Some people who have not served in the military lack training in how to use firearms with proficiency or lack respect for the power of automatic vs. manual ones. Otherwise, why would so many advocates of armed guards in our schools not also support banning the ownership of automatic firearms by the general public? Presumably the guards would not carry automatic military-style arms, which would make them sitting ducks!
The persistent use of the term “gun” when referring to anything that shoots reveals a blurring of distinction between arms designed to be used in agressive and/or defensive war and those to be used for recreation and/or personal safety. When I was in the military decades ago, the term “gun” was reserved for cannon weaponry such as huge howitzers whereas personally-carried firearms were called weapons, or in the case of pistols carried by certain leaders, sidearms. Although our BB and pellet shooters were and are still called guns, we should pay attention to the military’s application of the generic term “weapon” to devices designed to kill people and destroy their stuff.
“Weapon” should be used in an amended Second Amendment to our U.S. Constitution which was adopted on Dec. 15, 1791, when the muzzle loader (in rifle or pistol form) was the only personal firearm and our Army consisted of local militias. The sale of military weapons of any size should be banned, and like Australia the ones out there should be bought back by Uncle Sam at a fair price with substantial penalty for failure to comply. And the amended Amendment should call for training and background check of every new buyer, secure storage (even for firearms owned before the amended Second Amendment), before licensure to use a newly acquired arm for recreation or personal safety.