Assault Weapon Ban

WaPo in 1994: Ban 'Assault Weapons' to Set the Stage for 'Broader Gun Control'

WaPo now: "Assault weapons" are "the gold standard for mass murder."

|

Offspring 18 87 /wikimedia

"There is no reason mass killers can still legally buy their weapon of choice in America," says the headline over a Washington Post editorial that appeared in yesterday's paper, calling upon Congress to enact a new, broader version of the "assault weapon" ban that expired in 2004. Never mind that so-called assault weapons are not, in fact, the "weapon of choice" for mass killers, who overwhelmingly favor ordinary handguns. The Post says "assault weapons" are nevertheless intolerable because they are "capable of firing dozens of rounds in seconds." Never mind that the same is true of any gun that accepts a detachable magazine. The Post notes that a lawyer who is suing the businesses that supplied the gun used in the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre calls military-style rifles "the gold standard for mass murder of innocent civilians." Never mind that the lawyer and his colleagues cannot explain what makes these guns uniquely suitable for mass murder and uniquely unsuitable for legal uses.

The Post has been beating this drum for a long time. But when the federal "assault weapon" ban was enacted in 1994, the paper's editorial board was a little more honest about the point of it. While "it's ridiculous that the banning should even be an issue," the Post said then, "no one should have any illusions about what was accomplished. Assault weapons play a part in only a small percentage of crime. The provision is mainly symbolic; its virtue will be if it turns out to be, as hoped, a stepping stone to broader gun control." The mechanism for achieving "broader gun control" is the recognition that "assault weapons" account for a tiny share of gun homicides and that many other firearms are just as deadly—points that advocates of a ban are keen to obscure for the time being.

NEXT: Ronald Bailey and Robin Hanson Talk Robot Overlords at Cato: Video

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Gun-grabbing zealots.

    1. Gays all over the country must forfeit any hope of self-defense because a jihadi in Orlando murdered a bunch of gays. Progressive priorities are pretty fucked up.

  2. The federal “assault weapons” ban totally stopped gun violence, right?

    1. There was no statistical blip in the pattern.

    2. The ban didn’t go far enough. They’ll let you know when it does, though. But don’t worry, they don’t want to take your guns, they just want to ensure there’s a common-sense national buyback and forfeiture program by the end of the decade. It’s not taking them if you’re compensated. And if some doors have to be kicked in and some owners imprisoned, well, that’s just the price we pay for safety. It’s just common sense.

      1. And if some doors have to be kicked in and some owners imprisoned, well, that’s just the price we pay for safety. It’s just common sense.

        So, they’re going to borrow Trump’s “deportation force”?

        1. THAT’S DIFFERENT. Those people are criminals!

          Oh… wait…

    3. I’ll remember the logic of never taking any action unless it completely solves every related problem the next time someone suggests getting rid of the federal Department of Education, which totally wouldn’t eliminate the national debt or make every student in America a genius.

      1. You just stepped in it.

      2. “Doesn’t completely solve every related problem” is a funny way to describe a wholly ineffective, purely symbolic policy.

      3. I wasn’t aware there was a problem to be addressed.

        Something we cede too often to the Left is their assumption of the argument. This is a prime example: why are we talking about measures to fix a problem when you haven’t even defined or demonstrated there is a problem.

        1. The number of people killed by guns in America isn’t a problem? Okay.

          1. Banning guns won’t even start to solve the problem, you half-wit. The previous assault ban didn’t do anything to stop people being killed by guns, this one won’t either. Stop emoting and wrap your head around the numbers:

            In the final year of the assault weapon ban, 390 people were murdered with rifles, representing about 2.7% of all murders that year. In 2014, a decade later, 248 people were murdered with rifles, at a rate of barely 2% of all murders.

            Retard.

      4. Fuck off, slaver.

      5. You’re right, we should never have established the Department of Education because it wasn’t going to solve any problems at all.

