Analysis of Assault Weapon and Large-Capacity Magazine Bans Lawrence A. Cifarelli III University of New Haven

Abstract

The Assault Weapon and Large-Capacity Magazine Ban of 1994 is a policy that was implemented in order to reduce the homicide rate involving assault weapons and keep this type of weapon out of the hands of criminals. Also, large-capacity magazines were also banned, thus intending on reducing the homicide rate since criminals would not be able to have magazines that could carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Using various sources of data, the ban will be decided to have succeeded in its intended purpose or if it had failed given the data that will be scrutinized. The main thing that people wanted out of this ban is that less people will be killed, and there are many people who will take both sides of the fence in this argument. The homicide rates are posted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Supplementary Homicide Report and both clearly come to the same conclusion that from the time that the ban was put into effect, firearm homicide has decreased. As far as exactly how much of this decrease is accredited to the ban has been widely discussed but the policy cannot be both a failure and a success. Therefore the data will lead us to one evidence-based decision as to whether or not the ban was able to complete its intended purpose. Large-capacity magazines, listed as having the capability to carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition, were also banned because the less bullets one criminal has, than it is reasonable to believe that the less people he/she could harm. By banning assault weapons and large-capacity magazines, America had hoped homicide rates and the amount of these types of weapons would decrease. At the end of this paper, it will be clear as to whether or not policy makers were successful in making the ban as effective as possible in order to succeed in its overall goal.

Analysis of Assault Weapon and Large-Capacity Magazine Bans The following analysis will deal with assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and the bans that have been applied to their use and ownership. Assault weapons are considered to be semiautomatic firearms of military-style, which contain features that can be deemed useful in a military or criminal application but are not needed for hunting, shooting sports, or self-defense (Koper & Roth, 2002). Based on the Federal Assault Weapons ban, a high-capacity magazine is any type of feeding device for a weapon that contains greater than 10 rounds of ammunition. The overall goal of banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines is that those who proposed these bans intended on lowering the death rate and keeping such dangerous weapons out of the hands of criminals and off of the streets. In comparing the death rates from several different years (from both before and after the time in which assault weapon and high capacity magazine bans were put into effect) and based off of all relevant data analyzed, the ban will be determined to be either a success or a failure and it will be clear as to why that decision was chosen. Senator Diane Feinstein introduced an amendment to the Omnibus Anti-Crime Bill of 1993 which dealt specifically with banning the manufacture and sale of 19 different types of assault weapons. The amendment also prohibited the sale of any type of future “copycat” weapons which contain the grip of a pistol yet have a large-capacity magazine, which allows for the rapid fire of a high amount of shots fired and may fall into the category of an assault weapon (Kahane 1999). One of the major sections of the amendment is the banning of large-capacity magazines. Not only does this ban render mostly all assault weapons illegal, but roughly 40% of the semiautomatic handguns and the majority of semiautomatic rifles that were manufactured and advertised before the ban was put into place were sold with large-capacity magazines or offered a magazine that would be considered high-capacity. These types of handguns and magazines would be grandfathered in and be out in the public even though the ban had been put into effect. (Koper & Roth, 2002). While the ban was being debated in Congress, primary market prices of weapons that were to be banned if the ban was passed rose by upwards of 50% (Roth and Koper, 2001). Once the ban was put into effect, high speculative prices for assault weapons in primary markets carried over into the secondary markets which made the assault weapons more difficult to obtain on the black market. The two analysts also pointed out that assault weapons were only used in roughly 2% of all gun crimes before the ban, but since they were used in highly publicized mass murder incidents, the growing fear of individuals in the community brought upon the Assault Weapon Ban. The ban of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines was put into effect in 1994 and according to Table V in the article by Koper and Roth (2002), overall gun homicides decreased 10% from 16,333 deaths in 1994 to 14,733 deaths in 1995. Since they had previously stated that only about 2% of gun crimes involve assault weapons and the difference in gun homicides from 1994 to 1995 is 1,600, it can be concluded that the ban helped prevent 32 homicides from assault weapons. Aside from the surmountable decrease of overall gun homicides in the first two years in which the policy was put into effect, according to that same exact table, trace requests for all assault weapons decreased 20% from 4,077 trace requests in 1994 to 3,268 trace requests in 1995. According to the