Over at the Observer-Reporter of Washington, PA, their crack editorial staff is all worked up over the "availability" of 'assault weapons'. Putting aside the horrendous murder of the cops int he piece, tragedies all in their own right, I want to focus on the crux of the argument.
The piece bemoans the lapse of the Violent Crime Act of 1994 in 2004. What this piece doesn't tell you is that this law did nothing to stem the flow of alleged 'assault weapons'. They were, and are, still available for sale in most areas of the country. What changed in 2004 was that what was banned in '94 was now allowed; namely bayonet lugs, threaded muzzles, and folding/telescoping stocks.
When the Department of Justice and National Institutes of Justice studied the effects of the ban, they found that while these weapons uses in crime were a virtual statistical anomaly before the ban, the resultant decrease in crimes committed with them during the ban wasn't even calculable.
Another part of the ban that went away was the ban on standard capacity magazines, capping them at 10 rds for pistols and rifles, and 5 rounds for shotguns. Now, depending on where you're at, magazine capacities are limited to 5 rds in rifles, like here in South Dakota for instance. While across the state line in Wyoming, there is no such restriction. One can hunt with a 30 rd mag or a 75 rd drum if they're so inclined. (I must add that I have hunted in WY with a 30 rd mag, unfortunately, I wasn't able to bag anything, much to the delight of the anti-gun/hunting forces out there.) In those states that have magazine restrictions, they do make 5 rd hunting mags specifically for that purpose, so you can go out and hunt with your SKS, Saiga, AK, FAL, or heavy caliber AR without getting into trouble.
Sometimes, you can't make this stuff up.