It's an Op-Ed piece, what did you expect.
So are saying it won't/can't happen? Explain.
Can the ATF or the administration physically issue an order with a combination of letters that happens to re-class semi autos as Title II weapons?
sure.
Is such an order enforcable if challenged in court?
different story.
Title Two weapons are specifically defined in law
(a) Firearm
The term “firearm” means
(1) a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;
Too specific to claim a semi-auto meets this category
(2) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;
Again, not applicable
(3) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;
Most ARs and AK clones have long enough barrels
(4) a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;
See above
(5) any other weapon, as defined in subsection (e);
To be addressed later in the post
(6) a machinegun;
Again, the definition contained in this chapter precludes classing a semi-auto rifle in this category
(7) any silencer (as defined in section 921 of title 18, United States Code); and
N/A
(8) a destructive device. The term “firearm” shall not include an antique firearm or any device (other than a machinegun or destructive device) which, although designed as a weapon, the Secretary finds by reason of the date of its manufacture, value, design, and other characteristics is primarily a collector’s item and is not likely to be used as a weapon.
Will address later in post
So without a new statute how will they define a semi-auto rifle with certain cosmetic features as a Title Two weapon?
Destructive device is
(f) Destructive device
The term “destructive device” means
(1) any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas
(A) bomb,
(B) grenade,
(C) rocket having a propellent charge of more than four ounces,
(D) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce,
(E) mine, or
(F) similar device;
(2) any type of weapon by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, the barrel or barrels of which have a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter, except a shotgun or shotgun shell which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes; and
Nothing in this can reasonably be construed as to ban an AR-style rifle or any other military style weapon unless it has a bore over .50 caliber and no suitable sporting purpose. the "sporting purpose test" allows the ATF to class weapons that are otherwise banned to be acceptable, not the ban any gun they dislike. So for instance under the "Sporting use" clause at the end of the last cite weapons banned such as .600 Nitro express or a 12 gauge shotgun, or a .577 Tyranosaur which meet the definition of "destructive device" can be exempted because the bloods aren't out on gangsta safari with their .600 Nitro. It's actually kind of stupid because the big safari guns are all exempted from the DD requirement becuase they're made to kill large game, but .55 Boys is on the no-no list because it was made to kill tanks, even though its less powerful then several legal rounds. but i'm going OT. point is an "AWB" cannot be justified on this statute.
AOWs have a long definition, but I think you can't class them as an AOW either, anyway I'm certain the brady campaign will be thrilled if an AR is classed as an AOW and you have to pay a whopping $5 fee to transfer them becuase the ATF makes up some BS definition to put them there, but I don't see it happening.
so no, I don't think it will happen with current law.