Q. What is the difference between semi-automatic hunting rifles and semi-automatic, military-style assault weapons?

A. Sporting rifles and assault weapons are two distinct classes of firearms. While semi-automatic hunting rifles are designed to be fired from the shoulder and depend upon the accuracy of a precisely aimed projectile to kill an animal, semi-automatic assault weapons are designed to kill as many people quickly, as would be needed in combat.

Opponents of banning assault weapons argue that these military-style weapons only “look” scary. Assault weapons look scary and are scary because they are equipped with combat hardware. Combat features like high-capacity ammunition magazines, pistol grips, folding stocks, and bayonets, which are not found on sporting guns, are designed specifically to facilitate the killing of human beings in battle.

These combat features include:

• A large-capacity ammunition magazine which enables the shooter to continuously fire dozens of rounds without reloading. Many assault weapons come equipped with large ammunition magazines allowing more than 50 bullets to be fired without reloading. Standard hunting rifles are usually equipped with no more than 3 or 4-shot magazines;
• A folding stock which facilitates maximum concealability and mobility in close combat (which comes at the expense of the accuracy desired in a hunting weapon);
• A pistol grip which facilitates spray-fire from the hip without losing control. A pistol grip also facilitates one-handed shooting;
• A barrel shroud which enables the shooter to shoot many rounds because it cools the barrel, preventing overheating. It also allows the shooter to grasp the barrel area to stabilize the weapon, without incurring serious burns, during rapid fire;
• A threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor which allows the shooter to remain concealed when shooting at night, an advantage in combat but unnecessary for hunting or sporting purposes. In addition, the flash suppressor is useful for providing stability during rapid fire;
• A threaded barrel designed to accommodate a silencer which allows an assassin to shoot without making noise;
• A barrel mount designed to accommodate a bayonet which allows someone to stab a person at close quarters in battle.

Q. What is the difference between an automatic and a semi-automatic weapon?

A. An automatic weapon (machine gun) will continue to fire as long as the trigger is depressed (or until the ammunition magazine is emptied). A semi-automatic weapon will fire one round and instantly load the next round with each pull of the trigger. Semi-automatic firearms fire as rapidly as you can depress your finger.

This means that a semi-automatic fires a little more slowly than an automatic, but not much more slowly. When San Jose, California police test-fired an UZI, a 30-round magazine was emptied in slightly less than two seconds on full automatic while the same magazine was emptied in just five seconds on semi-automatic.

Ownership of machine guns has been tightly controlled since passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934, and their manufacture for the civilian market was halted in 1986. However, semi-automatic versions of those same guns are still being produced.

Q. Are semi-automatic hunting rifles considered assault weapons?

A. No. The definition of an assault weapon is tightly drawn. Only semi-automatic guns with military-style features should be banned. Traditional guns designed for use in hunting and recreational activities should not be affected. To alleviate concerns that hunting weapons somehow might be affected, the 1994 federal law provided specific protection to 670 types of hunting rifles and shotguns.

In 2007, a long-standing writer for Outdoor Life magazine, Jim Zumbo, made the following comments in regards to military-style assault weapons and hunting:

“I call them “assault” rifles, which may upset some people. Excuse me, maybe I’m a traditionalist, but I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity. I’ll go so far as to call them “terrorist” rifles. They tell me that some companies are producing assault rifles that are “tackdrivers.”

Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We don’t need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern. I’ve always been comfortable with the statement that hunters don’t use assault rifles. We’ve always been proud of our ‘sporting firearms.’”

Q. What happened to the federal assault weapons ban?

A. The federal law banning the sale of semi-automatic assault weapons, known as the federal assault weapons ban, was passed as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. President Clinton signed it into law on September 13, 1994.

The assault weapons ban expired in September 2004 when Congress and President George W. Bush took no action to save it. That means that AK47s and other semi-automatic assault weapons are once again flooding our streets, as the weapons of choice of gang members, drug dealers and other dangerous criminals.

Q. What should a new assault weapons ban look like?

A. Congress should enact a comprehensive federal assault weapons ban modeled after the California assault weapons ban. The California law banned assault weapons based on a “one-feature test” that requires a firearm to have only one military-style feature in order to be banned. The Brady Campaign was instrumental in helping to enact and implement the California law in 2000.

