Assault-weapons ban won’t work

Like 1994 law, loopholes would plague new plan

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is planning to introduce an assaultweapons bill that would “ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession” of certain guns, she tells CNN. “Not retroactively, but prospectively. It will ban the same for big clips, drums or strips of more than 10 bullets.”

In other words, it’s largely what we had in 1994. President Barack Obama appears to be on board, and some Republicans have said they’re willing to discuss the idea. Which is fine. Discuss all you want.

But it won’t do what people are expecting in the wake of the Dec. 14 school shooting. It won’t make us any safer.

That’s because the 1994 ban was largely built on appearances, regulating things such as collapsible stocks and pistol grips that had nothing to do with how the gun shoots. In effect, “scary looking” guns were out. Guns remained legal that seemed less “assaultweaponlike” but shot bullets just as fast and with as much force.

No wonder the ban had little effect on crime.

Some argue that we can clean up the loopholes that plagued the ’94 law. They be- lieve we can effectively ban weapons that can do the most harm to people. But how do are too many? It’s a slippery slope.

Let me be clear: What happened in Connecticut was terrible. But reviving an ineffective gun ban won’t stop it from happening again.

DIRK SHADD/ TAMPA BAY TIMES In the wake of the tragedy in Connecticut, pawn shop owner Frank James has decided to discontinue selling all firearms, including this Bushmaster AR15, at his shop Loanstar Jewelry and Pawn in Seminole, Fla. Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California plans to...