What we need to regulate is gun features like rate of fire, size of clips and other similar attributes that turn a target or hunting machine into an maximum effective people killing machine.
Welcome back, Husker.
So you recognize the problem with identifying specific models, but it seems you do not understand what features should be "restricted" and are in common production rifles right now and have been for a VERY long time. I won't list all the models because it won't matter. But understand that seeking to legislate away these firearm features IS a direct infringement upon the right to keep and bear arms. There was no qualifier to the "arms" ... only that the right to keep and bear wasn't to be infringed.
But since you listed a few characteristics ...
Rate of Fire ... automatic weapons are already illegal for civilians. AFA Semi Auto, that is limited by the shooter ... unless your suggestion is to restrict a repeater to one shot and reload. That will not happen and it shouldn't happen.
size of clips (sic) ... we haven't had production firearms with "clips" since WWII ... the term is magazine. Yes, it matters. Words matter, right? That's not a jab, it's a correction. arbitrarily setting a limit on the magazine capacity without infringing upon what y'all continue to say you support in firearm use ... dubious at best. OK ... restrict the AR-type magazines to 100 rounds ... even 50 rounds ... but at/below this line you are treading into your "legitimate uses" ... and guess what ... most mass shootings were with at/less than 30 round magazines.
similar attributes ... not exactly descriptive, but the other "features" of which I've read by gun control activists include stocks, grips, aiming devices (scopes/sights), muzzle breaks ... silencers. These are also among "legitimate" uses
So we get back to the basic and problematic ...
I've defined an outline of what I'd support.
*legislatively. As I've mentioned and referred to previous examples of "the left's" admonition --- behavior cannot be legislated. Legislation can only influence behavior, in a proper view of innocent until proven guilty ...
I've also already told you my response, but it doesn't compute to ya for some reason. Bottom line is, I don't suppose to "fix" the problem of mass shootings. Until people start realizing for themselves how wrong it is, it just simply won't matter. Meanwhile, we're tossing our Great Experiment into the history book ... "by your leave, sir" is the phrase used when our Founders ignited this candle called These United States of America. It's burned brightly for a long time ... but there is a growing number of people who would extinguish that flame for the promise of "not getting burned." A promise which cannot be kept by the government. So ... please stop insisting it can.