Limiting the rights of the individual without due process of law?
Full auto should not be outright banned but rather a restricted use firearm. Restricted as in the sense of no carry, restricted to home storage, locked in a safe when owner is not at home and used only under life threatening circumstances at home or during practice at a gun range. Similar to existing Hawaii general firearms laws but with the addition of the safe when owners are not at home.
Felonies differ from State to State and thus a federal unilaterally applied law without uniform state legal standards regarding felonies would circumnavigate the equal privileges and immunities clause.
For example; Vehicular Manslaughter, DUI's etc all differ with regard to felony or misdemeanor charges state by state. A more Constitutional approach would be Federal Standards based on violent and predatory convictions where the Convicting Judge is responsible for mandating removal of the right to keep and bear arms on Federal Standards under strict appropriate conditions only. When the judiciary removal order has been entered, the right to keep and bear arms is then removed and the person placed on a no firearms list.
I think preventing someone from certain diagnosed mental disorders is reasonable, Case by case basis and again under federal standards that a doctor is responsible for diagnosing and a definite prerequisite for being prescribed particular known to be dangerous prescription medications. Also such a gun rights removal should be subject to re-evaluation if sought through simple court procedures and medical clearance.
Also - No State, City, Municipality or privately owned open to public business may implement or adopt any local laws or rules regarding firearms. The federal standards should create uniformly applied laws throughout the 50 states and no individuals firearms rights will differ when traveling from one state to another.
I think background checks are reasonable (otherwise it would be impossible to screen for those placed on the no firearms list)
I think heavy ordinances should be legally restricted and handled according to necessity usages.
I am against magazine capacity limit laws and any laws that limit the many available options for firearms.
Local registration for full automatic weapons only as a method to help local law enforcement in helping track down and find stolen firearms of this type.
Semi automatic and under should require no local registration aside form the basic background clearance check when the purchase is registered within a central data base and that data base should only be accessible for checking a person for clearance and or when one who has been entered on the no firearms list to see if they have previously purchased, what they have purchased etc. so law enforcement can track them down and remove the firearms they previously purchased.
I am for concealed and open carry for any firearm short of full auto firearms and this carry practice need no special clearances or permits.
I will admit the part with regard to full auto can be argued for or against but the rest is pretty much the proper approach rather than generalizing "felony" while inadvertently denying or approving people from differing states based on differing state felony classifications. That word felony is full of holes as is no contact order etc. All is subjective state by state and there needs to be uniform application, otherwise a state could start classifying a parking ticket as a felony to keep its citizens from owning firearms.