[44 AMP]

So I have no idea what they would do, specifically. But if you take a look at the history of the gun control movement, one can find some good indicators.

They were fine for decades with just the NFA 34. They didn't care about what they today call assault weapons (military style semi autos). Certainly they would have gladly accepted any restriction on any one owning any gun, but the didn't push for any additional restrictions on machine guns, or their semi auto look alikes. For decades, they focused their main effort on handguns, when they focused on a specific type at all.

Their push against handguns was led by the catch phrase "Saturday Night Special", which, of course, they defined to suit themselves. The GCA 68's provisions for banning the import of handguns below a certain arbitrary size criteria (along with other guns for other reasons) was what they got from that campaign. And they got the GCA 68 due to a combination of two main factors, the Kennedy assassinations, (how it was sold to the public) and trade protectionism (how it was sold to many members of Congress).

They didn't give a rat's posterior about making any significant effort to restrict military style semi autos. First, because they had not been used in any spectacular crimes, and were very very seldom used in "ordinary" street crime. Second, they were a relatively small portion of the gun market (in those days), and third, the new that the time was not right so their efforts would be wasted. Public support just was not there in the 60s, or the 70s. They got support for handgun restrictions, "Saturday Night Specials" were crime guns.

Enter the 80s. Drug traffickers use of illegal full auto guns brought them back into focus in the anti gunner's eye, and back on to the radar of the general non shooting public. Hollywood's increased use of machineguns in every conceivable action movie (because they are dramatic), where before machineguns, especially SMGs and actual assault rifles, where they had been rather rare before, outside of war movies, put them back into the eye of the public (and always in the hands of a bad guy or a cop/soldier).

Then the mass shootings began. San Ysidro Mcdonalds (uzi) didn't get much traction, but it did stir the coals. Stockton schoolyard (AK -semi) started flames, as the media focused on the gun used, instead of the dead nut who pulled the trigger. Our newly developed 24hr news coverage kept it going. the mass murder of children is always news, as often and as grizzly as you can report it, or anything connected with it. The Reagan assassination attempt (handgun) brought the Bradys into it personally. Sarah became the mouthpiece for the movement, and a pretty effective one, using her victim status and political/PR savy to build the image of "assault weapons" in to an evil dangerous threat to life, safety and the American family. Willingly aided and abetted by a major portion of the news and entertainment industry, endlessly repeating (usually for free) whatever lies, disinformation, or obfuscation spoken by any anti gun personality, the political movement built up steam.

Copycat Stockton style shootings and others around the country (and media focus on them) added to the affectiveness of gun control arguments, in the uninformed court of public opinion.

Even though he himself was wounded in the attack, Pres Reagan did not call for, or support more gun control laws. But when the Clinton administration took over, that changed.

The antis have been hitting hard on "assault weapons" ever since. The only remotely beneficial side effect this (for us) has been the relaxation of their attack on handgun ownership. Due to that, and more so to the general public realization after Sept 11 that guns in private citizens hands were not the most dangerous thing facing the people of our nation, we have made a lot of progress in the legal protection of people having and using handguns for self defense in recent years. But make no mistake, they haven't given up, on anything. Once they win another restriction on those evil black rifles, etc. they will go back to trying to get rid of those dangerous handguns as their main effort.

The people making up the movement fall into a few general categories, as to their views on guns. Some fear guns, as objects. These people either un/under educated as to what guns really are, or a simply pathological in their worldview. Some have been "victims" of "gun violence", who have focused on the tool used, instead of the person who did the deed. Many are politically motivated, and do not fear guns at all. What they fear is guns in the hands of people they do not control! They don't want any guns in the hands of Joe Sixpack, generaly holding the elitist view that the great unwashed are unable to be trusted with their own safety, or more importantly, the safety of their precious elitist skins!

The Bradys had no problem as part of the White House entourage, being surrounded by Secret Servicemen and women carrying guns, even true machineguns and assault weapons, on a daily basis. The never said a word in public about the danger they were in from the people around them having these weapons. Not a peep!

The most anti gun politician is fine with an armed bodyguard, the police, and the military having all these weapons. But not with you or I having the same, or anything that remotely resembles them.