Jump to content

Examine individual changes

This page allows you to examine the variables generated by the Edit Filter for an individual change.

Variables generated for this change

VariableValue
Edit count of the user (user_editcount)
8
Name of the user account (user_name)
'Mutleybird'
Age of the user account (user_age)
267309962
Groups (including implicit) the user is in (user_groups)
[ 0 => '*', 1 => 'user' ]
Rights that the user has (user_rights)
[ 0 => 'createaccount', 1 => 'read', 2 => 'edit', 3 => 'createtalk', 4 => 'writeapi', 5 => 'viewmywatchlist', 6 => 'editmywatchlist', 7 => 'viewmyprivateinfo', 8 => 'editmyprivateinfo', 9 => 'editmyoptions', 10 => 'abusefilter-log-detail', 11 => 'centralauth-merge', 12 => 'abusefilter-view', 13 => 'abusefilter-log', 14 => 'vipsscaler-test', 15 => 'collectionsaveasuserpage', 16 => 'reupload-own', 17 => 'move-rootuserpages', 18 => 'createpage', 19 => 'minoredit', 20 => 'editmyusercss', 21 => 'editmyuserjson', 22 => 'editmyuserjs', 23 => 'purge', 24 => 'sendemail', 25 => 'applychangetags', 26 => 'spamblacklistlog', 27 => 'mwoauthmanagemygrants' ]
Whether the user is editing from mobile app (user_app)
false
Whether or not a user is editing through the mobile interface (user_mobile)
false
Page ID (page_id)
40129756
Page namespace (page_namespace)
0
Page title without namespace (page_title)
'Federal Assault Weapons Ban'
Full page title (page_prefixedtitle)
'Federal Assault Weapons Ban'
Edit protection level of the page (page_restrictions_edit)
[]
Last ten users to contribute to the page (page_recent_contributors)
[ 0 => 'AnomieBOT', 1 => 'Hoplon', 2 => '2600:1700:AF00:8870:44F8:5B56:E159:DD61', 3 => '2600:387:5:814:0:0:0:56', 4 => 'Oshwah', 5 => 'Kudaxsai', 6 => 'HelenDegenerate', 7 => '2601:646:4000:52D0:CDA0:46C8:4132:DEAB', 8 => '73.139.106.144', 9 => '64.222.115.210' ]
Page age in seconds (page_age)
585354816
Action (action)
'edit'
Edit summary/reason (summary)
'More accurate, new updated study. <ref>https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2021/03/assault-weapon-ban-significantly-reduces-mass-shooting/</ref>'
Old content model (old_content_model)
'wikitext'
New content model (new_content_model)
'wikitext'
Old page wikitext, before the edit (old_wikitext)
'{{About|the U.S. Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 that expired in 2004|other assault weapons bans in the U.S.|Assault weapons legislation in the United States}} {{Short description|United States federal law}} {{Use mdy dates|date=February 2018}} [[Image:Clinton signing AWB.jpg|thumb|300px|President [[Bill Clinton]] signing the bill into law.]] {{USgunlegalbox}} The '''Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act''' or '''Federal Assault Weapons Ban''' ('''AWB''') was a subsection of the [[Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act|Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994]], a United States [[federal law]] which included a prohibition on the manufacture for civilian use of certain [[semi-automatic firearm]]s that were defined as [[assault weapon]]s as well as certain ammunition [[magazine (firearms)|magazines]] that were defined as "[[high-capacity magazine|large capacity]]." The 10-year ban was passed by the [[103rd United States Congress|US Congress]] on September 13, 1994, following a close 52–48 vote in the [[United States Senate|US Senate]], and was signed into law by US President [[Bill Clinton]] on the same day. The ban applied only to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment. It expired on September 13, 2004, in accordance with its [[sunset provision]]. Several constitutional challenges were filed against provisions of the ban, but all were rejected by the courts. There were multiple attempts to renew the ban, but none succeeded. Studies have shown the ban had little effect in overall criminal activity, firearm homicides, and the lethality of gun crimes. There is tentative evidence that the frequency of mass shootings may have slightly decreased while the ban was in effect.<ref>See the [[Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Effects|Effects]] section for the many studies which support this statement.</ref> ==Background== Efforts to create restrictions on assault weapons at the federal government level intensified in 1989 after [[Cleveland Elementary School shooting (Stockton)|34 children and a teacher were shot and five children killed in Stockton, California]] with a semi-automatic Kalashnikov pattern rifle.