National Tracing Center at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (2013), a trace request is when a firearm is discovered at a crime scene by a law enforcement agency, who then seeks to learn the background and origin of the firearm in order to develop potential leads in the investigation. Considering the fact that there has been a 10% decrease in overall gun homicides and a 20% decrease in assault weapon trace requests, Koper and Roth (2002) have concluded that the Assault Weapon Ban of 1994 that came about from the Feinstein Amendment was indeed effective in getting assault weapons off of the streets. As previously stated, the Assault Weapon Ban of 1994 was meant to limit the use and ownership of these types of weapons and according to Koper and Roth’s assessment, it has succeeded. A study found that the 1995 gun homicide rates were 10.9% lower than the projected level for that year (Roth & Koper, 1999). The limitation of ownership has caused the prices of guns in both the primary and secondary markets to increase, thus making it more difficult for anyone to obtain assault weapons on the black market. These factors will end up impacting the gun availability of assault weapons to criminals, and by extension will have a long-term impact on gun violence. Gary Kleck, a well-known criminologist, author and professor in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University at the time, stated that Koper and Roth conducted impossible policy evaluations which led to impossible conclusions (Kleck 2001). In evaluating the article, Kleck pointed out many points which go against the conclusion and analysis of Koper and Roth. First, he discusses the assault weapon use in gun homicide that they use, which is 2%, and states that even though it is an accurate statement, based on six estimates analyzing how both banned and unbanned assault weapons were involved in only 1.17% of gun homicides. He then goes on to calculate that the maximum number of lives that this the assault weapon ban can save and he arrives at the answer of two gun homicides out of 14,686 which is roughly .0153% while Koper and Roth concluded that this ban would save roughly 32 homicides in 1995 alone. Being that they are generally looking at the same information and only operationalizing it differently, one can see how it is so difficult to come to a conclusion regarding a ban that carries so much weight in society. From Koper and Roth’s (2002) standpoint, the Assault Weapon Ban sounds like it is doing well in the case that it saves roughly 30 people’s lives per year. But when compared to Kleck’s (2001) findings that only about two people will be saved per year directly because of the ban, it seems as if people cannot come to an exact conclusion regarding the number of people who were saved due to the Assault Weapon Ban. With Kleck’s article potentially impacting their credibility, Koper and Roth then wrote a second article to further prove how their findings and conclusions are factual. Due to all of the scrutiny, one of the first things that they point out that they quoted from their old article is that “the ban has not produced a clear impact on gun violence, based on data available less than 2 years following implementation of the law” (Koper & Roth, 2001). Koper and Roth (2001) also reiterate how much assault weapons have become less accessible to nearly anyone, especially offenders. In relation to the trends of other types of firearms, police confiscations of assault weapons declined 10%, declined 25 to 29% in two major cities, and reported thefts of assault weapons also decreased by 14% nationally. They then continue to discuss how only 2% of all robberies and assaults committed with firearms would have been committed with assault weapons if the ban had not yet been put into place. In the year 1995, the National Crime Victimization Survey indicates there was about 805,802 robberies and assaults using firearms. In conjunction with the 2% expectation as to the number that would use assault weapons, roughly 16,116 robberies and assaults would be committed using assault weapons (Koper & Roth 2001). According to Koper and Roth (2001), the Assault Weapons Ban arguably prevented 2,417 of these violent crimes from occurring, assuming that a 15% reduction in assault weapon use has been applied. Another element that Kleck attempted to discuss to disapprove their conclusions was the large-capacity magazine limitation. Through his analysis Kleck stated that the ban on large-capacity magazines would prevent zero homicides in 1995. Using Kleck’s information and previous studies, Koper and Roth made made it quite obvious as to how it has saved lives. In his book Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, Gary Kleck points out how police officers only have an accuracy rate of 39% and they are considered to be more than proficient marksman (Koper & Roth 2001). Another study on accuracy concluded that victims are killed in only 25% of incidents involving firearms. Keeping in mind that victims killed by firearms armed with large-capacity magazines are shot 3.2 times on average, than it is probable that the shooter would fire between eight and thirteen shots in a large-capacity magazine shooting using the two previous statistics listed above. (Roth et al., 1997; Koper & Roth, 2001). Since a large-capacity magazine is classified as anything over ten rounds, banning anything over that amount could reduce the chance that the victim would die because the offender could not get enough shots off. In regards to Kleck’s conclusion that banning large-capacity magazines, magazines that contain greater than ten rounds, would