      6. The “Assault Weapons Ban” didn’t solve any problems. If someone suggested to you that you cure your headache by hitting yourself in the head with a hammer, would you just do it without asking yourself “how is this going to help?”

  3. Never mind that the same is true of any gun that accepts a detachable magazine.

    And Sullum goes and causes a stampede towards the ban detachable magazine door.

  4. The Post says “assault weapons” are nevertheless intolerable because they are “capable of firing dozens of rounds in seconds.” Never mind that the same is true of any gun that accepts a detachable magazine

    FALSE. My bolt-action .22 accepts detachable magazines. there is no way you can fire off dozens of rounds in seconds from that thing.

    1. There’s a white privilege lever on the right hand side that allow that. Haven’t you tried it?

      1. It is next to the knob to enable bottomless magazines?

          1. “Black Rifle mode engaged”, what does that-OHSHIT!*hits floor*

        1. Bottomless magazines are porn mags John doesn’t own.

          1. Extra wide and extra deep?

            1. Wide Load

      2. It also give you a cyclical rate of 3000 rounds a minute.
        I call it the ‘Awesome Button’.

        1. Which is great, except that the barrel starts to warp after 25 seconds.

          1. Which is 24 seconds after the mag is empty

    2. I challenge the Post to prove it. Take my HK91 (banned in many states) and show me how to put a dozen rounds on a target in a few seconds.

      1. They never said ‘on target’, but then again, they probably have no clue what that even means.

        1. By the 4th round, he would be shooting into the sky.

    3. they are “capable of firing dozens of rounds in seconds.”

      Meaningless drivel. How many dozens? How many seconds? I betcha you can’t run off 5 dozen rounds in 5 seconds in an AR-15.

  5. The Post says “assault weapons” are nevertheless intolerable because they are “capable of firing dozens of rounds in seconds.” Never mind that the same is true of any gun that accepts a detachable magazine

    At this risk of pissing people off, I’ll just leave this here.

    1. speed loaders are cheating.

      1. They’re worse than detachable magazines!

    2. Jerry!

      If I start watching his videos, I will get no work at all done today.

      1. Define work; you can learn a lot from watching Miculek, and that meets my definition of productive work [albeit not paid…].

      2. Define work; you can learn a lot from watching Miculek, and that meets my definition of productive work [albeit not paid…].

        1. Damn, echo is bad her today.

      3. If I start watching his videos, I will get no work at all done today.

        Yuuuup.

        *queues up seven more Jerry videos*

  6. Off-topic: If I were to gather up all the filth the previous disgusting redneck owners left in the drawers and closets of the house I bought, and all the dog hair and human skin they left in the ducts, and all the mouse turds in the corners of the closets, and put all the filth inside the non-functional washer and dryer they left in my basement, and threw the washer and dryer through the front window of their new house, and set their house on fire and killed them all, would that be a violation of the NAP?

    And I finally finished refinishing the floors. They look spectacular. Don’t be afraid of the drum sander, kiddos.

    1. A lot of those things you should have known about before buying the house. Burning them would be an aggression by you.

      1. The only thing I’m really annoyed about is the washer and dryer. How dare you leave your garbage in my house.

        1. Sounding like the Orange man, Warty.

        2. Agreed. That’s not cool. Throwing them through the front window while afire would be an understandable lapse. Killing them… maybe a little too much.

          1. And it wasn’t even that big of a deal in the end because the company that delivered my new washer and dryer takes away the old ones at no charge. It’s more the “how dare you live your lives this way” part of it that gets me.

    2. I’m pretty sure that’s just justice. Although if through that particular course of actions Crusty Juggler ended up dead the world would be a darker place.

