I personally agree that certain guns really have no use but for military or mass murdering. Those types of guns really shouldn't be in civilian hands tbh.
In an ideal world a civilian has access to a deer rifle, handgun with up to 9 shots, and a shotgun. Tbh that's still a lot of fucking firepower and honestly more than you can trust the average idiots with but it is a right allowed by the Constitution.
Exactly which guns would that be? Because way over 99.9% of the dreaded AR-15s in civilian hands are used legally and safely. According to the FBI, between 2007 and 2017,
all rifles (not just the dreaded AR-15) accounted for between 2-4% of all homicides. So, on a list of which tools murders are using to practice their craft, rifles are barely a blip, and assault rifles are only a small fraction of that blip.
The AR-15 is the most popular single rifle platform in America. It is used by lawful gun owners for lawful hunting, sport and target shooting purposes, and is a damn good tool for protecting your home and family with, and only misused in very rare instances. Lawful semi-auto rifle owners should not be turned into criminals because of the actions of a few criminal/evil/sick individuals. Just like banning motorcycle would be an inappropriate response to someone escaping from the scene of a crime on one. Or trying to ban automobiles to stop drunk driving.
And even if we agreed that a civilian can only own what's on your list, how would we actually force criminals and murders to obey that restriction? The reality is we can't, so such a ban would only serve to disarm the lawful.