<ref name=PittsPress900523>{{cite news |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=May 23, 1990 |title=Senate restricts assault weapon imports, production |url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=onk0AAAAIBAJ&dq=assault-weapon&pg=7212%2C4372530 |newspaper=The Pittsburgh Press |agency=Associated Press |page=A13 |access-date=September 30, 2013 |quote=A campaign for curbs on assault weapons began in January 1989 after a deranged gunman with an AK-47 semiautomatic rifle opened fire on a Stockton, Calif., school yard at recess time, leaving five children dead and 30 wounded. }}</ref><ref name=Pazniokas931220>{{cite news |last=Pazniokas |first=Mark |date=December 20, 1993 |title=One Gun's Journey Into A Crime |url=http://articles.courant.com/1993-12-20/news/0000000491_1_gun-control-assault-weapons-assault-weapon-law |newspaper=The Courant |location=Hartford, Connecticut |access-date=September 30, 2013 |quote=The campaign to ban assault weapons began Jan. 17, 1989, after Patrick Purdy shot 34 children and a teacher in a Stockton, Calif., schoolyard, using a semiautomatic replica of an AK-47 assault rifle. }}</ref><ref>More Stockton schoolyard shooting sources: *{{cite news |last=Adams |first=Jane Meredith |date=May 29, 1995 |title=Sparked By School Massacre, Gun Debate Still Rages |url=http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1995-05-29/news/9505290097_1_assault-weapon-ban-patrick-purdy-opened-fire-anti-assault |newspaper=Chicago Tribune |access-date=March 17, 2014 |quote=Every murder is horrific, but the massacre of five children as they ran screaming that sunny January morning, and the wounding of 30 others, including a teacher, packed such emotional power it ignited the nascent anti-assault weapons movement.}} *{{cite news |last1=Roth |first1=Jeffrey A. |last2=Koper |first2=Christopher S. |year=1997 |title=Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994 |url=http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/aw_final.pdf |publisher=The Urban Institute |location=Washington, D.C. |access-date=September 30, 2013 |quote=Nonetheless, the involvement of assault weapons in a number of mass murder incidents such as those discussed above [including the Stockton schoolyard shooting] provided an important impetus to the movement to ban assault weapons. }}{{rp|12}} *{{cite news |last=Cowan |first=Lee |date=December 16, 2012 |title=1989 Calif. school shooting led to assault weapons ban |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/1989-calif-school-shooting-led-to-assault-weapons-ban/ |work=CBS News |access-date=March 17, 2014 }} *{{cite news |last=Johnson |first=Kevin |date=April 2, 2013 |title=Stockton school massacre: A tragically familiar pattern |url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/01/stockton-massacre-tragically-familiar-pattern-repeats/2043297/ |newspaper=USA Today |access-date=March 17, 2014 |quote=Like Newtown, the Stockton shooting helped prompt a heated national debate about gun control, culminating in a landmark, 10-year federal ban on assault weapons, which expired in 2004.}}</ref> The [[Luby's shooting]] in October 1991, which left 23 people dead and 27 wounded, was another factor.<ref>"Assault Weapons Ban." Encyclopedia of Gun Control and Gun Rights. Glenn H. Utter and Robert J. Spitzer. 2nd ed. Amenia, NY: Grey House Publishing, 2011. 24–25. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. August 20, 2016. Quote: "Two events spurred the introduction of an assault weapon ban in Congress: the January 1989 schoolyard shooting in Stockton, California, that left five children dead and 29 others wounded; and the Killeen, Texas, cafeteria shooting in which 22 people were killed and 23 others wounded before the shooter took his own life."</ref> The July 1993 [[101 California Street shooting]] also contributed to passage of the ban. The shooter killed eight people and wounded six. Two of the three firearms he used were [[TEC-9]] semi-automatic handguns with [[Hell-Fire trigger]]s.