Considering the drastic change in the level of crime using legal full-autos and semi-auto "assault weapons"

Question

since their respective bans, would it be reasonable to state that the bans are responsible for the changes?

Answer 1

Last time I checked, Chicago, which has banned all guns for the last 20 or so years, has a very high gun crime rate. The majority do not use " machine guns" or even military style AR type semi-autos, the government wants to ban .50 cal weapons, I havent read about a single instance where a .50 was used in a criminal enterprise. These gun bans are feel good measures only, enforcing pre-existing laws is almost impossible due to criminals not really caring about a good societies laws. Gun bans make legal gun owners victims, or even worse, criminals because you own something they decided you cant have!

Answer 2

The number of violent crimes in America committed by folks using legal full autos and semi auto "assault weapons" is so small that it doesn't even get it own bar on the FBI's crime graphs.

Full autos have been strictly regulated for decades....since the Al Capone days actually. Still, a few criminals get them and use them if they really want.

With all the cocaine available on American streets, it seems possible to get just about anything from South America into the US, and this is also the primary source for illegal firearms in the USA. Guess the smugglers never heard about that "ban", huh?

There is no such thing as a semi-auto "assault weapon".

There was an "Assault Rifle" in Hitler's arsenal, the Stg44, but it was full auto capable......is that what you mean?

I have a baseball bat and if I use it to comit an assault on someone I guess my bat's an "assault weapon" right?

Answer 3

Kevin, any rifle, assault style or not, does not present any more difficulty to purchase than a handgun. You still go through the same background checks. In some states, it is easier to get a rifle of any variety, since it is a "long arm" and not subjected to the restrictions of a handgun. To the question at hand: would the carnage have been worse? Maybe, maybe not. Hard to say because I dont recall the number of people that escaped, or the nature of the injuries to survivors. There are so many variables (ammo, accuracy, location of hits, ranges, etc), you can't make much of a case either way. The rifle is inherently more powerful and accurate, so all things being equal there likely would have been more fatalities. However, consider that the final intent of the rampage was suicide, and that it is much easier to commit suicide with a handgun, and his choice of firearm makes more sense. It's a bit more difficult to blow your own brains out with a rifle. For your last question: why is the Brady bunch using this to promote the assault weapons ban? This one is easy. It is their entire reason for being - to eliminate your second amendment rights and disarm the American public. They hate guns. As you know, hatred is not a rational thought, so the cannot be reasoned with nor debated. They can, however, be beaten. Make sure you join the NRA if you have not, and purchase your own firearms. Teach others to shoot, behave responsibly. Build the pro-second amendment base.

Answer 4

Since you quote no figures on level of crime, I can only assume you are referring to the reduction of crime with firearms.
Banning any thing does nothing to reduce crime, but only makes criminals of law abiding citizens. Neither does registration or licensing.
The simple reason is the fact that criminals do not obey the law and they will have what it is illegal for you and I to have.
The reason for reduction in crime is more citizens are carrying legally, and the criminal will not take anything the hard way. The criminals are more afraid of an armed citizen than the police.
The only thing I don't like about the law in OK is you can't carry your gun where you need it most: school and the Post Office.
PS: There ain't no such thing as a semi-automatic assault rifle.

Answer 5

First of all, do not believe everything you hear in the media, who's self- appointed job apparently is to ensure they en flame any incident to the "drastic change" level. The latest thing in Miami was not usual even for Miami. The liberal media has a vested reason they do this. They want to highlight any gun crime and make it seem that it is common occurrance and something that new laws should address.

Probably the full auto "legal" weapons you refer to are not Legal at all under the law. Full auto ownership is covered under the Class III license requirements. There are lots of people who legally own Class III weapons. The people shooting these full auto weapons at policemen and each other are called "criminals" and most assuredly would not pass the rigorous background checks done for Class III owners.

Last time I looked, criminals have this little problem with following society's laws...THEY don't.

We do not need new laws, however, we might need to re-arm the police to make sure they KILL the little suckers that are spraying bullets around neighborhoods and at policemen.

Answer 6

Statistics show that gun bans in general do not effect crime rate at best and it worst they cause it to rise. Very few legal full autos are used in crimes, it is mostly semi-autos, single shots and BB guns. The criminals don't need a gun to kill you (most don't want to kill you, they just want your money), they need it to scare you so BB guns are often used by criminals... if they wanted to kill you they could just stab you.

