The Federal Government wants to ban something with “no consistent or specific definition.” So what could go wrong here? In the eyes of the Obama Administration and Trial Lawyers, nothing. This is a golden opportunity to gain more control by the Federal Government and more power for the Democrat Party. If the Democrats control how this law is administered people would be careful how they deal with the party.
Assault weapon is a term which has been given many different meanings. One is that it is any of various automatic and semiautomatic military firearms using an intermediate cartridge. In the United States, there are a variety of statutory definitions of assault weapons in local, state, and federal laws that define them by a set of characteristics they possess, sometimes described as military-style features useful in combat. Using lists of physical features or specific firearms in defining assault weapons in the U.S. was first codified by the language of the now-expired 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban. A common usage is to interchange the term with assault rifle, but unlike that term, “assault weapon” has no consistent or specific definition and so is subject to varying definitions for varying purposes, including definitions that include common non-military-style firearms.