I'm planning on sending the following email to the globe, but I'd like to get your opinions before I send it...
To Whom It May Concern,
I just finished reading Senator Jarrett T. Barrios' op-ed piece entitled, "Assault weapons must be banned -- again" (
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ed...5/04/assault_weapons_must_be_banned____again/). Mr. Barrios' article is full of inaccuracies. He chose not to cite his sources, so we don't know where he obtained his information, but a quick review of the laws can clear things up.
The Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) (
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC921) defines assault weapons as:
(1) any of a list of specific models of semi-automatic firearms,
(2) a rifle that incorporates two or more of the following features:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii) a bayonet mount;
(iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
(v) a grenade launcher;
(3) a pistol that incorporates two or more of the following features:
(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
(ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;
(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;
(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and
(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and
(4) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of--
(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and
(iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.
The AWB does not outlaw the AK-47 or UZI that Barrios talked about. It doesn't even
mention machine guns (firearms that fire more than one round with a single pull of the trigger, including the AK-47 and the UZI). The federal laws regarding machine guns are the National Firearms Act of 1934 (
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#m), which controls ownership of machine guns; and the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986 (99th Cong., 2d Sess. (GPO; Washington, D.C.; March 14, 1986)), which prevents the importation of manufacture of new machine guns for civilian use.
In his piece, Barrios claims that the AWB affects weapons of mass destruction. Most of the U.S. population realizes that WMD are Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (NBC) weapons - nothing else. They are most obviously not firearms.
If you review the list of features in the AWB, there's only one that makes a weapon more dangerous: a grenade launcher. The National Firearms Act of 1934 covers ownership of the grenades that would be launched from a grenade launcher. Thus, Barrios' disingenuine attempt to indicate that some combination of the features that the AWB prevents doesn't hold water.
Any firearm can be used for self protection, assault weapons included. Any firearm may be used to fire projectiles at high velocity into an attempted rapist, or attempted murderer, to prevent a heinous crime. An assault weapon may not be possible to walk around town with, but it's useful to defend one's family from a vicious intruder.
In Vermont, the crime rate is one of the lowest in the United States (
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm#cius), and there are no state restrictions on firearms - they can be carried, concealed or open, empty or loaded, anywhere not prevented by federal law. In New York City and Washington D.C., there is a near total ban on firearms, but the crime rates are some of the highest in the United States (
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm#cius). In England, firearms are banned, but crimes in which guns are used is skyrocketing, and continues to do so (
http://www.crimereduction.gov.uk/statistics26.doc).
The only effect of the Assault Weapons Ban is to prevent specifically named firearms, and specific (mostly harmless) feature combinations from entering private hands.
I ask very little: I ask that any discussion about this law be based in the facts, rather than in Barrios' falsehoods. And since our own senator provided an article full of falsehoods, I ask that American elected officials tell us the truth when talking about laws.