    3. So you are cheapskate who bought a run-down house and wants to blame somebody else?

      1. It is possible to judge the basic human fitness of other people based on the way they live their lives.

      2. I’m the cheapskate who bought a house at $30k below the neighborhood’s prevailing value because of these disgusting filthy rednecks. Thanks, rednecks. I appreciate your disgusting filthy ways, honestly. But I’m still going to bitch about, for instance, the burst pipe on the outside spigot. How are you be this slovenly and stupid, you know?

        1. Good move. Shitty looking houses/deferred maintenance means bargaining power. Glad you got a good price. Fix that house, and feel free to complain. You earned it.

        2. How is the new dungeon workout location holding out?

          1. I’ll have to lower the basement floor by a foot if I want to be able to press a barbell down there. I think I’ll just stick with my steroid palace that’s a mile down the road.

            1. My gym is now in the garage. No car parking in there, unless I move some gear around. Oh – and lifting when it’s a Michigan winter outside is uh, interesting.

        3. I question ‘rednecks.’ A self-respecting redneck not only has a job but is usually quite handy when it comes to fixing things. This sounds like white trash.

          1. Good distinction.

          2. The terms are largely interchangeable, though I suppose there’s been some reclamation of redneck. But since the word originates as a term for Scottish Covenanters, and those are the people I descended from, I have the sovereign right, given me by the gods of identity politics, to use it as much as I please.

            1. The terms are largely interchangeable,

              Not in lower-class white communities, they aren’t.

              “Redneck” is a badge of pride in those communities. “White trash” isn’t.

    4. I believe it is a violation that would get you arrested and tried. However jury nullification is always possible.

    5. Pics or GTFO (floors, not garbage)

      I posted about it this weekend, but I was in a similar situation vis-a-vis a recently abandoned rental. The evictees had left the place trashed, with half their belongings strewn about and just a ton of half-eaten meals littering the floor. Browning mattresses, clothing overflowing the tubs and hallways, and a couple used diapers. I’m supposed to head back today to help tear up carpet. The whole time we were emptying out the house I was entertaining some dark, dark thoughts.

      1. Someday I’ll tell the story of my aunt, the con artist who got her to support him in her will after she died, his threats to sue my dad after he wasted all her estate’s money, and the state he left her house in after he finally died. A cleansing fire would have been the cleanest way to clean up that house.

        1. Ugh. Sad. My uncle’s in a similar state… he’s there intellectually, but as a life-long pot smoker he’s pretty out there. His girlfriend for the past several years is a total cretin, just a nasty piece of work. Like, insurance fraud and serial litigant piece of work. Her kids are even worse. If he succumbs to Parkinson’s like grandad, I can only imagine her squabbling with my dad over uncle’s half of grandmom’s estate. Very much hoping she kicks it first.

          1. Good luck. Have you ever seen a broken toilet that’s filled with months- or years-old human shit? A toilet that causes a plumber to walk away from the job as soon as he sees it? Hopefully you don’t have to deal with that.

            1. Thank God, no. At least this family knew how to flush.

              But when my mom’s mom died and we cleared out her house, we found bagged hair and nail clippings she’d shorn herself for forty years and squirreled away in her closets and basement. Nowhere near as gross, just bizarre.

            2. Something like this?

              1. More or less. Cleansing fire and insurance money would have been the smart move.

                1. It is truly incredible how some people choose to live.

                  1. The cherry on top of helping re-floor the back-room of an ancient trailer that had burst its water heater, besides the second-hand smoke and the cat piss everywhere, was listening to the regular hollering fights between the neighbors.

        2. That’s a very common story, unfortunately, Warty.

          One of my peeps is going through exactly that with her mother. Its infuriating. The only real solution is to stick a gun in the guy’s face and tell him the next time you visit you will have a shallow grave ready if he’s still there.

          But that’s frowned upon, for some reason.

      2. Email inbound.

        1. Not just abstract, but pithy. Well done.

      3. The house I bought last year was a rental for over twenty-five.

        Nothing too bad, but the landlord just cheaped out everywhere. Budget lights, crap carpeting, a really crappy paint job (the paint color looked like human flesh) where they didn’t even bother removing the AC wall plates. I also found out – after a big windstorm – that the roofing job was subpar.