<ref name=Bingham120727>{{cite news |last=Bingham |first=Amy |date=July 27, 2012 |title=Shootings That Shaped Gun Control Laws: 101 California Street Shooting |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/shootings-shaped-gun-control/story?id=16863844#4 |publisher=ABC News Internet Ventures }}</ref> The ban tried to address public concerns about mass shootings by restricting firearms that met the criteria for what it defined as a "semiautomatic assault weapon," as well as magazines that met the criteria for what it defined as a "large capacity ammunition feeding device."<ref name="Roth-Koper ImpactsBrief1999">{{cite journal |last=Roth |first=Jeffrey A. |author2=Christopher S. Koper |title=Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban |url=https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/173405.pdf |journal=National Institute of Justice Research in Brief |issue=NCJ 173405 |date=March 1999 }}</ref>{{rp|1–2}} In November 1993, the proposed legislation passed the [[U.S. Senate]]. The bill's author, [[Dianne Feinstein]] (D-CA) and other advocates said that it was a weakened version of the original proposal.<ref name="Bunting 931109">{{cite news |title=Feinstein Faces Fight for Diluted Gun Bill |first=Glenn F. |last=Bunting |url=http://articles.latimes.com/1993-11-09/news/mn-54844_1_assault-weapon |newspaper=Los Angeles Time |date=November 9, 1993 }}</ref> In May 1994, former presidents [[Gerald Ford]], [[Jimmy Carter]], and [[Ronald Reagan]], wrote to the U.S. House of Representatives in support of banning "semi-automatic assault guns." They cited a 1993 CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll that found 77 percent of Americans supported a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of such weapons.<ref name="Eaton 940505">{{cite news |title=Ford, Carter, Reagan Push for Gun Ban |first=William J. |last=Eaton |url=http://articles.latimes.com/1994-05-05/news/mn-54185_1_assault-weapons-ban/2 |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |date=May 5, 1994 }}</ref> US Representative [[Jack Brooks (American politician)|Jack Brooks]] (D-TX), then chair of the House Judiciary Committee, tried unsuccessfully to remove the assault weapons ban section from the crime bill.<ref name="Seelye 940728">{{cite news |title=Assault Weapons Ban Allowed To Stay in Anti-crime Measure |first=Katharine Q. |last=Seelye |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1994/07/28/us/assault-weapons-ban-allowed-to-stay-in-anti-crime-measure.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=July 28, 1994 }}</ref> The [[National Rifle Association]] (NRA) opposed the ban. In November 1993, NRA spokesman Bill McIntyre said that assault weapons "are used in only 1 percent of all crimes."<ref name="Daley 940508">{{cite news |title=Senate Acts To Ban Assault Weapons: Brady Bill Still Awaiting Action |url=http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993-11-18/news/9311180157_1_brady-bill-ban-assault-weapons-violent-crime |newspaper=Chicago Tribune |date=November 18, 1993 }}</ref> The low usage statistic was supported in a 1999 [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]] brief.<ref name="Roth-Koper ImpactsBrief1999"/> The legislation passed in September 1994 with the assault weapon ban section expiring in 2004 due to its [[sunset provision]]. ==Provisions== The Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Act was enacted as part of the [[Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994]].<ref name="ChuFAWB">Vivian S. Chu, [https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42957.pdf Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Legal Issues], [[Congressional Research Service]] (February 14, 2013), pp. 3–5.</ref> The prohibitions expired on September 13, 2004.<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> The Act prohibited the manufacture, transfer, or possession of "semiautomatic assault weapons," as defined by the Act. "Weapons banned were identified either by specific make or model (including copies or duplicates thereof, in any caliber), or by specific characteristics that slightly varied according to whether the weapon was a pistol, rifle, or shotgun" (see [[#Criteria of an assault weapon|below]]).<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> The Act also prohibited the manufacture of "large capacity ammunition feeding devices" (LCAFDs) except for sale to government, law enforcement or military, though magazines made before the effective date ("pre-ban" magazines) were legal to possess & transfer. An LCAFD was defined as "any magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device manufactured after the date [of the act] that has the capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> The Act included a number of exemptions and exclusions from its prohibitions: *The Act included a "[[grandfather clause]]" to allow for possession and transfer of weapons and ammunition that "were otherwise lawfully possessed on the date of enactment."