Yeah, and good riddance. It was an asinine law. I feel like I must have commented on this before here, but I'm too lazy to search at the moment.

Here's a rundown of what the so-called assault weapons ban actually did, in, hopefully, non-gun-nut terms:

First, it had absolutely no effect on fully automatic weapons. (I find that many people are confused by the difference between fully- and semi-automatic guns, so let me define that really quickly. A fully automatic gun allows you to pull the trigger once and, while holding it down, will fire continuously. A semi-automatic gun fires one and only one bullet each time you pull the trigger, but it does automatically ready the next bullet, so you don't have to cock a hammer, or insert another bullet, before firing again.) Fully-automatic weapons are effectively banned due to a couple of laws dating back to the '20s.

Second, it called out about a dozen specific guns, by name, as assault weapons, and banned those.

Third, it defined "assault weapons" and banned guns that fell into that category. This is where it gets really asinine. A rifle was defined as an assault weapon if it was semi-automatic, accepted removable ammunition magazines that held six or more bullets, and had more than one of the following:

• Folding, telescoping, collapsible, etc. stock. That is, if the part of the rifle that normally rests against your shoulder when firing it can be removed in some way.
• Pistol grip. That's pretty much exactly what it sounds like. Instead of your trigger hand cradling the bottom of the rifle, as with a more traditionally styled rifle, there is a protrusion allowing you to grip the rifle with your trigger hand as if it were a pistol.
• Flash suppressor. A flash suppressor is a device attached to the end of the barrel of a rifle that tries to hide the flame that is emitted from a rifle when it is fired. This has two basic purposes. One, the flash can be distracting to the person firing the rifle, and, two, the flash can be a giveaway to the position of a hidden assailant.
• Bayonet mount. The ability to attach a knife to the end of your rifle.
• Grenade launcher. It's actually not the type of grenade launcher you might be thinking of, where there's an almost separate cannon-like device attached to the rifle. There are some grenades that can be attached to the end of the rifle's normal barrel and a special "bullet" can be inserted to launch it.

And, remember, any weapon could legally have any one of those things, just not two or more. These things fall into two camps from my point of view. The "so what" camp: pistol grips and collapsing stocks. Okay, maybe a collapsing stock can aid in concealing a rifle, but, so? Notably, it doesn't prevent a rifle from simply having no stock at all. And the "holy crap" camp: bayonets, flash suppressors, and grenade launchers!?! That's right, under this supposedly onerous law, you could legally have a grenade launcher.

I'm trying to imagine the thought process behind this law. I mean, clearly, the NRA was trying to get any concessions they could, but was there someone up there lobbying that they might run out of ammo while shooting a deer and have to run over and stab it with their bayonet? Or that the bear might be scared off because of the flash coming from his rifle. I guess he's hunting deaf bears.

There are similarly, but not quite as, asinine provisions for pistols. They could have any one of the following features:

• Magazine that attaches somewhere other than the grip. Semiauto pistols you usually see in the movies have the bullets in a container in the grip itself. This is talking about when the container attaches somewhere else.
• Threaded barrel. Basically, the ability to attach things to the end of the barrel, things like flash suppressors, barrel extensions, and silencers.
• Barrel shrouds. Basically part of the body of the gun surrounds the barrel and allows you to use a second hand to grip it.
• Weight over 50oz/3 lbs 2 oz/1.8kg.
• Basis on a fully automatic pistol.

The "so what" camp: must be lightweight, can't look like another gun, and must have the ammo in the grip. The "holy crap" camp: again with flash suppressors, and this time, silencers!

Ultimately, in my opinion, this law did a lot of damage. It served to irritate gun nuts (never a good idea), while also doing nothing to reduce gun violence. Manufacturers simply redesigned weapons to meet these asinine rules. And, notably, a significant portion of the rules seemed to be based not on mitigation of danger, but on the appearance of the weapons. Some guns nuts ended up referring to this law as the "ugly gun law". Any political progress that may have been made towards a realistic weapons law was squandered and dashed with this useless legislation.