Adopting a one-feature test would address weaknesses in the original federal law that limited its effectiveness. Specifically, the expired federal law contained a list of assault weapons banned by make and model, but this list was not comprehensive. Also, the statute banned guns with two military-style features (in addition to the ability to accept a detachable, high-capacity ammunition magazine).

The result was a piece of legislation that was valuable at keeping many of the most dangerous assault weapons out of criminals’ hands, but one that could also be evaded by gun makers coming out with “copycat” assault weapons stripped of enough combat features to evade the ban.

Gun makers designed guns specifically to evade the federal ban by making minor changes in features to banned weapons. The guns’ names reflected gun makers’ knowing violation of the spirit of the assault weapons ban: Intratec’s AB (“After Ban”)-10 and Olympic Arms PCR (“Politically Correct Rifle”).

Q. Did the 1994 assault weapon law accomplish anything?

A. According to a study published by the Brady Center in 2004 entitled On Target: The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Act, the federal assault weapons ban reduced the incidence of assault weapons use in crime (Siebel, 2004).

In the five-year period (1990-1994) before enactment of the ban, assault weapons named in the Act constituted 4.82% of the crime gun traces ATF conducted nationwide. In the post-ban period after 1995, these assault weapons made up only 1.61% of the guns ATF has traced to crime – a drop of 66% from the pre-ban rate.

Moreover, ATF trace data showed a steady year-by-year decline in the percentage of assault weapons traced, suggesting that the longer the statute was in effect, the less available these guns became for criminal misuse. Indeed, the absolute number of banned assault weapons traced also declined. An initial report issued by the Department of Justice supported these findings. These findings were further supported in a later report by one of the same researchers.

On Target also looked at the problem of “copycat” assault weapons developed by the gun industry to enable the continued sale of high-firepower weapons. On Target found that industry efforts to evade the federal ban through the sale of these “copycat” weapons was able to diminish, but not eliminate the 1994 Act’s beneficial effects.

Even including copycats of the federally banned guns, there was still a 45% decline between the pre-ban period (1990-1994) and the post-ban period (1995 and after) in the percentage of ATF crime gun traces involving assault weapons and copycat models.

Q. Who supports banning assault weapons?

A. Presidents across the political spectrum have supported an assault weapons ban. Former Presidents Reagan, Ford, and Carter wrote Congress in support of the 1994 ban urging them to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of these weapons.” In 2004, Presidents Ford, Carter, and Clinton wrote to urge re-authorization of the ban. And President George W. Bush stated that he supported the ban and would sign it if it passed Congress.

The law enforcement community has long supported strong assault weapons bans. Every major national law enforcement organization in the country supported the Federal Assault Weapons Act and urged its renewal, including: the Law Enforcement Steering Committee, Fraternal Order of Police, National Sheriffs’ Association, International Association of Chiefs of Police, Major City Chiefs Association, International Brotherhood of Police Officers, National Association of Police Organizations, Hispanic American Police Command Officers Association, National Black Police Association, National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, Police Executive Research Forum, and Police Foundation.

Q. Why do police support the federal ban so strongly?

A. In the absence of a ban on assault weapons, police across America report that semi-automatic assault weapons become the "weapon of choice" for drug traffickers, gangs and paramilitary extremist groups. It happened in the 1980s, before the federal assault weapons ban, and it appears to be happening again now that the law is gone.

The Brady Center report, Assault Weapons: Mass Produced Mayhem, documents the concerns of police chiefs from around the country on the increasing problem of assault weapons since 2004 (Brady Center, p. 3). For example, during the last year of ban (2004), Miami police reported that 4 percent of homicides were committed with assault weapons. In 2007, 20 percent were committed with assault weapons (Miami Herald, 2007).

Likewise, from March 1, 2005 to February 28, 2007, the media reported 235 assault weapon incidents. While the number of assault weapon incidents stayed roughly the same from 2005/6 to 2006/7, the percent of incidents involving law enforcement increased by 20.7 percent (Diaz, 2010).

Law enforcement officers are at particular risk from these weapons because of their high firepower and ability to penetrate body armor. In the four years since the ban expired, at least 38 police officers have been killed or wounded by assault weapons (Brady Center, p. iv).

