newB

You seem to be intentionally misconstruing the point of the two weapons. The clue is right there in their names: a hunting rifle is intended for HUNTING, and an assault rifle is intended for ASSAULT. Of course the weapons will fire different ammunition with different results.

Since a hunting rifle is intended to bring down large game at range as humanely as possible, the rounds are designed to cross mid- to long-range distances with accuracy as well as enter and exit cleanly. Responsible hunters know this and therefore know not to fire unless they are absolutely certain of what lies beyond their target.

Assault rifles are intended for real-world combat situations - often at close- to mid-range. As such, the ammunition is intended to bring the target down quickly and decisively with minimal collateral damage. Imagine a SWAT style approach on a building with a front and rear entrance. Team A enters the front while Team B enters simultaneously from the rear. If either team needs to respond to a threat, they need to do so immediately without hesitation - ergo, without fear of rounds piercing the target and any interceding walls between them and their compatriots.

As to the point that extended clips can be obtained for hunting rifles as well, I see no problem with outlawing said clips. Every real hunting rifle I own holds 1-3 rounds (4 after you chamber one; I'm not counting my .22 rifle here), which is more than enough.
By necessity hunters need to patiently time their first shot. If they miss, it would be irresponsible to hastily attempt to fire again while the animal is fleeing. Like sawed off shotguns, it makes little sense to outlaw the unmodified weapon which has it's uses as intended. Instead, once modified the weapon becomes illegal. The same with semi to full auto modifications.

__________________