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> *The Act exempted some 650 firearm types or models (including their copies and duplicates) which would be considered manufactured in October 1993. The list included the Ruger Mini-14 Auto Loading Rifle without side folding stock, Ruger Mini Thirty Rifle, Iver Johnson M-1 Carbine, Marlin Model 9 Camp Carbine, Marlin Model 45 Carbine, and others. The complete list is in section 110106, Appendix A to section 922 of Title 18. This list was non-exhaustive.<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> *The Act "also exempted any firearm that (1) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action; (2) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or (3) is an [[antique firearms|antique firearm]]."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> *The Act "also did not apply to any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than ten rounds of ammunition or semiautomatic shotguns that cannot hold more than five rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> Tubular magazine fed rimfire guns were exempted regardless of tubular magazine capacity. *The Act provided an exemption for the use of "semiautomatic assault weapons and LCAFDs to be manufactured for, transferred to, and possessed by law enforcement and for authorized testing or experimentation purposes" as well as transfers for federal-security purposes under the [[Atomic Energy Act]] and "possession by retired law enforcement officers who are not otherwise a prohibited possessor under law."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> In 1989, the [[George H. W. Bush administration]] had banned the importation of foreign-made, semiautomatic rifles deemed not to have "a legitimate sporting use." It did not affect similar but domestically-manufactured rifles.<ref name="Rasky 890708">{{cite news |title=Import Ban on Assault Rifles Becomes Permanent |first=Susan F. |last=Rasky |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1989/07/08/us/import-ban-on-assault-rifles-becomes-permanent.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=July 8, 1989 }}</ref> (The [[Gun Control Act of 1968]] gives discretion to the [[Attorney General of the United States]] to choose whether to "authorize a firearm or ammunition to be imported or brought into the United States," under what is known as "the sporting purposes test."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/>) Following the enactment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the [[Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives|ATF]] determined that "certain semiautomatic assault rifles could no longer be imported even though they were permitted to be imported under the 1989 'sporting purposes test' because they had been modified to remove all of their military features other than the ability to accept a detachable magazine" and so in April 1998, it "prohibited the importation of 56 such rifles, determining that they did not meet the 'sporting purposes test.'"<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> ===Definition of assault weapon=== Under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, the definition of "assault weapon" included specific semi-automatic firearm models by name, and other semi-automatic firearms that possessed two or more from a set certain features:<ref name=FedBan94>[http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-103hr3355enr/pdf/BILLS-103hr3355enr.pdf Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, H.R.3355, 103rd Congress (1993–1994)], Government Printing Office. Retrieved January 26, 2013.