I've seen the video of Mitt Romney announcing signing of the Mass Assault Rifle Ban, including his rationalization that the bill was supported by both the anti-gun and the *pro-gun* crowd, and that (I am paraphrasing...) gun owners "got as good as the gave" with this bill.
I cannot imagine what procedural or regulatory "win" for gun-owners would have justified this 2-A abridgement, e.g. 20% reduction in hunting license fees for no more ARs, etc., so I am appealling to those with first hand knowledge of this wonderful trade-off to please enlighten us.
Also, how was the ARB ban implemented? Was there a turn-in requirement or were existing weapons "grandfathered"? Was there a registration requirement?
Apologies if these specific questions have been covered elsewhere, but I searched and could not find them covered elsewhere.
I cannot imagine what procedural or regulatory "win" for gun-owners would have justified this 2-A abridgement, e.g. 20% reduction in hunting license fees for no more ARs, etc., so I am appealling to those with first hand knowledge of this wonderful trade-off to please enlighten us.
Also, how was the ARB ban implemented? Was there a turn-in requirement or were existing weapons "grandfathered"? Was there a registration requirement?
Apologies if these specific questions have been covered elsewhere, but I searched and could not find them covered elsewhere.