        But I managed to buy a house for under $50k of the average price of the neighborhood. I still have a lot more work to do but the place is really starting to come together.

        1. 25 people??? Is it some huge old Victorian mansion?

          1. years

    6. I’m terrified of the drum sander, because I’m too stupid to use it. Which is why I’ve hired people to use it for me.

      1. I left a few uneven bits in the floor before I learned what I was doing with it. But fuck it. You can’t see it unless you’re looking at it just right, and even so it’s better than paying $4 a square foot.

      2. I’m with you JB. Everything I do looks like a lawyer with pencil arms, bad eyesight, and shaky hands did it. Probably because, well, that’s exactly what happened.

          1. Well, that’s weird.

            imgur.com/gallery/vuo9k4w

    7. Why not leave the garbage and debris, on fire, in their front yard?

  7. OT (I haven’t seen this mentioned yet): US Armed Forces: Senate Approves 1st Bill Requiring Women to Register for Military Draft

    The bill approved Tuesday requires women who turn 18 on or after Jan. 1, 2018, to register for Selective Service as men currently do. The draft has not been used since 1973 during the Vietnam War.

    1. “Failing to register or comply with the Military Selective Service Act is a felony punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 or a prison term of up to five years, or a combination of both. Also, a person who knowingly counsels, aids, or abets another to fail to comply with the Act is subject to the same penalties. (Selective Service System)”

    2. Infuriating, isn’t it.

    3. I have two sons. I’m halfway rooting for this to magically pass and become law because its such a political hand grenade, just so I can point to it and say, “See what cowards elected officials are? They would rather throw your daughters in prison for failing to register for a draft we don’t use than repeal the bad law. This is how law makers actually think.”

  8. Would.
    Would.
    Would.
    Would.

    1. Turn off The View, TM. You’re drunk.

      1. *hic*

        I’ve only had three straffinruns, Mr. Beer!

  9. “There is no reason mass killers can still legally buy their weapon of choice in America,”

    Mass murderers cannot. They don’t seem to get that getting the gun predates the actual murders committed with the gun, or that lots of the guys who do haven’t done anything worth putting on a background check.

  10. The NYT can’t figure out what caused Mateen to kill the gays. So, they place the blame squarely on the Republicans where it so clearly belongs:

    While the precise motivation for the rampage remains unclear, it is evident that Mr. Mateen was driven by hatred toward gays and lesbians. Hate crimes don’t happen in a vacuum. They occur where bigotry is allowed to fester, where minorities are vilified and where people are scapegoated for political gain. Tragically, this is the state of American politics, driven too often by Republican politicians who see prejudice as something to exploit, not extinguish.

    http://thefederalist.com/2016/…..ts-motive/

    1. Anything to avoid blaming fundamentalist Islam, huh?

    2. “While the precise motivation for the rampage remains unclear…”

      Yeah when a guy in the middle of a shooting rampage takes time out to call 911 and proclaim allegiance to ISIS that is just way too ambiguous to figure out what he’s really thinking about.

      1. Being a self-hating gay guy seems like a possible factor too. But between that and his explicit declaration that he was doing it for ISIS would seem to cover motivation pretty well.

  11. The magic phrase they use without the slightest hint of irony or shame is:

    Tragically, this is the state of American politics, driven too often by Republican politicians who see prejudice as something to exploit, not extinguish.

    Sometimes words just fail.

    1. TRIGGER WARNING: THIS IS ADMITTEDLY A RANT

      They HAVE to blame anyone and anything but a non Judeo-Christian perspective; because, you know, everyone else is a victim because they live in the Western world, and it’s Republican’s fault or the guns fault or the gun owners [who never commit crimes] fault for getting in the way of the progressive movement…

      This country, and much of Europe, is obsessed with racism in its continuously nuanced manifestations, and to them that is the real crime: how this radicalized person is really the victim of us privileged folk whether we mistreat them or not, because according to their narrative some persons in our past were colonizers and just not very nice so there.

