Gun Control Groups Have Moved Away From An Assault Weapons Ban
BY Herschel Smith10 years, 5 months ago
The morning after the Sandy Hook shootings, Shannon Watts, a mother of five and a former public relations executive, started a Facebook page called “One Million Moms for Gun Control.” It proved wildly popular and members quickly focused on renewing the federal ban on military style assault weapons.
“We all were outraged about the fact that this man could use an AR-15, which seemed like a military grade weapon, and go into an elementary school and wipe out 26 human beings in less than five minutes,” Watts said.
Nearly two years later, Watts works full-time as the head of the group, now named Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, is a significant player in a coalition financed by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. But while polls suggest a majority of Americans still support an assault weapons ban, it is no longer one of Watts’ top priorities.
“We’ve very much changed our strategy to focus on public safety measures that will save the most lives,” she told ProPublica.
It’s not just that the ban proved to be what Watts calls a “nonstarter” politically, gaining fewer votes in the Senate post-Sandy Hook than background check legislation. It was also that as Watts spoke to experts and learned more about gun violence in the United States, she realized that pushing for a ban isn’t the best way to prevent gun deaths.
A 2004 Justice Department-funded evaluation found no clear evidence that the decade-long ban saved any lives. The guns categorized as “assault weapons” had only been used in about 2 percent of gun crimes before the ban. “Should it be renewed,” the report concluded, “the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.”
With more information, Watts decided that focusing on access to guns, not types of guns, was a smarter approach. She came to the same conclusion that other gun control groups had reached even before the Sandy Hook shootings: “Ultimately,” she said, “what’s going to save the most lives are background checks.”
So in other words, we (the control freaks) lost, we were wrong, and we admit it. Or perhaps we don’t admit it so much as we have to give a reason for our “pivot” to universal background checks. But we all know why you’re interested in that.
The only way we can truly be safe and prevent further gun violence is to ban civilian ownership of all guns. That means everything. No pistols, no revolvers, no semiautomatic or automatic rifles. No bolt action. No breaking actions or falling blocks. Nothing. This is the only thing that we can possibly do to keep our children safe from both mass murder and common street violence.
Unfortunately, right now we can’t. The political will is there, but the institutions are not. Honestly, this is a good thing. If we passed a law tomorrow banning all firearms, we would have massive noncompliance. What we need to do is establish the regulatory and informational institutions first. This is how we do it. The very first thing we need is national registry. We need to know where the guns are, and who has them.
But you’ve tried that one too. You lost. And you’ll lose again, and even if you won, it wouldn’t have any more effect than does your much heralded assault weapons ban.
Because this isn’t about guns and safety and you know it. As for your pivot, bring it. ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ.
On September 9, 2014 at 10:14 pm, PeterTx52 said:
the sad part is that Pro Publica is misnamed it isn’t for the public. claims to be non-partisan but their reporting is definitely leftwing in tone
On September 12, 2014 at 8:52 am, pjb1 said:
The Rulers Don’t Want Universal Background Checks:
http://ncc-1776.org/tle2013/tle710-20130303-07.html