Lori L Moore, click
here to update your pages on AuthorsDen.
Blogs by Lori L Moore
The 94 Assault Weapons Ban 10/8/2004 3:11:43 PM
What did it really accomplish? There is so much misinformation being spread about the 94 Assault Weapons Ban, I thought I’d address the issue here.
What did the ban ban? Before reading the rest of this blog, what would your answer be? Exactly what did the ban ban?
The following information is based upon the actual legislation as well as Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 921 of the United States Code. The area of law affected by the ban.
To start with…
This law banned the manufacture, sale and transfer (Not ownership or possession) of rifles that had detachable magazines and two or more of the following characteristics:
1. A folding or telescoping stock
2. A pistol grip
3. A bayonet mount
4. A flash suppressor, or threads to attach one (a flash suppressor reduces the amount of flash that the rifle shot makes. It is the small birdcage-like item on the muzzle of the rifle)
5. A grenade launcher.
4 of the 5 major points of the ban are solely cosmetic. They have nothing to do with function or firepower of the weapon. The final point, a grenade launcher, is window dressing, since grenades and the materials used to make grenades are already illegal, covered by several other laws. Notice that in order for the ban to affect a weapon it had to have a detachable magazine and at least 2 of the 5 additional characteristics.
The ban also banned the manufacture, sale and transfer (Not ownership or possession)of any pistol that is a look alike of a fully automatic pistol. Such as a Mac10 look alike. For a pistol to be included in the manufacturing/sales ban it must have the ability to accept a detachable magazine, plus two of the following features:
1. Magazine that attaches outside of the pistol grip
2. Threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer* (Silencers are covered in National Firearms Act of 1934 and for the most part already illegal for the general public.)
3. Shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned
4. Manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded
5. Semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm
Basically, this covers military look-alike weapons. Again, it covers cosmetics not functionality.
Finally, the ban addressed the manufacture, sale and transfer of certain shotguns already covered by law.
The ban also placed a 10 round limitation on magazines for semi automatic weapons. Weapons that fire one shot with each pull of the trigger and do not require the manual advancement of the next round. Such provision was already covered to a great extent by other laws, including many state and local laws.
What the Ban Didn’t Do:
The Ban didn't do what most people assume it did...
The ban did not ban a weapon based upon its firepower or potential kill power. It did not ban a weapon based upon its caliber, speed or impact potential. The ban did not ban ownership of weapons covered by the law if they were owned prior to ban. The ban did not ban true assault weapons, such as fully automatic weapons and military weapons which were already governed by the National Firearms Act of 1934.
This ban was a cosmetic smoke screen, designed to make further inroads towards total gun control. It was designed to play on the emotions and deceive those who do not do their homework to find out the actual provisions of the law. It was designed to solidify a constituency that is, generally speaking, in favor of gun control. Simply put, it was designed to create a political issue. The functionality of "assault weapons" covered in the ban is no different than any other semi-automatic weapon, which have been available for 100 years and continued in availability throughout the period of the ban.. The ban dealt with military look-alikes based solely on cosmetics, not function.
Beyond appearance, there were no significant differences between those weapons that were affected by the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and those that were not. The banned weapons are no more lethal than any of the weapons that were not banned. The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was an emotional legislative response to the perception of a major public safety and law enforcement problem. If one looks objectively at the facts and statistical evidence regarding the uses of these banned weapons and crime, the conclusion is obvious. The Assault Weapons Ban was not an effective piece of legislation and its death will have no major impact on crime or crime prevention.
"The semi-automatic weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons – anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun – can only increase that chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons." - Josh Sugarmann
The above statement characterizes the intent of the supporters of the 94 Assault Weapons Ban. To exploit the general publics lack of knowledge concerning the difference between and true assault weapon and one that is a mere look-alike. Feeling over form, emotion over substance, cosmetics over function.