Legal full autos are almost never used in crimes since there are so few and are easy to trace. If a full auto is ever used in crime it is most likely by drug smugglers that smuggle them over with their drugs.... Mexican drug dealers could care less what is banned. The few that are not drug dealers are just regular criminals that had enough mechanical smarts to turn a semi-auto full auto, please note: this is no easy task even with the knowledge since parts are needed which are difficult to find or the ymust be machined by a skilled craftsman.

Answer 7

the AWB accomplished nothing. it banned weapons based on appearance not function.

Most of the weapons auto and semi-auto used in the commission of a felons are not weapons that are legally purchased or owned by people who play by the rules.

According to U of Chicago's Sociology professor John Lott's well known study, gun laws restrict ownership do not reduce crime, in fact it does just the opposite. Criminals realize unarmed citizens make better victims.
Bans result in "increased" crimes, not decreased crimes.

Answer 8

Hardly...The bans have accomplished nothing in regrads to reducing crime. To the contrary assault weapons and fully automatic weapons are on the rise in criminal activity. Bans only have a marked effect on the normal law abiding citizen and not the career criminal. With the infux of monies available to street level criminals these days, they have the cash and the contacts to obtain automatic weapons regardless of the bans or existing weapons laws. As a retired LEO and Detective I've seen the ill effects for 26 years on the job. We don't need new gun laws, but we do need to enforce those we already have

Answer 9

FBI statistics show that states with stricter gun control have serious increases in violent crime. This is also proven in countries like the UK, canada and australia where they imposed almost complete gun control and violent crime sky rocketed.
All reports from the FBI etc show no "decrease" like you state. What source are you quoting? In the first place, "full automatic" weapons are very very rarely used in crime. As for "semi auto assault weapons" first off, "assaullt weapon" was a term derived by hand gun control several years ago to make firearms sound like a terrorist all by itself. Anything used as a weapon against another human becomes an "assault weapon" whether it is an "assault knife", and "assault baseball bat" , an "assault ink pen" or an "assault car".
Further, firearms are a tool. Just like any other tool they can be missused by criminals. Common sense says that if you want to stop crime, you remove the criminal from society. No criminal, no crime. Removing firearms or sharp objects from circulation, does nothing to stop crime because the criminal is still there, still commits crimes, and just finds another item to use as a weapon.
As a retired police officer, I have continued to study firearms related crime. I have access to a dozen or more "studies" done each year by the ATF, FBI etc and none of them show the "drastic" change you speak of. The only exception to that is, that with more states issuing concealed weapons to law abiding citizens, violent crime in THOSE STATES has dropped. Gee, imagine that, the states where criminals know private citizens are armed, have lower crime rates, but the places with strict gun control like Washington DC have the highest murder and violent crime rates. Kinda puts your "reasoning" in a poor light doesn't it?

Answer 10

1)For starters, neither of these have been banned,
2)Legal full-auto's are virtually never used in crimes of ANY sort,
3)Statistics garnered during the "assault rifle ban",
which was not a ban, but a ten year moritorium on sales PENDING an FBI investigation on statistics of "assault style" weapons used in crime, showed NO increase in the usage of so called "assault rifles" in crime. THAT, is why the ban EXPIRED - NO link COULD be shown.

That being said,
What the hell are you talking about?
You need to get your statistics from the FBI, not the gun-haters. They manipulate their statistics to make them appear to support their positions, but their manipulations have no basis in solid fact.

If you wanna blame someone on the rate of gun crime,
How about HOLLYWOOD? Even though it is the home of the gun-fearing movement, They can hardly make a movie without gun violence in it. They promote gun violence by de-sensitizing everyone to it at an early age, and glorify it by showing it as the way Movie-Screen-"Hero's" solve their problems.

Since you use the word "legal" in your question, let me remind you of this as well, Criminals, do not obtain their guns legally, they steal them. Even if you banned guns, and law-abiding gun owners turned all of theirs in, ...What makes you assume CRIMINALS, will obey the law and turn THEIR guns in? All gun bans do is empower criminals by ensuringtheir VICTIMS will be UNARMED!