Many states have minimum wait times, usually 3 days. Those wait times are often waived if you have a concealed carry or active duty law enforcement since both involve much more extensive recording and background checks already.
I would appreciate it if you didn't strawman my position as "I don't know what they do and they look scary so I want to take away ya guns." I know exactly what the fuck these things do, I know how dangerous and scary ALL guns are, I just think that certain types are overkill for what they're given to the public for and COULD cause huge levels of death and damage if they fell into the wrong hands...so they should be banned because they're just more dangerous on an individual level than pistols. Automatic weapons also includes machine pistols, by the way. What would have happened, do you think, if the Virginia shooter had had a machine pistol instead, hm?
This is the problem with your argument. You say 'I know exactly what these things do', but then you keep making statements that show that you do not know what they do or even what current laws and regulations are.
Leveling a city block? A hand grenade for example has an effective lethal radius of 15 meters, so roughly the length of a city bus. That's a pretty big area, but it's not a city block. RPGs? I'm going to assume you mean the stereotypical russian shoulder mounted rocket launcher since that's what most people see in video games and movies: less than half that, 7 meters. All deadly weapons, but designed for military applications. If someone just wants to kill people they're literally better off building a bomb with basic instructions from the internet and things they can buy from Home Depot.
And after all of that the reality is that these items (generally referred to as incendiary or explosive devices) are already heavily regulated
. There is no gunstore you can go into and pick up an RPG-7 off the shelf.
Gun-Free Zones... so 13% of crime happens in a gun-free zone (assuming this is correct, just going with it). So more than 1 and 10 crimes happen in a gun-free zone. If one and ten burglaries happened in a 'door lock free' zone would that somehow be a good statistic for removing all door locks?
Also how are you enforcing the gun free zone? Are you going to invest billions of dollars for metal detectors, full time employees, and training for every one of these gun free zones? Because otherwise they're just quaint signs on a door. I know I ignore them every time I go to the movies or the mall because I have no interest in being disarmed by a little yellow placard that will be equally ignored by anyone that is actually
meaning to do harm.
And then we get into assault weapons, which is the word you keep using. Can you actually define an 'assault weapon' for me? Because as far as I know the term has never been defined. The 90s assault weapons ban was a completely random selection of guns that were entirely chosen based upon public knowledge and how 'military' they looked.
Hi capacity magazines and automatic weapons? Have you ever wondered, if these 50 and 100 round magazines are such 'machines of death' why the US Military doesn't equip all of our soldiers with them? It's because they're generally terrible. They jam with regularity and tend to result in their users missing more than they hit.
Elliot Rodgers? He was using normal handguns with basic ten round magazines. Look at the list of spree killings in the United States (which is, indeed, too damn many) and what you'll find? Most of them are not perpetrated by guys like Holmes wearing full body armor with 100 round magazines. Most of them are people with normal, off the shelf guns. Normal remington hunting rifles, glock 9mm pistols, etc. In the Aurora shooting the fact that Holmes was using one of those 100 mags probably meant less people died because it jammed with over 1/3 of the magazine still in it.
Finally your 'gun license' idea? I'm actually all for universal background checks and such. But half the things you want to implement? Already exist
. Which is why people usually don't take these arguments seriously. Most the people arguing for gun control aren't even aware of the laws they are trying to change.
The fact of the matter is you cannot stop someone that wants to kill people in mass as long as guns
exist, and there is way to get rid of them all. These ideas that somehow one less round in the chamber or banning pistol grips, or any of the rest are just ways for politicians to make it look like they're doing something just like the TSA. If you want to stop spree killings then the only way to do that is to stop them BEFORE there is ever an attack.