Has enough time passed to rationally discuss the "Assault Weapons" Ban?

The Assault Weapons Ban (or AWB) of 1994 was a historic piece of legislation for many reasons. First, the authors named it beautifully and turned a term that had been very loosely thrown around by Right to Keep and Bear Arms types (RKBA) for years. Up until 1994, there were “assault” weapons on the cover of every gun magazine in the US. And the WORD “ASSAULT” in a 144 pt font, usually bright orange. They weren’t actual assault weapons, but they did look like them, and it bit the RKBA folks in the bum.

Second, it was a real defeat for the Second Amendment and NRA.

Third, it astounded the authors. While it made it through a bunch of hoops in the Congress, and Clinton was all too happy to sign it, it cost them the control of the Congress, and the House for the first time in 40 years – and unseated the speaker. Even Clinton said so – the AWB cost them 20 seats. Now in the house EVERYBODY is pro gun – witness the DC Personal Protection Act HR 3193 that passed 250-118.

So what exactly did the AWB do? Nothing. I mean literally nothing from a practical and realistic standpoint. Status Quo except for some minor (and occasionally major) price increases. See, while it “banned” 19 guns, it is important to understand the following –

A) None of them were fully automatic. Full auto weapons are regulated by 1930’s legislation, the NFA. All full auto guns are “class three” and so regulated that it they are basically verboten. AK-47s, M-16s, and Uzis have NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BAN. They are mentioned by shrill and inflammatory people, but those weapons are regulated by 1930s legislation, period, end of subject.

B) Many LOOKED like military weapons, but weren’t. From a functionality standpoint, it was a beauty contest – mean looking guns were “banned” while guns that looked like regular rifles or pistols were left untouched EVEN IF THEY DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

C) I’m going to slap the next person that says Cop Killer pistol/gun/bullet/AK-47. This is the cry of the woefully ignorant and uninformed. The vast majority of bullets that can defeat body armor pre-date its existence. Think about that for a second.

Quick lesson –

As a general rule, semi-automatic pistols can’t defeat body armor. Hollow points are especially useless against body armor. Handguns that can penetrate body armor are so big and hard to fire - and expensive and rare - that they are not a consideration.

As a rule, 99% of rifles can. Any rifle. The “assault” weapons tend to fire relatively low powered rifle rounds compared to hunting rifles. The most deadly guns will never be banned in the U.S. as they are hunting rifles. I’m more scared of a guy who knows what he’s doing and has a 4 shot bolt action rifle than an idiot with a Tec-9 and a 30 round magazine.

Anyone who doesn't understand and wants a lesson in ballistics and physics can e-mail me.

After the AWB went into effect, cosmetic changes were made and nothing missed a beat. An AR-15 lost the non-functional bayonet lug, the accuracy decreasing flash suppressor, and the collapsible stock. It was still a 20-100 shot .223 semi-automatic rifle. It was still the same price. It was just as available. This applies to just about every weapon out there. They dropped a couple things that weren’t functional anyway and went about their business.

So how the heck did “crime with these types of weapons go down 70%” like Dianne Feinstein felt obligated to crow? I have no idea, as it couldn’t have, since the BAN DIDN’T BAN GUNS – IT BANNED BAYONET LUGS AND FLASH SUPPRESSORS. I have personally never had a problem with a bayoneting in my neighborhood but then I live in a relatively safe area.

Those statistics were full of it and they knew it. The only reason crime went down at all was that now more than 35 states allow concealed carry – mainly in response to the 94 AWB. People got serious about their rights. Despite predictions of gloom and doom, NOT A SINGLE STATE HAD A INCREASE IN HANDGUN VIOLENCE OR CRIME RELATED TO FIREARMS AFTER PASSING A CONCEALED HANDGUN PERMIT LAW. Not one. Funny – more guns, less crime. Just doesn’t comprehend does it? Except to think that just maybe – MAYBE – criminals worry about getting shot by law abiding citizens if they don’t know whether or not they are packing heat. Funny thing happened in Louisiana a while back. We passed a “shoot the carjacker” law that says, well, if you get carjacked you can plug the guy. Carjackings aren’t a problem any more due to former carjackers sense of self preservation.

I also submit that the places you CAN NOT get a permit – Washington DC, NYC, LA, Detroit – crime is the worst and handguns are on the streets. CRIMINALS DON’T FOLLOW THE LAW. They carry regardless.

And finally – the most senseless and least thought out comment that is repeated over, and over, and over –

“Why do you need an Uzi*, you don’t hunt deer with AK-47s*”", and every other argument talking about what I need.

Regulating NEED? Really? We want government regulating NEED? Holy crap.
First, the Constitution (you knew it was coming) isn’t about needs or hunting. It is about wants, freedom, and defending yourself against bad guys, and those guys didn’t trust the government, either.

Let us regulate some needs - You don’t NEED your car. You certainly don’t NEED an SUV, Porsche, 3,000 square foot home using precious energy to heat and cool its extravagance, TWO homes, chocolate, MP3s, television, football, high heeled shoes – would you like me to go on?

I want to be able to protect myself and my family as effectively and efficiently as possible. POLICE DO NOT PROTECT US. Until I have an officer personally assigned to me, and one to my wife – and they are with me 24/7 and are trained and competent to my standards – I’m carrying a gun. Bad things happen whether or not cops are around. Cops show up after the fact and find the bad people who did it and stop them from doing it again. That is their job. They CAN NOT PROTECT US FROM UNFORESEEN EVENTS IN THE FUTURE.

In closing, I’d like to challenge everyone who disagrees with me that every citizen should have the right to carry a handgun and own a semi-automatic rifle to do the following.

A) Print up a sign and put it in your window. It should say –

“There are no firearms in this home. I do not believe in using firearms to defend myself or my loved ones. Anyone entering this home will face unarmed opposition. YOU WILL NOT BE SHOT IF YOU ENTER THIS HOME!”

B) Wear a button ALL THE TIME that says – “I am not carrying a firearm for self defense. I will defend my life and loved ones with my bare hands.” I’m serious – wear it all the time. Especially in bad neighborhoods and at night.

Good luck with those strategies in the world of today.

*Disclaimer - This article is a compilation of thoughts I stole from other people. Don't be mad at me, everything you write is as well.