      If we privileged could only own up to our inherent nastiness and overcompensate by making up for all the sins of our fathers and excoriating ourselves for what we might not have said or done along these lines every time we pass someone on the street, no one would be radical, And if, in spite of our best efforts, they do turn nasty they just would not be able to buy any sort of weapon to misuse albeit justifiably.

      And that would be suitable for the WAPO, the NYT, Vogue, RS, and just about any major publication you care to name.

  12. If you are talking mass-murder, guns of any kind aren’t the gold standard. As has been demonstrated several times, bombs are much more effective. Even driving a truck through a crowd would be more effective if you want to kill or maim as many people as possible. And a semi-auto shotgun would probably be more effective for indiscriminately mowing people down than an “assault weapon” that is available to regular people in the US.

  13. And a semi-auto shotgun would probably be more effective

    The tube magazine on most shotguns is slow to reload, compared to swapping box magazines. Other than that, yeah. A 12 gauge 00 shell holds 9 pellets (if memory serves), each the equivalent of a 9mm bullet.

  14. how can we mount an armed insurrection against the federal government and liberals without military type weapons and wide support among law enforcement officers? the founders explicitly stated that militias had to have arms to protect us against tyranny and for overthrowing the government they just created. forget about foreign aggression, we kicked everyone else’s asses and we have the strong dumpf keeping us safe.
    there is absolutely no reason civilians need military rapid fire quickly changeable high capacity magazines weapons. it’s even dubious that law enforcement agencies need such weapons and military hardware they are getting.
    that being said, assault weapons account for a small number of deaths nationwide yet they are commonly used in mass murders. that’s what they’re designed for. leave the handguns alone so they can fulfill their vital role in society: prize takings for home burglars, suicide, domestic abuse, and accidental shooting.

    1. there is absolutely no reason civilians need military rapid fire quickly changeable high capacity magazines weapons.

      Fortunately, my rights aren’t limited to my needs.

      1. Indeed.

        No one needs a 700 horsepower muscle car either but if they want and can afford one they absolutely have the right to have it.

        1. No one needs anything but some gruel to eat and a warm enough place to sleep that they don’t die of hypothermia.

    2. “the founders explicitly stated that militias had to have arms to protect us against tyranny and for overthrowing the government they just created.”

      “there is absolutely no reason civilians need military rapid fire quickly changeable high capacity magazines weapons”

      If you don’t see why these two statements are contradictory, then you’re missing some critical information. I suggest starting with Federalist Paper #29.

      “To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people”

      —-“Concerning the Militia”

      http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed29.asp

      The purpose of the militia is to stand against tyrannical government, and the purpose of the Second Amendment is so that average people will have the knowledge and practice necessary to fight effectively against that tyrannical government’s army. “A well-regulated militia” is one that is practiced in the use of its arms.

      It’s the difference between “regular army” and “irregulars”, the latter typically not standing much of a chance against the former since they’re not trained in the use of their weapons.

      1. I may have missed a close italics tag somewhere in the there.

        I’m just sayin’.

  15. Anyone who ever thought the call for gun control was anything less than a strategy for ultimately outlawing guns and confiscation is a complete moron.

    You are either a marxist or a a capitalist. There is no happy marriage of the two of mix.

    Capitalists believe in freedom of the individual. That includes right rights to liberty and property. including self defense.

    Marxists, which are every other pussy on earth, are for control and dictatorial fiat.
    It really is quite simple. Weapons in the hands of the citizenry have been viewed by big government psychos(GOP and Dems) as a menace that needs to be reigned in to achieve their goals. American are guilty of being dumbed down to the point that they readily accepted the false benevolence of politicians.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.