Harry Tuttle
Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2003
- Messages
- 3,093
Assault Weapons Must be Banned -- Again
5/5/2004
Commentary
by Jarrett T. Barrios
Ten years after landmark legislation banning assault weapons was passed by a Democratic Congress and signed by a Democratic president, a Republican Congress and president have killed it. In September [editor's note: unless Congress reauthorizes the ban], people will once again be able to buy an Uzi or AK-47.
With the federal law's demise, the Commonwealth's own statute will also lapse unless the Legislature passes a new law before September. Massachusetts should extend the assault weapons ban and also close the loophole that allows gun dealers to continue selling semiautomatic assault weapons that were purchased prior to 1994.
It is true that 90 percent of gun-related crimes are committed with ordinary handguns, which are not affected by the assault weapon ban. But according to Attorney General John Ashcroft's statistics, the number of banned weapons traced to crime has decreased by 65.8 percent across the nation from 1995 -- the first full year the ban went into effect -- to 2002.
Mirroring this reduction, the number of police officers killed by semiautomatic assault weapons has fallen precipitously since 1995. Perhaps that is why every major police organization in the country supported the effort to renew the federal assault weapons ban. And why the State Police Association of Massachusetts and the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association are on the front line in lobbying for Massachusetts to extend the assault weapons ban and close the pre-1994 loophole.
Police on the front lines know what it means to be outgunned. And as much as opponents of this legislation keep saying that there is no difference between assault weapons and other types of guns, police know there is a major difference between a handgun and a Tec-9 (used in the massacre at Columbine High School), Mac-10, or AR-15 sniper rifle.
Let's be clear. Semiautomatic assault weapons have no self-protection purpose. Unlike rifles and other recreational firearms, they have no sporting purpose. The constitutional right to own guns has never been found to extend to military-designed weapons of mass destruction.
The National Rifle Association and its allies say the assault weapons ban is ineffective. That's what they said about Brady background checks. That's what they said about banning cop-killer bullets that can pierce body armor. That's what they said about trigger locks that save children's lives. That's what they said about closing the legal loophole that lets criminals buy weapons at gun shows without undergoing background checks. That's what they said about banning high-capacity ammunition feeding clips that can hold 30 rounds per clip. They were wrong about each one of these gun safety laws, and they are wrong now.
The Legislature should look at the facts and set aside political agendas. This debate is about public safety. A bill in the Senate protects gun rights and provides a 90-day grace period for applicants renewing their firearms identification card. It draws the proper line between what is acceptable and what is not under the Second Amendment.
The bill makes permanent the ban on selling or purchasing assault weapons in Massachusetts. It also closes the loophole that allows gun dealers to resell these firearms if originally purchased prior to 1994. It was an AK-47 purchased under this loophole that Michael McDermott used when he entered Edgewater Technologies in Wakefield in 2000 and killed seven of his fellow employees. Closing this loophole only makes sense: An AK-47 manufactured in 1992 allows a criminal to kill just as effectively as one manufactured in 2002.
In 1998 Massachusetts passed gun safety laws that were tougher than any other state on criminals seeking to own guns. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the state's violent crime rate has declined steadily since 1998 -- from 10 percent above the national average in 1998 to 2 percent below the national average in 2002. In 2002, the murder rate in Massachusetts was less than half the national average -- and the second-lowest of any state in the country with a large urban population.
Extending the assault weapons ban and closing the pre-1994 loophole will not solve crime, nor will it keep all guns out of the hands of criminals. But it will aid law enforcement professionals in reducing the carnage caused by the most deadly weapons sold in Massachusetts.
Massachusetts State Senator Jarrett Barrios is chairman of the Senate Public Safety Committee.
Originally published in The Boston Globe, May 4, 2004 on page A19. Reprinted with permission.
This article is online at http://www.jointogether.org/z/0,2522,570802,00.html
5/5/2004
Commentary
by Jarrett T. Barrios
Ten years after landmark legislation banning assault weapons was passed by a Democratic Congress and signed by a Democratic president, a Republican Congress and president have killed it. In September [editor's note: unless Congress reauthorizes the ban], people will once again be able to buy an Uzi or AK-47.
With the federal law's demise, the Commonwealth's own statute will also lapse unless the Legislature passes a new law before September. Massachusetts should extend the assault weapons ban and also close the loophole that allows gun dealers to continue selling semiautomatic assault weapons that were purchased prior to 1994.
It is true that 90 percent of gun-related crimes are committed with ordinary handguns, which are not affected by the assault weapon ban. But according to Attorney General John Ashcroft's statistics, the number of banned weapons traced to crime has decreased by 65.8 percent across the nation from 1995 -- the first full year the ban went into effect -- to 2002.
Mirroring this reduction, the number of police officers killed by semiautomatic assault weapons has fallen precipitously since 1995. Perhaps that is why every major police organization in the country supported the effort to renew the federal assault weapons ban. And why the State Police Association of Massachusetts and the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association are on the front line in lobbying for Massachusetts to extend the assault weapons ban and close the pre-1994 loophole.
Police on the front lines know what it means to be outgunned. And as much as opponents of this legislation keep saying that there is no difference between assault weapons and other types of guns, police know there is a major difference between a handgun and a Tec-9 (used in the massacre at Columbine High School), Mac-10, or AR-15 sniper rifle.
Let's be clear. Semiautomatic assault weapons have no self-protection purpose. Unlike rifles and other recreational firearms, they have no sporting purpose. The constitutional right to own guns has never been found to extend to military-designed weapons of mass destruction.
The National Rifle Association and its allies say the assault weapons ban is ineffective. That's what they said about Brady background checks. That's what they said about banning cop-killer bullets that can pierce body armor. That's what they said about trigger locks that save children's lives. That's what they said about closing the legal loophole that lets criminals buy weapons at gun shows without undergoing background checks. That's what they said about banning high-capacity ammunition feeding clips that can hold 30 rounds per clip. They were wrong about each one of these gun safety laws, and they are wrong now.
The Legislature should look at the facts and set aside political agendas. This debate is about public safety. A bill in the Senate protects gun rights and provides a 90-day grace period for applicants renewing their firearms identification card. It draws the proper line between what is acceptable and what is not under the Second Amendment.
The bill makes permanent the ban on selling or purchasing assault weapons in Massachusetts. It also closes the loophole that allows gun dealers to resell these firearms if originally purchased prior to 1994. It was an AK-47 purchased under this loophole that Michael McDermott used when he entered Edgewater Technologies in Wakefield in 2000 and killed seven of his fellow employees. Closing this loophole only makes sense: An AK-47 manufactured in 1992 allows a criminal to kill just as effectively as one manufactured in 2002.
In 1998 Massachusetts passed gun safety laws that were tougher than any other state on criminals seeking to own guns. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the state's violent crime rate has declined steadily since 1998 -- from 10 percent above the national average in 1998 to 2 percent below the national average in 2002. In 2002, the murder rate in Massachusetts was less than half the national average -- and the second-lowest of any state in the country with a large urban population.
Extending the assault weapons ban and closing the pre-1994 loophole will not solve crime, nor will it keep all guns out of the hands of criminals. But it will aid law enforcement professionals in reducing the carnage caused by the most deadly weapons sold in Massachusetts.
Massachusetts State Senator Jarrett Barrios is chairman of the Senate Public Safety Committee.
Originally published in The Boston Globe, May 4, 2004 on page A19. Reprinted with permission.
This article is online at http://www.jointogether.org/z/0,2522,570802,00.html
and 
