Doubt it.  The 'war on drugs' had pretty much only the effect of making profit margins for drug trafficers very high.  It actually didn't seem to have much impact on the availability of drugs.  I don't see any practical way to keep so-called 'assault rifles' out of the hands of those who want to have them, and especially since the U.S. and others are flooding certain regions with them in order to try to provoke 'regime change.'  There is also a strong push for 'open borders' which cannot help but induce extra channels for illegal goods of all sorts.

I read somewhere (this board?) that more people are killed in the U.S. with hammers than with 'assault rifles'.  I would not doubt it.  Most fatalities are probably accomplished with handguns.  Rifles and shotguns not so much.  So why the big push against 'assault rifles'?  Could it be that the paramilitaries see what is on the horizon and do not wish to be packing the extra body armor?  Are they anticipating a desire to throw a certain class of people in prison (or a 'gulag') and want an excuse to round up this certain class of people?  Basically from the perspective of 'protecting the peeps from harm' there are a lot of much more practical things to do that would save a lot more suffering than trying to confiscate all 'assault rifles'.  Clearly something else is going on.  What exactly it is isn't clear.  Yet.