</ref> [[Image:Zastava M70AB2 with folded stock Hunter la5.JPG|right|thumb|300px|A semi-automatic [[Zastava M70|Yugoslavian M70AB2]] rifle.]] [[Image:kg99.jpg|right|thumb|300px|An Intratec [[TEC-DC9]] with 32-round magazine; a semi-automatic pistol formerly classified as an assault weapon under federal law.]] :[[Semi-automatic rifle]]s able to accept detachable magazines and has two or more of the following: :*Folding or [[telescoping stock]] :*[[Pistol grip]] :*[[Bayonet]] mount :*[[Flash suppressor|Flash hider]] or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one :*[[Grenade launcher]] :[[Semi-automatic pistol]]s with detachable magazines and two or more of the following: :*Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip :*Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or [[suppressor]] :*[[Barrel shroud]] safety feature that prevents burns to the operator :*A manufactured weight of 50 ounces (1.41kg) or more when the pistol is unloaded :*A semi-automatic version of a fully [[automatic firearm]]. :[[Semi-automatic shotgun]]s with two or more of the following: :*Folding or telescoping stock :*Pistol grip :*Detachable magazine. The law also categorically banned the following makes and models of semi-automatic firearms and any copies or duplicates of them, in any caliber: {| class="wikitable" |- ! Name of firearm !! Preban federal legal status |- | [[Norinco]], Mitchell, and [[Poly Technologies]] [[AK-47|Avtomat Kalashnikovs (AKs)]] (all models) || Imports banned in 1989* |- | Action Arms Israeli Military Industries [[UZI]] and [[Galil]] || Imports banned in 1989* |- | [[Beretta]] [[AR-70]] (SC-70) || Imports banned in 1989* |- | Colt [[AR-15]] || Legal |- | Fabrique National [[FN FAL|FN/FAL]], [[FN LAR|FN-LAR]], [[FN FNC|FNC]] || Imports banned in 1989* |- | SWD (MAC type) [[MAC-10|M-10]], [[MAC-11|M-11]], M11/9, M12 || Legal |- | [[Steyr AUG]] || Imports banned in 1989* |- | INTRATEC [[TEC-9]], [[TEC-DC9]], [[Intratec TEC-22|TEC-22]] || Legal |- | [[Revolver|Revolving]] cylinder [[shotgun]]s such as (or similar to) the [[Armsel Striker|Street Sweeper]] and [[Striker 12]] || Legal |} ===Cosmetic features=== [[Gun control]] advocates and [[gun politics in the United States|gun rights]] advocates have referred to at least some of the features outlined in the federal Assault Weapon Ban of 1994 as cosmetic. The [[National Rifle Association#Political advocacy|NRA Institute for Legislative Action]] and the [[Violence Policy Center]] both used the term in publications that were released by them in September 2004, when the ban expired.<ref name="NRA040913">{{cite web |author=<!--no byline--> |date=September 13, 2004 |title=Finally, the End of a Sad Era—Clinton Gun Ban Stricken from Books! |url=http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2004/finally,-the-end-of-a-sad-era-clinton.aspx |publisher=National Rifle Association, Institute for Legislative Action |location=Fairfax, Virginia |quote=Law-abiding citizens, however, will once again be free to purchase semi-automatic firearms, regardless of their cosmetic features, for target shooting, shooting competitions, hunting, collecting, and most importantly, self-defense.}}</ref><ref name="VPC040913">{{cite press release |author=<!--no byline--> |date=September 13, 2004 |title=Violence Policy Center Issues Statement on Expiration of Federal Assault Weapons Ban |url=http://www.vpc.org/press/0409aw.htm |publisher=Violence Policy Center |location=Washington, D.C. |quote=Soon after its passage in 1994, the gun industry made a mockery of the federal assault weapons ban, manufacturing 'post-ban' assault weapons with only slight, cosmetic differences from their banned counterparts. |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131010231937/http://www.vpc.org/press/0409aw.htm |archive-date=October 10, 2013 }}</ref> In May 2012, the [[Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence]] said that "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."<ref name="AWPS120521">{{cite web |author=<!--no byline--> |date=May 21, 2012 |title=Assault Weapons Policy Summary |url=http://smartgunlaws.org/assault-weapons-policy-summary/ |publisher=Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence |location=San Francisco, California }}</ref> The term was repeated in several stories after the [[2012 Aurora, Colorado shooting]] and the [[Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting]].<ref name="Seitz-Wald130206">{{cite web |url=http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/dont_mourn_the_assault_weapons_bans_impending_demise/ |title=Don't mourn the assault weapons ban's impending demise| work=Salon |first=Alex |last=Seitz-Wald |date=February 6, 2013 |quote=[The National Rifle Association] says the ban created an artificial distinction between 'assault weapons' and other semi-automatic weapons, based almost entirely on cosmetic features. This is largely true.