So it’s conservative to refuse to ban tobacco? Do you agree with the general consensus that it’s also conservative to ban marijuana? How do you square those two attitudes, if so?

1. Absolutely everyone with an interest in a self-defense firearm would prefer a “high capacity” one. The only guns that aren’t high capacity are single-shot and revolvers, both useless for self-defense in general.
2. High caliber is not relevant here; we are discussing all weapons Connecticut has defined as “assault”, including low-caliber ones, not specifically e.g. .50s. For example, some AR platform rifles fire 22 caliber rounds, very famously a low caliber by anyone’s definition. 2A) If it were relevant, you would be wrong, as low-caliber weapons are completely useless against bears and other large wildlife, as well as anyone in body armor. People don’t buy self-defense firearms knowing what threat they will need to stop.
3. Same again for Rifle; the statutes in question label many non-Rifles as “assault”. 3A) Rifles are significantly more accurate than handguns and hence are significantly more credible for home defense than handguns, whose only benefit is portability for self-defense on the go. Given the choice between a handgun or a rifle for home defense, only a fool would choose a handgun. Because home defense can include close-quarters combat and is never going to include very long distances, a relatively short-barreled rifle is your best bet - only a fool would choose a long rifle optimized for hunting long-distance targets.

There is no SUV in this picture.

Why are you riding your bike on the sidewalk?