Will Lapse of the Assault Weapons Ban Lead to More Columbines?

 by Rachel Alexander  

| View comments |  Print This Post

A close look at why Congress allowed the Assault Weapons Ban to lapse, and why the ban was powerless to prevent the Columbine murders.

Now that Congress has chosen, with little fanfare, not to renew the 10-year ban on so-called assault weapons, gun control advocates are claiming it is because of the influence of the National Rifle Association. However, a deeper look reveals that the reason cannot be this simple. The NRA could not stop the ban from passing in 1994, nor was it able to convince Congress to repeal it during the past 10 years. The real reason the ban is not being renewed is because statistics revealed that it did not affect the crime rate nor the frequency guns are used in crimes. Only 19 guns and their similar counterparts were banned; bad people simply bought other types of guns or continued to obtain them illegally. The 19 banned weapons were not the type that criminals typically use; handguns - pistols and revolvers - have consistently been the firearm of choice in violent crime. There is a reason why around half of all police officers across the nation carry Glock pistols, not assault weapons - they are easy to conceal, carry, and highly effective. Furthermore, a .45 pistol or a hunting shotgun can be quite lethal; and most hunting rifles are equally as powerful or more powerful than the 19 banned assault weapons.

The ban was drafted to prohibit the manufacture of 19 guns that looked scary or that the public would have heard of in violent movies. The Democrats who drafted the ban paid little attention to whether the additional "scary" features - which included bayonet mounts rarely used today - actually made the gun more deadly or not. Predictably, gun manufacturers just redesigned and renamed the guns after they were banned. Only guns that looked very similar to the 19 chosen were prohibited. During the ban, the public was still free to buy any of the 19 banned guns that were manufactured prior to the 1994, they were just pricier.

The ban made illegal the manufacture of clips that held more than 10 rounds of ammunition, and banned the manufacture of 19 guns that resembled automatic military assault rifles in appearance. However, automatic weapons have been generally illegal to the public since the National Firearms Act of 1934 was passed, so characterization of the 19 semi-automatic guns as military-style "assault weapons" has always been misleading.
And contrary to public statements made recently by proponents of the ban, "Uzis" as most people think of them have not become legal - the fully automatic submachine gun used in movies such as The Matrix and used by the military for the last 50 years remains banned since 1934. It is deceptive to refer to "Uzis" now being available when in fact it is only the semi-automatic pistol that is meant. The 19 banned guns simply cannot convert to fully automatic fire as a military assault rifle can.

Proponents of the ban argue that it was responsible for a decrease in crimes involving guns. However, although incidents of violence in general greatly decreased from 1993 to 2001, incidents of firearm violence only slightly decreased, according to statistics from the Department of Justice. The violent crime rate has been steadily going down since 1973, and there was little difference in this decrease after the 1994 ban was passed. The homicide rate had already begun declining prior to the ban, peaking in 1991. According to statistics collected by the FBI, the murder rate began increasing again beginning in 2000. Noted scholar John Lott of the American Enterprise Institute has observed that there has not been a single academic study indicating that the ban has had an effect on gun violence, and notes that the Department of Justice acknowledged in a recent study that the ban's effect on gun violence has been negligible. An older Department of Justice study found that from 1979 to 1992, there was an overall increase from 9.2 percent to 12.7 percent of violent offenses committed with a handgun. Only a small percentage of crimes committed with guns before the ban went into effect involved assault weapons.

The weapons used in the 1999 Columbine shooting included a Hi-Point Carbine and a TEC-DC9 assault pistol, both bought illegally by Columbine killers Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, who were not old enough to legally buy the weapons. If the killers had been old enough, they could have bought both guns legally; the ban would not have stopped them. The Hi-Point Carbine wasn't even in existence at the time of the 1994 ban. Its use during crimes has progressively increased from when it was first manufactured in 1996, to 505 times in 2000. The Hi-Point Carbine shot standad 9mm rounds; it was much less powerful than major caliber pistols and revolvers. Older models of the TEC-DC9 were still circulating after the ban, but its manufacturers had gone out of business by the time of the Columbine shooting. After it was banned, its manufacturer revised it slightly and renamed it the AB-10 ("After Ban"). Its usage during crimes also increased during the ban, from 8 times during 1995 when it first appeared to 746 times in 2000.

The two Columbine killers had two other weapons, sawed-off shotguns, which have been illegal for purchase or manufacture since the National Firearms Act of 1934, and homemade bombs. None of these would have been affected by the Assault Weapons ban since they were already illegal.

The problem is that unless all guns are banned, which includes rounding up pre-existing privately-owned guns, there will not be a significant difference in crime and violence caused by firearms. Even if the U.S. did enact draconian gun-control laws, criminals will still obtain guns illegally or resort to violence using other weapons. According to figures from the FBI, approximately 10% of all violent crime in the U.S. is attributable to guns, 15% is attributable to other causes, including 6% caused by sharp objects such as scissors, ice picks, or broken bottles, and 4% caused by blunt objects such as bricks, bats and metal pipes. 5% is caused by miscellaneous other methods, such as ropes, martial arts weapons, BB guns, and poison.

If guns are completely banned, a conscious decision will have been made that our women and elderly are no longer entitled to use the one method that would allow them to defend themselves against criminals who are stronger than them. There were at least 95,136 rapes reported in the U.S. in 2002, and 84% of them did not involve a firearm. If society makes the choice to ban all gun ownership, it will be choosing to take away the one equalizing factor that women, the weak, and the elderly have against the physically stronger men in society - a gun. There are currently around 200 cases of justifiable homicide using a gun each year, and countless more incidents where self-defense using a gun did not require use of the gun or result in serious injury or death. After analyzing 10 years of statistics, Congress has made the decision that steps toward complete gun control are not effective or prudent ways to stop criminals.

Politics: General, Second Amendment

Read more articles by Rachel Alexander