}}</ref><ref>More ''cosmetic'' sources: *{{cite news |url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/21/just-say-no-to-dumb-gun-laws.html |title=Just Say No to Dumb Gun Laws |newspaper=The Daily Beast |first=Megan |last=McArdle |date=November 12, 2012 |quote=... 'assault weapon' is a largely cosmetic rather than functional description.}} *{{cite web |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323723104578185271857424036 |title=Guns, Mental Illness and Newtown |newspaper=Wall Street Journal |first=David |last=Kopel |date=December 17, 2012 |quote=None of the guns that the Newtown murderer used was an assault weapon under Connecticut law. This illustrates the uselessness of bans on so-called assault weapons, since those bans concentrate on guns' cosmetics, such as whether the gun has a bayonet lug, rather than their function.}} *{{cite news |url=http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/277663-assault-weapons-pose-a-problem-of-definition |title=The problem with 'assault weapons' |newspaper=The Hill |first=Jordy |last=Yager |date=January 16, 2013 |quote=Gun companies quickly realized they could stay within the law and continue to make rifles with high-capacity magazine clips if they steered away from the cosmetic features mentioned in the law.}} *{{cite web |url=http://reason.com/archives/2013/01/30/whats-an-assault-weapon |title=What's an Assault Weapon?| publisher=Reason |first=Jacob |last=Sullum |date=January 30, 2013 |quote=The distinguishing characteristics of 'assault weapons' are mainly cosmetic and have little or no functional significance in the context of mass shootings or ordinary gun crimes.}} </ref> [[Senator Marco Rubio]] cited that issue during a town hall forum, responding to questions from survivors of the 2018 [[Stoneman Douglas High School shooting|Stoneman-Douglas High School]] shooting in Parkland, Florida.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/22/politics/cnn-town-hall-full-video-transcript/index.html|title=Read Stoneman students' questions at the CNN town hall|work=CNN|access-date=February 22, 2018}}</ref> ==Legal challenges== Several constitutional challenges were filed against provisions of the ban, but all were rejected by the courts. There were multiple attempts to renew the ban, but none succeeded. A February 2013 [[Congressional Research Service]] (CRS) report to [[United States Congress|Congress]] said that the "Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 was unsuccessfully challenged as violating several constitutional provisions" but that challenges to three constitutional provisions were easily dismissed.<ref name=CRSr42957130214>{{cite web |last=Chu |first=Vivian S. |date=February 14, 2013 |title=Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Legal Issues |publisher=Congressional Research Service |url=http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42957.pdf |access-date=April 24, 2014}}</ref>{{rp|7}} The ban did not make up an impermissible [[bill of attainder]].<ref name=Navegar-US1996>{{cite court|litigants=Navegar Inc. v. United States|vol=103 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=994 |pinpoint= |court=D.C. Cir.|date=1999|url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-caDC-98-05491/pdf/USCOURTS-caDC-98-05491-0.pdf}}</ref>{{rp|31}} It was not [[unconstitutionally vague#Unconstitutional vagueness|unconstitutionally vague]].<ref name=US-Starr1996>{{cite court|litigants= United States v. Starr |vol=945 |reporter=F. Supp. |opinion=257 |pinpoint= |court= M.D. Ga. |date=1996 |url= http://www.leagle.com/decision/19961202945FSupp257_11149 |quote=Accordingly, the statute is not unconstitutionally vague and Defendant Starr's motion is hereby DENIED.}}</ref> Also, it was ruled to be compatible with the [[Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Ninth Amendment]] by the [[Ninth Circuit|Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals]].<ref>{{cite court|litigants= San Diego Gun Rights Comm. v. Reno |vol=98 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=1121 |pinpoint= |court= 9th Cir. |date=1996 |url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1413776.html |quote=To grant plaintiffs standing to challenge the constitutionality of the Crime Control Act in the circumstances of this case would eviscerate the core standing requirements of Article III and throw all prudential caution to the wind.