[FRIAM] is "assault rifle" a red herring?

[uǝlƃ ↙↙↙]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/24/boulder-ban-assault-rifles-mass-shooting

https://www.vice.com/en/article/7k9njz/atlanta-shooting-suspect-bought-his-gun-the-same-day-he-allegedly-killed-8-people

According to the Vice article, the massage parlor shooter used a 9mm handgun. I have a 9mm Beretta and I can fit 10 rounds in the mag. It seems rifles can be unwieldy at close range. The only benefit I can see, if you want to murder lots of people, is the rifle has some stability that helps with targeting. So my question is whether banning "assault" rifles is of any use at all?

I do get that the styling appeals to machismo. But so do handguns. We met a guy at the pub last weekend who brought his dog. A friend wanted to take the dog inside to visit another dog who'd just arrived. The dog owner nearly shouted at the friend: "Left side!", meaning the leash should be held in the left hand. I asked, "Why?". The dog owner explained that he always carries his handgun on the right hand side and wants to train the dog to stay on the left, you know, so he can always be ready to whip out his gun and kill people.

That macho paramilitary, camo-wearing, pseudo-tough, stockpiles of Mountain Dew in the basement [⛧] attitude seems to play some role in those to whom the AR-15 appeals. I suppose the trick is teasing out which ones are actually dangerous from those simply LARPing. Removing the macho styling also, I suppose, targets the material cause. But it seems too weak to matter much.


[⛧] https://youtu.be/QUHoFotHj9k?t=225

-- 
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