The Real Goal Behind “Assault Weapon” Bans

Austin Reville
Mar 15
3 min read

Across the country, lawmakers continue pushing bans on commonly owned firearms, often using shifting language and last-minute amendments that can turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals overnight.

A recent example comes from legislation that initially allowed gun owners who legally possessed certain firearms before July 1, 2026 to keep them under a grandfather clause. However, a proposed amendment could drastically change that protection. Instead of allowing continued possession, the revision would require those owners to sell or transfer their firearms by a new deadline, typically to a federally licensed dealer or an out-of-state buyer. After that deadline passes, continued possession would be illegal.

In other words, individuals who were once protected under the law could suddenly find themselves facing felony charges for simply keeping property they legally purchased.

A Growing National Trend

Map of States in the United States that have a so called "Assualt Weapons Ban" — Map provided by the USCCA

Currently, 11 states have enacted so-called “assault weapon” bans, and several others are actively attempting to follow suit. States like Virginia, Minnesota, and New Mexico have all seen proposals introduced during recent legislative sessions.

While New Mexico’s proposal appears to have stalled for the moment, lawmakers in Virginia and Minnesota continue pushing forward with various versions of semi-automatic firearm bans and magazine restrictions. In Minnesota, Governor Tim Walz has once again brought national attention to the issue by advocating for bans that would target some of the most commonly owned rifles in America.

The Reality Behind the Argument

Even supporters of these bans rarely claim they will dramatically reduce violent crime. That’s because the data simply doesn’t support the claim. Rifles of all types—including semi-automatic rifles—account for a very small percentage of crimes committed with firearms in the United States. In fact, handguns are far more commonly used in violent crime due largely to their portability and concealability.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that handguns are constitutionally protected. In the landmark case District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court made it clear that firearms in common use for lawful purposes cannot be banned. Handguns meet that standard. So do semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15.

Millions of law-abiding Americans own these rifles for sport shooting, hunting, and self-defense. That popularity alone places them firmly within the constitutional protections recognized by the Court.

Courts Continue to Clash

Despite Supreme Court precedent, several lower federal courts have upheld state-level bans. Many of these rulings rely on legal reasoning that predates more recent Second Amendment decisions like New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which clarified how courts must evaluate gun regulations.

For now, the legal battle continues. One of the next major cases to watch is ANJRPC v. Platkin, currently before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. In that case, the United States Department of Justice has filed a brief supporting the argument that bans on commonly owned firearms violate the Constitution. Another important case awaiting potential Supreme Court review is Viramontes v. Cook County, which asks whether Americans have the constitutional right to own AR-15-style rifles.

Waiting on the Supreme Court

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas a George H.W. Bush appointee.

Last year, the Supreme Court declined to hear several cases involving firearm bans, including challenges to laws in Maryland and Rhode Island. However, Brett Kavanaugh suggested the Court would likely address the issue soon. Meanwhile, Clarence Thomas strongly dissented from those decisions, writing:

“I cannot see how AR-15s fall outside the Second Amendment’s protection … I would not wait to decide whether the government can ban the most popular rifle in America.”

Many Americans—and many in the firearms community—share that frustration.

Why This Matters

The debate over so-called “assault weapons” is not really about crime statistics or firearm mechanics. At its core, it is about whether the government can ban firearms that millions of Americans legally own and regularly use.

Until the Supreme Court provides clear guidance on the issue, these legislative battles will likely continue in states across the country—including here in Minnesota. At 2 If By Sea Tactical, we believe constitutional rights should not shift based on political trends or temporary majorities. The Second Amendment protects arms in common use, and those protections must remain firmly in place for future generations.

Here at 2 If By Sea Tactical we strive to bring you the best experience in the firearms world. As we continue to grow the media arm of 2 If By Sea, make sure you keep tuning in to our Youtube and Rumble channels and right here at “The Patriot’s Almanac” to stay informed on the latest happenings in the firearm world! But we are not lawyers, so this isn't legal guidance. We are proud to be Southern Minnesota source for all things 2A.