I've read a few articles recently by doctors who have operated on victims of AR-15 and other ASSAULT RIFLES. The main injuries seem to be from the velocity of the bullets, and the cavitation caused once the bullets strike a body/organs. They rip organs apart making repair much more difficult than if a moving object simply sliced through the body. So I call BS on "no more killing capacity"
The damage done is NOT based on the weapon, but the round used.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5424197/Radiologist-reveals-effects-AR-15-bullets-human-body.html
So this doctor, like many others, doesn't know what they are talking about? Seems to be a common theme with you.
She either doesn't know what she is talking about, or is being intentionally misleading. I should point out that getting an MD does not make one an expert on weapons. She may have seen nasty wounds that were fired by an AR-15 and ASSUMED all AR-15s cause that kind of damage, which is not necessarily the case. Let me explain.
An AR-15 is capable of firing a .556 NATO military round (high velocity, and "tumbles" in the body, making it a pretty lethal round, though not the worst) or it can fire a common .22 plinking round (the round most kids use when they first learn to shoot at cans or bottles. A round with a very low lethality).
I should also point out that MANY other rifles that don't look as "scary" as the AR-15 are capable of firing that high velocity military round.
The point is, the AR-15 can fire a highly lethal round, or a far less lethal round.
Non "assault style" rifles that can fire the same lethal round I mentioned before as well (or they can fire less lethal rounds).
Why is this important? Because you have to know what you are talking about to pass a law.
If you ban all AR-15s, the next shooter can just use a Ruger 10-22 or Mini-14. Rather bland looking weapons, that are perfectly capable of firing highly lethal rounds just as fast as an AR-15. As are many other semi-autos that aren't "assault style."
Note that the doctor seemed to be obsessing about how the rounds used in Florida were more lethal than a HANDGUN. She's more or less right there- the 5.56 is far higher velocity than typical handgun rounds (9 mm, .38, etc). Most handguns do not fire high velocity rounds (and they are far less accurate). But almost any rifle can- even ancient bolt action rifles. Note that there are specialized handgun rounds that can do just as much damage, not because of their velocity, but because the bullets are designed to fragment inside the body, causing massive damage.
So a ban on "assault style" rifles would be pretty pointless, because any rifle can do the same kind of internal damage she was talking about, as can handguns, given the proper ammunition selection.
I won't even get into the kind of damage one could do with a semi-auto shotgun at close quarters. These things can have up to 23 rounds, fire ALL of them in less than 4 seconds, and in close quarters are far more devastating than an AR-15.
So are we gonna ban shotguns as well?