not have an effect what-so-ever on reducing injury or homicides, while Koper and Roth showed exactly how a ban would decrease the amount of injuries and homicides. All information and data collected in regards to regarding the effectiveness, or ineffectiveness, of the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 makes it very clear as to whether or not the policy involving these types of weapons and large-capacity magazines had an effect, if any, on saving lives. It is clear that the data that has been collected goes both ways, and that different analysts have come to different conclusions regarding the effectiveness of the ban. The main area that has been presented and evaluated regarding the Assault Weapons Ban is whether or not it has saved any lives. According to Koper and Roth (2002) about 32 lives were saved in 1995 based off of the ban alone. On the opposite end is Koper (2001) who came to the conclusion that only the lives of two people were saved strictly because of the ban. Both of the methodologies of these analysts seemed legitimate but of the two, Koper and Roth used several more data points. In using more data points, their information and conclusions seem more scrupulous in being positive that nothing was overlooked in order to ensure the most accurate data possible. Plenty and Truman (2013) show in their work that in 1994, there were 2,830 homicides by use of other firearm (rifle, shotgun, and other types of firearms [including assault weapons]) and in 1995 that number reduced by 5.65% to 2,670 homicides by other firearm. For the preceding years up until 2004 when the assault weapons ban was lifted, the number fluctuated but never rose above the original number from 1994 of 2,830 deaths by other firearm. Not until 2005, the year that the ban was lifted, did this number increase to higher than it had been since 1994 (Plenty & Truman 2013). This data shows that people’s lives were being saved during the time that the Assault Weapon Ban was put into place right up until it was lifted. Koper and Roth (2001) made the point how the Assault Weapons Ban helped get assault weapons off the streets which is why the ban helped as much as it did. The number of trace requests for assault weapons was greatly reduced from 1994 to 1995, also proving that assault weapons were used less in crimes nationwide. From the time period 1990 through 1993, the four years before the Assault Weapons Ban was put into effect, the average annual homicide by firearm total was 13,025. From the four years after the ban had been put into effect, 1995-1998, we see that the number of homicides was largely affected. The average annual homicide by firearm rate in these four years was about 10,390. The difference in these two time periods shows exactly how much of a difference there was. On average, 2,635 less people were being killed each year because of firearms (Puzzenchrea, Chamberlin, & Kang 2012). Even though there is no direct data linked to assault weapons telling us how many of these homicides were caused by assault weapons, there is enough data out there to calculate that number. Using Koper and Roth’s (2002) 2% that they calculated to be the number of homicides that involve the use of assault weapons each year in use with the above data, it can be said that 52.7, or 53 people have been saved each year. Whether or not we can relate all 53 lives that have been saved to the Assault Weapons Ban is still not 100% clear, but in helping get them off of the street and out of the hands of criminals, the ban has done its job by reducing overall trace requests since it has been put into place. All tables and comparisons show that firearm homicides and the involvement of firearms in crime has decreased since 1994, which is the time that the Assault Weapon Ban had been put into effect and there is no conceivable way that this data can be represented to say that firearm violence has increased while the ban was in effect. Out of all of the analyses, there are few things that we need to know and study further before any true conclusions can be stated. For one, there is not enough data to support the statement that if criminals cannot get their hands on assault weapons than they will simply go and get a handgun that will get the same job done. No one has done any studies in relation to this issue and this statement should not be issued without any true, relevant facts as it had been. The stopping power, accuracy, and ease of use of different types of firearms has never been truly evaluated either. Not one of the analyses discusses the ease of use of assault weapons versus handguns, or any other firearm for that matter. In studying the stopping power and accuracy of various firearms, we will further be able to tell exactly how deadly in comparison assault weapons can be. Also, not everyone has the competency to pick up, load and shoot an assault weapon and the number of people who can, more than likely know how dangerous they can be. In comparison to other types of violent crime involving firearms, analysts should further look into the stopping power and number of people who would be able to use an assault weapon to perhaps target a specific area or a specific group of people to best utilize an assault weapon ban of some sort. As far as the large-capacity magazine data, it can be said that there needs to be a lot more research done on this topic in order to make an effective ban on them. By limiting the number of bullets per magazine to 10, it seems as if they just threw out a number to use rather than scientifically analyze a limit that would be the most effective at saving lives. Even though 10 does