If one didn't know any better, they'd think assault weapons have a deeply-rooted place within the American citizenry.

After 10 years of operation, the federal assault weapons ban was allowed to expire Monday. The ban was initially headed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., in response to three mass shootings. The original draft prohibited the sale of 19 types of semiautomatic weapons and accessories.

The federal ban, signed by then-President Bill Clinton in 1994, was designed to expire in exactly 10 years if it wasn't renewed by Congress. As of Monday, no significant effort to maintain the ban had occurred.

The language of Feinstein's initial legislation was admittedly vague. It allowed for manufacturers to utilize a list of loopholes to keep their products in stores. With similar, more serious bans existing in other states, the legislation stood resolute for all of its 10 years, despite being challenged by pro- and anti-gun associations.

While the ban had its weaknesses, it was written with noble intentions. Instead of accepting the ban's expiration as a result of the law's weak language, one should instead ask why Congress has not done anything to renew it.

Although protection of the Second Amendment may be a reason to let the law lapse, it is not an acceptable justification for jeopardizing the country's safety.

Plainly, no one needs a semiautomatic weapon to protect themselves, their possessions or their homes. It's difficult to think of any legitimate reason an average U.S. citizen would need a TEC-9.

This expiration is an invitation for police to work harder to protect the community from unnecessary means. If the Bush administration allows the bill to lapse, undaunted, then it serves to provide its mantra on how important they find our security to actually be.