Ban on "Assault Weapons"
Proposed Ban on “Assault Weapons”
For my recent controversial legal topic I have selected the failed proposed ban on “assault weapons” that appeared before congress this past spring. This proposed legislation was one that worried me greatly because being a responsible gun owner myself I was worried that by putting another ban upon the ownership of “assault weapons” or semi-automatic rifles such as AR-15’s or Ak-47’s would restrict my current rights as well as not even addressing the real issue of violence in our society which seems to be a mental or psychological issue. It is my intention to address why this proposed ban on “assault weapons” was illogical.
Firstly as someone who has owned and used many firearms for many years it bothered me greatly how many people seemingly thought that by prohibiting the ownership of these particular firearms that there would be a reduction in gun violence when there is no empirical data to support that claim. Over the previous two years there have been two mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, Connecticut which caused uproar in the political climate surrounding these firearms. The argument proposed against these firearms was an emotionally charged one that targeted these rifles in particular because of the fact that they can possess higher capacity magazines and that they have cosmetic features that can resemble military style weapons. The argument was that these firearms are more lethal and that in the hands of the wrong person can cause greater devastation than other firearms however the proposed ban conveniently failed to mention that less than 2% of all firearm crimes are committed with rifles and let alone “assault rifles” and that of this 2% many are self-inflicted. Another is that the biggest mass shooting in the United States wasn’t even with an “assault rifles” or even a rifle, it was with a pistol. At the forefront of those who sought the ban of these firearms was Senator Diane Feinstein from
For my recent controversial legal topic I have selected the failed proposed ban on “assault weapons” that appeared before congress this past spring. This proposed legislation was one that worried me greatly because being a responsible gun owner myself I was worried that by putting another ban upon the ownership of “assault weapons” or semi-automatic rifles such as AR-15’s or Ak-47’s would restrict my current rights as well as not even addressing the real issue of violence in our society which seems to be a mental or psychological issue. It is my intention to address why this proposed ban on “assault weapons” was illogical.
Firstly as someone who has owned and used many firearms for many years it bothered me greatly how many people seemingly thought that by prohibiting the ownership of these particular firearms that there would be a reduction in gun violence when there is no empirical data to support that claim. Over the previous two years there have been two mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, Connecticut which caused uproar in the political climate surrounding these firearms. The argument proposed against these firearms was an emotionally charged one that targeted these rifles in particular because of the fact that they can possess higher capacity magazines and that they have cosmetic features that can resemble military style weapons. The argument was that these firearms are more lethal and that in the hands of the wrong person can cause greater devastation than other firearms however the proposed ban conveniently failed to mention that less than 2% of all firearm crimes are committed with rifles and let alone “assault rifles” and that of this 2% many are self-inflicted. Another is that the biggest mass shooting in the United States wasn’t even with an “assault rifles” or even a rifle, it was with a pistol. At the forefront of those who sought the ban of these firearms was Senator Diane Feinstein from