercise a "right" to self defense, and most of all they hate you because you think you have rights as a citizen.
They want to have thugs kick in your door, shoot your dog, terrorize your children, and haul you off to prison for a long time. Look at the sentencing provisions: first offence of this law is a felony with a ten year possible prison sentence. A second offense is a FIVE YEAR MINIMUM and up to 20 in prison. Those penalties are harsher than the penalties for molesting a child (sexual battery of a 14 year old for example) . The mandatory minimum is longer than that for manslaughter. They are harsher with criminal sexual assault two.
They think you are worse than a child molester, rapist, or killer.
Do not underestimate the adversary. This bill is almost certainly going nowhere, but the people drafting them hate you.
*Edited to fix typo.