What Will It Take to Address Gun Control?
The debate over gun control in the United States has waxed and waned over the years. Each time there is a mass killing by gunmen in civilian settings,…
October 05, 2017 at 02:01 PM
8 minute read
The debate over gun control in the United States has waxed and waned over the years. Each time there is a mass killing by gunmen in civilian settings, there is outrage—for what seems like 10 seconds. In particular, the killing of 20 schoolchildren and six educators in Newtown in December 2012 fueled a national discussion over gun laws, with calls by the Obama administration to limit the availability of military-style weapons.
But despite extensive public support, legislation to ban semi-automatic assault weapons and expand background checks was defeated in the Senate in 2013. Deadly mass shootings in 2015, including the killing of nine people at a church in Charleston, South Carolina, and 14 at a community center in San Bernardino, California, helped to rekindle the debate. But little has changed.
The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibited the sale of firearms to several categories of individuals, including persons under 18 years of age, those with criminal records, the mentally disabled, unlawful aliens, dishonorably discharged military personnel and others. In 1993, the law was amended by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which mandated background checks for all unlicensed persons purchasing a firearm from a federally licensed dealer. But by 2016, there were no federal laws banning semi-automatic assault weapons, military-style .50 caliber rifles, handguns, or large-capacity ammunition magazines. The federal prohibition on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines between 1994 and 2004 had expired.
Not that that prohibition was so great. First, there is no technical definition of an “assault weapon.” There are fully automatic weapons, which fire continuously when the trigger is held down. Those have been strictly regulated since 1934. Then there are semi-automatic weapons that reload automatically but fire only once each time the trigger is depressed. Semi-automatic pistols and rifles come in all shapes and sizes and are extremely common in the United States. Because Congress didn't want to ban all semi-automatic weapons, lawmakers mainly focused on 18 specific firearms, as well as certain military-type features on guns. Complex flow charts laid it all out but it was extremely complicated, thereby making it easy to evade.
Additionally, as both gun control advocates and gun rights advocates noted, at least some of the features outlined in the federal Assault Weapon Ban of 1994 were merely cosmetic. In May 2012, the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence said, “the inclusion in the list of features that were purely cosmetic in nature created a loophole that allowed manufacturers to successfully circumvent the law by making minor modifications to the weapons they already produced.” The term was repeated in several stories after both the 2012 Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings.
Moreover, there was an important exception. Any assault weapon or magazine that was manufactured before the law went into effect in 1994 was legal to own or resell, and at the time there were roughly 1.5 million assault weapons and more than 24 million high-capacity magazines in private hands. Further, as soon as Congress began working on the law, manufacturers increased production of weapons and magazines in anticipation of higher prices. But, as imperfect as it was, it was something.
In January 2016, President Barack Obama issued a package of executive actions designed to decrease gun violence, notably a measure to require dealers selling firearms at gun shows or online to obtain federal licenses and, in turn, conduct background checks of prospective buyers. Additionally, he proposed new funding to hire hundreds more federal law-enforcement agents, and budgeting $500 million to expand access to mental health care in light of the fact that suicides—many by individuals with undiagnosed mental illnesses—account for about 60 percent of gun deaths. The president acted under his own authority because Congress had failed to pass “common-sense gun safety reforms.” Congress continues to fail.
Mother Jones magazine tracks and maps every shooting spree in the last three-plus decades. It found that since 1982, there have been at least 91 mass murders carried out with firearms across the country, with the killings unfolding in 30 states from Massachusetts to Hawaii. And in most cases, the killers had obtained their weapons legally. The deadliest shooting came this week in Las Vegas, leaving 59 people dead and more than 500 injured. So once again, we ask: What's it going to take for Congress to respond?
The debate over gun control in the United States has waxed and waned over the years. Each time there is a mass killing by gunmen in civilian settings, there is outrage—for what seems like 10 seconds. In particular, the killing of 20 schoolchildren and six educators in Newtown in December 2012 fueled a national discussion over gun laws, with calls by the Obama administration to limit the availability of military-style weapons.
