With the latest mass shooting, on cue the usual calls to action by the Democrats. They begin to whip out the golden oldies like Assault Weapons Ban, High Capacity Magazine Ban, Universal Background Checks, Gun Show Loophole, and the newest two of the bunch Terror Watchlist/No Fly List Loophole and the Bump Stock Ban. I think a thorough examination of each of these is in order to see if one or more of them might actually have an impact.
Assault Weapons Ban – To say been there, done that, got the t-shirt is entirely accurate. The federal government did have an assault weapons ban for a while, it was cheerily called the “Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act” passed in 1994 with a ten year sunset provision, meaning unlike most legislation it would expire in 10 years if not renewed. Ah if only ALL legislation was like this. Anyway, what this did was ban so called assault weapons. Now what is an assault weapon you might be wondering? Well there is no real definition for this, it is basically a made up phase. “Assault” is the action of brining harm to another and “Weapon” is any implement that can cause harm, so by definition ANYTHING can be an “assault weapon”. I like to call it the Big Scary Gun Ban, because per the original ban, it only focused mostly on cosmetic items that had very little to do with the lethality of the weapon itself. What it classified as an “assault weapon” was any rifle with a detachable magazine and any TWO of the following:
- Folding or telescoping stock
- Pistol grip
- Bayonet mount
- Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
- Grenade launcher
Bayonet mounts and grenade launchers, oh come on. When was the last time some lunatic yelled “Fix Bayonet” and ran amok anywhere engaging people with a perfect form “Thrust Series”. And grenade launchers, yes while 37 mm ones are legal to own, they are for flares. If you want a real M433 HEDP lobbing capable 40 mike mike, you need to have the ATF all up in your business in the first place. These two were just stupid. Flash suppressors, okay anyone that has fired a weapon with a flash suppressor at night can confirm that it doesn’t suppress all that much. I suspect the political ninnies saw “suppressor” and thought James Bond silencer, no noise making bullets, in their minds. Now the last two do have a little, well very little, merit. A pistol grip can help a person maintain better control of their sight alignment but even without a pistol grip most practiced shooters can put rounds on target at pretty good distances. Lastly the collapsible stock, it is not like you are going to be able to hide the weapon that much more. Yes it makes it less clunky until you extend the stock, but a military style rifle is big and clunky no matter how you try to hide it. A collapsible stock does nothing to enhance the lethality of the weapon at all. So all in all what impact did the AWB have in curbing gun violence, well according to the most recent study by the DOJ, little if any.
Having said this, the ban’s impact on gun violence is likely to be small at best, and perhaps too small for reliable measurement. AWs were used in no more than 8% of gun crimes even before the ban. Guns with LCMs are used in up to a quarter of gun crimes, but it is not clear how often the outcomes of gun attacks depend on the ability to fire more than 10 shots (the current limit on magazine capacity) without reloading.
High Capacity Magazine Ban – First of all it is a magazine people, not a clip. I mentally, if not physically, cringe when someone uses clip. It just screams the person knows next to nothing about firearms and this will be a very aggravating debate. But getting back on topic, the study mentioned above pretty much nails this down, but let’s put some common sense into this as well. I am guessing the theory here is that if a nutjob has to reload often that potential victims will have time to get away or charge and subdue the gunman. Anyone who thinks this is kidding themselves. It takes next to no time to change out a magazine with a little practice and preparation. It would take most people longer to realize there is an actual lull in fire than it would be for a practiced gunman to load in a new magazine and chamber the next round.
Universal Background Checks – This one is a doozy because its originates from “statistics” found in a flawed study, specifically the discussion concerning Table 3.14, of how weapons were acquired. It stated 60 to 70% of all firearms were acquired from the primary market. So of course that means 30 to 40% were from the secondary market. But this has problems, as detailed here
The survey sample was relatively small — just 251 people. (The survey was done by telephone, using a random-digit-dial method, with a response rate of 50 percent.) With this sample size, the 95 percent confidence interval will be plus or minus six percentage points.
The analysis concluded that 35.7 percent of respondents indicated they did not receive the gun from a licensed firearms dealer. Rounding up gets you to 40 percent, although the survey sample is so small it could also be rounded down to 30 percent.
Moreover, when gifts, inheritances and prizes are added in, then the number shrinks to 26.4 percent. (The survey showed that nearly 23.8 percent of the people surveyed obtained their gun either as a gift or inherited it, and about half of them believed a licensed firearms dealer was the source.)
Also consider that most of this survey period was before the National Instant Check System, NICS, was even setup. This nonsense has been regurgitated as often as people claiming gum stays in your digestive tract for 7 years. So much so that even that bastion of conservatism, PolitiFact, considers it FALSE and have repeatedly called out politicians who use it.
Gun Show Loophole – This goes hand in hand with Universal Background Checks. There is this belief that gun shows are some wild and raucous affair where military weapons are exchanged without anyone checking on anything. Well nothing could be further from the truth. The overwhelming majority of tables at gun shows have FFL dealers and FFL dealers are required to run background checks on ANYONE they sell a firearm to, even if it is from their own private collection. Would someone, ANYONE, please tell me the last mass shooter, or any shooter for that matter, that acquired their weapon by “exploiting” this “loophole”.
Terror Watchlift/No Fly List – This is something relatively new that popped up in the early 2000s and really gained traction in the aftermath of the San Bernardino shooting, even though none of the shooters were on any of the lists in the first place. That bastion of conservatism, the Washington Post, has taken this one to task already. I will add one thing here, and that is Due Process. Before you can deny ANYONE a right, you have to use Due Process. 5th Amendment ring any bells? The ACLU has sued on behalf of Americans that found themselves put on these lists without any notice and not given any clear guidance on how to get off of them. Ted Kennedy, yes Sen. Ted Kennedy found himself on the “Selectee List” for additional screening because T. Kennedy had been put on the list and it took him communicating with the Director of Homeland Security to get it resolved. What chance do us plebs have of getting a similar issue resolved. It is not like we can call up this person and speak with them.
Bump Stock Ban – This is a direct result of at least twelve bump stock weapons being found in the Las Vegas shooting. I have never actually fired a weapon with a bump stock, but I have fired M16A1s, M249s, M60s, M2s, Steyr AUGs, AK47s, AK74s and a few other weapons in full auto mode and while fun, they are not very accurate. Cyclic fire is meant to just throw lead down range, generally for suppression. It is not meant to be, nor is it, very accurate. The same can be said for a bump stock. I would bet real money that the long term effects of fast food has killed more people in the last year than bump stocks have lead to the death of people since they were introduced.