Even Ronald Reagan said civilians don’t need military weapons.
When asked if he thought that, by banning military rifles, Americans would be able to take guns out of the hands of murderers, without taking them away from law-abiding citizens, he stated, “I would be very happy to answer that question. California has a system unlike that of many other states, in which when you go in to buy a gun, you put down your money and you buy a gun, but you don’t get to pick up the gun for several days because investigation is then made to make sure that you’re not a felon, that you don’t have a record of bad conduct, or mental illness or anything. And then you can come back and get your gun. And I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen to own guns for sporting, for hunting, and so forth, or for home defense, but I do believe that an AK-47 — a machine gun — is not a sporting weapon, or needed for the defense of a home.”
Stronger reform on assault rifles doesn’t need to be a partisan issue — and as Reagan implied, regulating weapons does not necessarily take away anyone else’s right to arms.