But despite extensive public support, legislation to ban semi-automatic assault weapons and expand background checks was defeated in the Senate in 2013. Deadly mass shootings in 2015, including the killing of nine people at a church in Charleston, South Carolina, and 14 at a community center in San Bernardino, California, helped to rekindle the debate. But little has changed.
The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibited the sale of firearms to several categories of individuals, including persons under 18 years of age, those with criminal records, the mentally disabled, unlawful aliens, dishonorably discharged military personnel and others. In 1993, the law was amended by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which mandated background checks for all unlicensed persons purchasing a firearm from a federally licensed dealer. But by 2016, there were no federal laws banning semi-automatic assault weapons, military-style .50 caliber rifles, handguns, or large-capacity ammunition magazines. The federal prohibition on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines between 1994 and 2004 had expired.
Not that that prohibition was so great. First, there is no technical definition of an “assault weapon.” There are fully automatic weapons, which fire continuously when the trigger is held down. Those have been strictly regulated since 1934. Then there are semi-automatic weapons that reload automatically but fire only once each time the trigger is depressed. Semi-automatic pistols and rifles come in all shapes and sizes and are extremely common in the United States. Because Congress didn't want to ban all semi-automatic weapons, lawmakers mainly focused on 18 specific firearms, as well as certain military-type features on guns. Complex flow charts laid it all out but it was extremely complicated, thereby making it easy to evade.
Additionally, as both gun control advocates and gun rights advocates noted, at least some of the features outlined in the federal Assault Weapon Ban of 1994 were merely cosmetic. In May 2012, the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence said, “the inclusion in the list of features that were purely cosmetic in nature created a loophole that allowed manufacturers to successfully circumvent the law by making minor modifications to the weapons they already produced.” The term was repeated in several stories after both the 2012 Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings.
Moreover, there was an important exception. Any assault weapon or magazine that was manufactured before the law went into effect in 1994 was legal to own or resell, and at the time there were roughly 1.5 million assault weapons and more than 24 million high-capacity magazines in private hands. Further, as soon as Congress began working on the law, manufacturers increased production of weapons and magazines in anticipation of higher prices. But, as imperfect as it was, it was something.
In January 2016, President Barack Obama issued a package of executive actions designed to decrease gun violence, notably a measure to require dealers selling firearms at gun shows or online to obtain federal licenses and, in turn, conduct background checks of prospective buyers. Additionally, he proposed new funding to hire hundreds more federal law-enforcement agents, and budgeting $500 million to expand access to mental health care in light of the fact that suicides—many by individuals with undiagnosed mental illnesses—account for about 60 percent of gun deaths. The president acted under his own authority because Congress had failed to pass “common-sense gun safety reforms.” Congress continues to fail.
Mother Jones magazine tracks and maps every shooting spree in the last three-plus decades. It found that since 1982, there have been at least 91 mass murders carried out with firearms across the country, with the killings unfolding in 30 states from
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCensorship or Security Measure? TikTok Ban Pits Civil Liberties Groups Against US Officials
Supreme Court Takes Up TikTok's Challenge to Upcoming Ban or Sale
Justices Weigh Constitutional Standard Applicable to Law Banning Trans Care
Trending Stories
- 1‘The Decision Will Help Others’: NJ Supreme Court Reverses Appellate Div. in OPRA Claim Over Body-Worn Camera Footage
- 2MoFo Associate Sees a Familiar Face During Her First Appellate Argument: Justice Breyer
- 3Antitrust in Trump 2.0: Expect Gap Filling from State Attorneys General
- 4People in the News—Jan. 22, 2025—Knox McLaughlin, Saxton & Stump
- 5How I Made Office Managing Partner: 'Be Open to Opportunities, Ready to Seize Them When They Arise,' Says Lara Shortz of Michelman & Robinson
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250