Law enforcement officers now need to carry assault weapons themselves in order to match the firepower of criminals wielding assault weapons. An informal survey of about 20 police departments conducted by the International Association of Chiefs of Police revealed that since 2004, all of the agencies have either added assault weapons to patrol units or replaced existing weapons with military-style assault weapons (USA Today, 2007).

Q. How does the public feel about banning assault weapons?

A. In poll after poll, the American people, regardless of party affiliation, have consistently supported a federal ban on assault weapons.

In polling of 1,083 voters conducted between November 5 and 9, 2008 by Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, 65 percent of voters supported a ban on military-style assault weapons, including 60 percent of gun owners and 62 percent of McCain voters (Penn, Schoen, and Berland, p. 3).

A 2007 poll of Illinois voters found that 80% favored banning semiautomatic assault weapons (WBBM, 2007). Newspaper editorial boards have also continued their strong support for getting assault weapons off our nation’s streets (Daily Pennsylvanian, et al.).

Q. What states have assault weapons bans?

A. Seven states — California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York — have state assault weapons bans.

Q. What can I do?

A. Contact your Representative and Senators to urge them to support a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips. To review your state's gun laws, click here.

Sources

Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Assault Weapons: “Mass-Produced Mayhem,” Washington, DC: Brady Center, October 2008.

DAILY PENNSYLVANIAN, Our leaders are fighting to bring back the national assault weapons ban, May 29, 2008. See also: Brian Scheid, Rendell: Reinstate weapons ban, BUCKS COUNTY COURIER TIMES, May 12, 2008; David Gambacorta, In wake of Liczbinski slaying, a push for assault-weapon ban, PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS, May 8, 2008; Time for action, BUCKS COUNTY COURIER TIMES, May 7, 2008; Gun Control: How many more?, PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER, May 6, 2008; Sam Wood, Cheap but deadly weapon killed police officer, PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER, May 6, 2008; Assault rifles: Cops find themselves outgunned, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE, Apr. 14, 2008; Take aim at guns, CHICAGO TRIBUNE, Mar. 12, 2008; Gun Crazy, NEW YORK TIMES, Mar. 1, 2008; Assault weapon bill is a start, at least, SOUTH FLORIDA SUN-SENTINEL, Feb. 12, 2008; Off-Target: Why are chuka sticks illegal, but not AK-47 knockoff?, SYRACUSE POST-STANDARD, Dec. 27, 2007; Mass killings demand serious debate on banning some weapons, RECORDNET.COM, Dec. 20, 2007; Ralph Fascitelli, It’s time to outlaw military assault weapons, SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER, Dec. 19, 2007; Get rid of these guns – now, TIMES-HERALD, Dec. 19, 2007; Courage vs. Carnage: What Congress can do to keep the worst weapons out of the wrong hands, WASHINGTON POST, Dec. 13, 2007; The Omaha Massacre: Warning Shots, PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER, Dec. 7, 2007; Charles Rabin, Dade urges renewing assault-arms ban, MIAMI HERALD, Nov. 8, 2007; The other arms race, BALTIMORE SUN, Nov. 7, 2007; Ana Menendez, There’s no good reason to have an assault rifle, MIAMI HERALD, Sept. 16, 2007; Legislature should take aim at assault weapon horrors, CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, Jan. 10, 2007.

Diaz, Tom, Target: Law Enforcement, Assault Weapons in the News, March 1, 2005 -February 28, 2007, Washington, DC: Violence Policy Center, February 2010

MIAMI HERALD, Byline, Jack Dolan, “Miami Police Get OK For More Firepower,” September 16, 2007.

Green R, and M. Bechak,Post-Election Analysis: Sensible Gun Laws Build Bridges Not Burn Them to Moderates, McCain, and Even Gun Owners in a Post-Heller World, Washington, DC: Penn, Schoen, and Berland Associates, Inc., November 18, 2008

Siebel, Brian J. with Gerald Nunziato of Crime Gun Solutions LLC, On Target: The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban, Washington, DC: Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, March 2004.

USA TODAY, Byline Kevin Johnson, “Police Needing Heavier Weapons: Chiefs Cite Spread of Assault Rifles,” February 20, 2007.

USA TODAY, “Police Fear a Future of Armored Enemies,” March 3, 1997.

WBBM 780 NEWS, Survey: 8 Out of 10 Illinois Voters Favor Banning Assault Weapons, Chicago, IL, Mar. 22, 2007.