Reinstate the Assault Weapon Ban
So far this year there have been more than 200 mass shootings where four or more victims were shot or killed. Inconceivable, there have been more mass shootings than days so far this year. This is beyond my comprehension.
It is equally incomprehensible to me that Congress will not pass a federal assault weapons ban as it did in 1994, as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (Crime Bill). The ban was limited and only covered certain categories of automatic weapons such as AR-15s and it applied only to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban’s enactment.
The Crime Bill was passed by a Democratic-controlled Congress and signed by President Clinton. Unfortunately, the bill contained a “sunset provision” that allowed it to expire on September 13, 2004, and the Republicancontrolled Congress decided not to renew the ban.
When it expired, assault weapons and large-capacity magazines were suddenly legalized, unless banned by state or local laws. There is considerable evidence that the ban had an effect on reducing fatalities and injuries from mass shootings, as assault weapons are more frequently used for those crimes. For the decade that the federal assault weapons ban was in effect from 1994 to 2004, 89 people died in 12 massacres. Already this year, there have been more than 90 deaths from mass shootings in the first four months of this year.
I believe the only people who should be able to have assault weapons with highcapacity magazines, the weapon of choice of mass shooters, are military personnel and highly trained tactical police.
Assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms designed for rapid fire and combat use and large-capacity magazines increase the number of rounds that can be fired without reloading. These are weapons of war. They exist only to extract maximum destruction, and there’s simply no reason that Americans need access to them. They are designed to kill lots of people quickly, not simply to defend one’s self.
NBC News reported the following about the tissue destruction capacity of the AR-15 assault vs. a 9 mm handgun “A typical 9mm handgun wound to the liver will produce a pathway of tissue destruction in the order of 1-2 inches. In comparison, an AR-15 round to the liver will literally pulverize it, much like dropping a watermelon onto concrete results in the destruction of the watermelon. Wounds like this, as one sees in school shootings like Sandy Hook and Parkland where AR-15s were used, have high fatality rates.”
No matter what your interpretation of the Second Amendment is, there is no reason for the average American to be permitted to own an assault weapon with a large-capacity magazine. Even if you are a staunch NRA supporter, and you feel the 2nd amendment gives the individual the right to arm themselves regardless of whether they are or are not a member of a militia, it is hard to understand why precluding someone from owning a weapon that is designed specifically to inflict maximum destruction and not all guns, is an infringement of your fundamental right to defend your self. You can defend yourself with a handgun. You don’t need a tactical rifle.
Mass murders will not be eliminated by reinstating an assault weapon ban, but the data clearly indicates that some deaths and injuries will be prevented. This is a sensible measure that should be enacted that preserves the right to bear arms without kowtowing to the firearms industry and their minions that subscribe to a culture of guns.
The devastation of mass shootings extends beyond the body count and injuries. Mass shootings are increasingly traumatizing all of us. Americans are becoming increasingly anxious and fearful. This is a cancer on the very soul of our nation. We must stem the metastasis of mass murder. It is a time for action, not just prays and vigils for the dead.
The American people are increasingly losing faith in their government. Democracy depends on its people believing in the integrity of its institutions and their ability to address our most pressing problems. It is time for elected officials to stop being more concerned about the concerns of the gun lobby than the lives of their constituents.
It is time for voters of all political persuasions to make it clear that they will not vote for any representative in Congress who do not supports the reinstatement of the assault weapons ban and that there is a political appetite for sensible gun control in America. I recognize that reinstating the ban is not a total solution and that we also need to devote far more of our resources to dealing with mental illness, but it is a first step in what should be an ongoing effort against the deadly epidemic of mass murder in our nation.
Various surveys indicate that around 70% of voters would back a ban on assault-style weapons (around 54% for Republicans and 86% for Democrats). And an even higher percentage support a ban on high-capacity magazines and a purchase age of at least 21 for any gun. I have, no doubt, that the calls for pragmatic gun control will continue to rise as mass shootings, unfortunately, become more and more commonplace in America.