not seem like a lot of bullets, who says that people are going to carry only 10 bullets? People break laws every day and still own magazines that can carry well over 10 rounds of ammunition. An anonymous study should be done to see exactly how many people own and transport weapons using more than the legal limit of 10 bullets in the magazine. If the percentages clearly show that people still travel with more than 10 rounds in the magazine, than we would need to reduce the amount of bullets that can be carried. On the other hand, if the data shows that no one carries over the legal limit then 10 rounds per magazine, than the large-capacity magazine limit would be sufficient. In obtaining more data on some of the topics and points that have been brought up in various articles, we can only assure that our conclusions have been stated correctly and are in fact true. In order to make an assault weapons ban as effective as possible in America, the Assault Weapons and Large-Capacity Magazines ban should be based more off of data rather than just banning the weapons simply because they fall under the category of assault weapons. Before they were to put another ban into effect, the policy makers should base exactly what the ban targets off of data instead of what sounds good on paper. As discussed before, the large-capacity magazines are clarified as anything that can hold 10 or more rounds. In not one of the articles analyzed was there anything stating exactly why that number was chosen to be used for the ban. By further studying the data and performing more research, policy makers will be able to narrow down the most efficient number of bullets allowed in a magazine that will save the greatest number of lives. As for assault weapons, we should take into consideration the stopping power and ease of use before banning every type of firearm that can be classified as an assault weapon. Since certain assault weapons are lighter, more manageable and easier to conceal than others, it would make sense to make sure that those are banned indefinitely so that people will not be able to get their hands on them to transport them if they decide to commit some type of mass murder or violent crime. In implementing an assault weapon and large-capacity magazine ban similar to the one involved in the Feinstein amendment, with just a few changes, we should see an even greater decrease in the homicide rate involving assault weapons and fewer guns out on the street in comparison to 1994. Using the analyses performed throughout this paper, it is clear that any reasonable person would believe that the Assault Weapons and Large-Capacity Magazines Ban of 1994, brought upon by the Feinstein amendment, has done its intended job of saving lives and getting these weapons off of the streets and out of the hands of criminals. The purpose of such a ban is to reduce homicide rates as well as getting these types of weapons out of the hands of criminals and off of the street. The data shows that the homicide rates steadily decreased from the time that this ban was put into effect and several analysts, even though the data ranges, have concluded that this ban does in fact save lives every year. Regardless of the number of lives saved per year, the main goal was to reduce murder in the country caused by the use of assault weapons or large-capacity magazines. Even though it may not be the most efficient ban, as long as one life has been saved, the ban has done its job. Of the data analyzed, the average number of lives that were saved per year is about 29, which is more than enough to say that this policy has been successful and should be re implemented back into today’s society with a few minor changes. References Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (2013, February). National Tracing Center . Retrieved June 18, 2013, from http://www.atf.gov/publications/factsheets/ factsheet-national-tracing-center.html Kahane, L. H. (1999, December). Gun Lobbies and Gun Control: Senate Voting Patterns on the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban. Atlantic Economic Journal, 27(4), 384. Retrieved from Academic One File database. Kleck, G. (2001). Impossible Policy Evaluations and Impossible Conclusions: A Comment on Koper and Roth. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17(1), 75-80. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Koper, C. S., & Roth, J. A. (2001, March 1). A Priori Assertions Versus Empirical Inquiry: A Reply to Kleck. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17(1), 81-88. Retrieved from EBSCOhost Koper, C. S., & Roth, J. A. (2002, September). The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban on Gun Markets: An Assessment of Short-Term Primary and Secondary Market Effects. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18(3), 239-266. Retrieved from ProQuest Criminal Justice database. Plenty, M., & Truman, J. L. (2013, May). Firearm Violence, 1993-2011. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf Puzzanchera, C., Chamberlin, G., & Kang, W. (2012). Easy Access to the FBI's Supplementary Homicide Reports: 1980-2010. Retrieved June 23, 2013, fromhttp://ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ ezashr/asp/off_display.asp Roth, J. A., Koper, C. S., Adams, W., Johnson, S., Marcotte, J., McGready, J., Scott, A., ... Wissoker, D. (1997, March 13). Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994. National Institute of Justice, Retrieved from ProQuest Criminal Justice database Roth, J. A., & Koper, C. S. (1999, March). Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994–96. National Institute of Justice, Retrieved from EBSCOhost.