I have one small correction. The person quoted claims to be a gun salesman. I don't believe him. Here's why:
Since this upward trend shows no signs of ceasing, many citizens and government officials believe automatic weapons need to go.
For all practical purposes relative to criminal use, automatic weapons have already gone. The regulations are so draconian that legally-owned fully-automatic firearms are essentially never used in crime. Given the regulations involved, anyone ignorant on this point while operating in the firearms industry will probably spend the rest of their life in jail.
A shotgun under the bed or a pistol in the nightstand will do just as much damage as a .223 AR-15 â they just arenât as cool looking.
No one could effectively sell guns and be ignorant of the huge functional differences between a handgun, a shotgun, and an AR-15 -- the AR-15 being a specifically semi-automatic firearm, rather than the fully-automatic referred to earlier.
While gun rights advocates often point out that assault weapons bans focus on cosmetic differences between gun models rather than functional differences, those cosmetic differences remain within the class of semiautomatic magazine-fed rifles. Handguns are functionally different (firing a substantially less powerful cartridge in most cases, with different operating mechanisms). Shotguns are again functionally different, lacking a rifled barrel and being designed to fire multiple projectiles.
While all three have self-defense utility, they are significantly different weapons and are not directly comparable in "amount of damage" or other factors such as ammunition capacity and precision of aim. They are different tools, with different design goals, and they are not replaceable one for the other as firearms within the narrower "semiautomatic magazine-fed" category are.
If this individual actually works as a gun salesman, he probably won't for much longer. I think it far more likely that this is an gun control activist pretending to be a gun salesman.