Thomas WilliamsUSA? Or is that a theory founded on fallacy?

Would banning “semi-automatic assault rifles” dramatically reduce gun crime in the USA? Or is that a theory founded on fallacy? - Thomas Williams

America, the country of free markets, free people and free speech, a gun crazed country in which over 40% of the populous say they either own a gun or live in a house with one. (Pew Research Center, 2017). It is undoubtedly true, that on the whole America has a Gun loving culture in which more guns exist than people. However, in recent times, the country is divided. Following every mass shooting a common theme persists. “It seems as if each time there is a new tragedy, some in the media, some political figures and some in the public wait just long enough to find out a detail that supports their political agenda. Then, they let loose with political blame.” (Attkisson, 2019). For many leading house Democrats (high profile members of the USA Democratic party), this agenda is for tighter regulation and increased gun control.

A common solution offered by many house Democrats such as presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Joe Biden, to Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey is to ban “semi-automatic assault rifles”. However, many believe that banning semi-automatic weaponry would have very little effects to gun crime on the whole. Recent mass shootings and national tragedies have damaged the social fabric of the USA such that, despite bans of any kind generally being unpopular, “so many Americans are so upset, many of them by school shootings, and rightly so, that they might be open to a ban if it promised to save lives” (Carlson, 2018)

Definitions

Semi-automatic Weaponry A weapon that is “able to fire repeatedly through an automatic reloading process but requiring release and another pressure of the trigger for each successive shot a semiautomatic rifle”. (Merriam-Webster, 2019)

Assault Rifle A lightweight rifle developed from the sub-machine gun, which may be set to fire automatically or semi-automatically. (Oxford, 2019)

History

Luckily, we do not have to guess concerning the results (or lack there of) from banning “semi-automatic assault rifles” such as AR-15s due to the fact that there has already been a ban of such a kind, for 10 years starting in 1994. This ban, colloquially known as the “ten-year ban” is legally referred to as the “The Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act or Federal Assault Weapons Ban” (USA-Federal-Government, 1994). “Although the weapons banned by this legislation were used only rarely in gun crimes before the ban, supporters felt that these weapons posed a threat to public safety because they are capable of firing many shots rapidly. They argued that these characteristics enhance offenders’ ability to kill and wound more persons and to inflict multiple wounds on each victim, so that a decrease in their use would reduce the fatality rate of gun attacks.” (US-D.O.J, 1999) however, this thesis was shown to be incorrect with the effects on overall

gun crime found to be non-existent. (US-D.O.J, 1999). Many other studies have been conducted since such as a 2014 study that found no impacts on homicide rates with an assault weapon ban (Gius, 2014) or the book published by the Oxford University Press in 2014 that also concluded that “There is no compelling evidence that [the ban] saved lives" (Beckett, 2019) (Oxford University Press, 2014). The same DOJ study referenced earlier does recognise pre-fixing its conclusion, that studies before the ban estimated that semiautomatic “assault rifles” account for only 1-8% of total gun crime in the first place and therefore the ban was unlikely to have the dramatic effects on gun crime that supporters of the legislation claimed and hoped.

The proportional makeup of gun crime in the US

Figures show there were a total of more than 38,600 deaths from guns in 2016, of which 22,900 were suicides. With suicide by firearm being the most popular method of taking ones life. (BBC, 2019). However, of the remaining 14,415 homicides in 2016 (of which 71 died in mass shootings) deaths by rifle accounted for only 4% of these gun deaths with handguns in comparison being 16 times more often used. (FBI, 2017)

The political and practical issues with banning semi-automatic assault rifles

Firstly, politically there are many major issues with trying to pass a ban on semiautomatic assault rifles. One of these reasons is simply that the relationship between Americans and their guns appears to have grown tighter. According to a 2011 Gallup poll, 47 percent of American adults report that they have a gun in their home or somewhere on their property. (ABC News, 2012) Furthermore many Americans perceive owning a gun as a civil right granted through the second amendment. This right to bear arms, many believe, extends to guns of all category from a small handgun that can fit into a purse to a so called “military style” assault rifle such as an AR-15. This theory stems from deep cultural roots and a cultural belief in the ability to defend one’s family, property and liberty against a tyrannical government. Secondly, the NRA has a huge presence in D.C through making huge donations to members of both houses and through its broad membership base offering massive political pressure for guarantees to second amendment rights (ABC News, 2012). Moreover, there are huge practical issues with trying to permanently ban semi-automatic assault rifles. One way to ban these weapons is through ending production and legal importation, however there are two main issues with this. Firstly, many weapons are still in circulation and secondly, while legal importation would be banned, illegal importation, especially so through the 3,145 km of boarder shared with Mexico, would then become a more prominent step in the chain of supply (Buehn, 2009). Another way of permanently banning these weapons as well as removing them from circulation and the populous, is through the use of a gun buy back scheme, similar to that seen in Australia. However there two are some practical issues with this. Firstly, this plan heavily relies on the honesty of the public, many of which would simply not offer their guns for sale back to the government. Secondly a gun buy back scheme would be a huge administrative task which would consume an extraordinary quantity of labour-hours as well as being a huge economic burden. (Parliment of Australia, 2016)

The outcomes relating to the level of gun crime in the USA.

Due to the 1994 “Ten Year Ban” and the conclusive DOJ study evaluating its affects, we do have a solid understanding of the likely effects of such a ban on overall gun crime in the USA. These effects being extremely minimal. Furthermore, this would also mean that while guns are being taken away from law abiding citizens, those that are, statistically most likely to commit crimes; those that do not possess their weapons legally in the first place, will have an even greater advantage over their potential victims. (Scott, 2019) . These outcomes, in the opinion of many are far from favourable.

While I am sure it is not in doubt that America has her problems, especially so relating to gun crime. Due to the political and practical obstacles in the way of tangible legislation and the overwhelming data suggesting that banning “semi-automatic assault rifles” does not have an effect on gun crime. I believe that the focus of the debate needs to shift onto more realistic and successful methods of approach to combating this issue in the USA. Many believe that positive results could be seen through multiple courses of action such as more regulation in the second-hand market particularity in gun shows or more comprehensive background checks at the point of purchase. However, one thing is clear from evaluating the 1994 “Ten Year Ban”, this conclusion being that banning semi-automatic weaponry is an unpopular, ineffective and impractical policy that would realistically have an extremely minimal effect on gun crime and the overall quantity of gun deaths in the USA. 17