}}</ref> Challenges to two other provisions took more time to decide.<ref name=CRSr42957130214/>{{rp|7}} In evaluating challenges to the ban under the [[Commerce Clause]], the court first evaluated Congress's authority to regulate under the clause and then analyzed the ban's prohibitions on manufacture, transfer, and possession. The court held that "it is not even arguable that the manufacture and transfer of 'semiautomatic assault weapons' for a national market cannot be regulated as activity substantially affecting interstate commerce."<ref name=CRSr42957130214/>{{rp|8–9}}<ref name=Navegar-US1996/>{{rp|12}} It also held that the "purpose of the ban on possession has an 'evident commercial [[:wikt:nexus#Noun|nexus]]'."<ref name=CRSr42957130214/>{{rp|9}}<ref name=Navegar-US1996/>{{rp|14}} The law was also challenged under the [[Equal Protection Clause]]. It was argued that it banned some semi-automatic weapons that were functional equivalents of exempted semi-automatic weapons and that to do so, based upon a mix of other characteristics, served no legitimate governmental interest. The reviewing court held that it was "entirely rational for Congress... to choose to ban those weapons commonly used for criminal purposes and to exempt those weapons commonly used for recreational purposes."<ref name=CRSr42957130214/>{{rp|10}}<ref name=OA-Buckles2002>{{cite court|litigants= Olympic Arms v. Buckles |vol=301 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=384 |pinpoint= |court= 6th Cir. |date=2002 |url= https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1156271.html |quote=Accordingly, it is entirely rational for Congress, in an effort to protect public safety, to choose to ban those weapons commonly used for criminal purposes and to exempt those weapons commonly used for recreational purposes.}}</ref> It also found that each characteristic served to make the weapon "potentially more dangerous" and were not "commonly used on weapons designed solely for hunting."<ref name=CRSr42957130214/>{{rp|10–11}}<ref>{{cite court|litigants= Olympic Arms v. Buckles |vol=301 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=384 |pinpoint= |court= 6th Cir. |date=2002|url= https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1156271.html |quote=Each of the individual enumerated features makes a weapon potentially more dangerous. Additionally, the features are not commonly used on weapons designed solely for hunting.}}</ref> The Federal Assault Weapons Ban was never directly challenged under the Second Amendment. Since its 2004 expiration, there has been debate on how the ban would fare in light of cases decided in following years, especially ''[[District of Columbia v. Heller]]'' (2008).<ref name=Kopen120808>{{cite news |last=Kopan |first=Tal |date=August 8, 2012 |title=If Congress, W.H. wanted to ban assault weapons, could they? |url=http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/08/if-congress-wh-wanted-to-ban-assault-weapons-could-131451.html |publisher=POLITICO |access-date=April 24, 2014 }}</ref> =={{anchor|Expiration and effect on crime}}Effects== ===Overall crime=== A 2017 review found that there was no evidence that ban had a significant effect on firearm homicides.<ref name="Lee2017">{{cite journal|last1=Lee|first1=LK|last2=Fleegler|first2=EW|last3=Farrell|first3=C|last4=Avakame|first4=E|last5=Srinivasan|first5=S|last6=Hemenway|first6=D|last7=Monuteaux|first7=MC|date=1 January 2017|title=Firearm Laws and Firearm Homicides: A Systematic Review|journal=JAMA Internal Medicine|volume=177|issue=1|pages=106–119|doi=10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7051|pmid=27842178|s2cid=205119294|quote=Limited data from 4 studies on the effects of the federal assault weapons ban (in effect from 1994 to 2004) do not provide evidence that the ban was associated with a significant decrease in firearm homicides.}}</ref> A 2014 study found no impacts on homicide rates with an assault weapon ban.<ref>{{Cite journal | doi=10.1080/13504851.2013.854294|title = An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates| journal=Applied Economics Letters| volume=21| issue=4| pages=265–267|year = 2014|last1 = Gius|first1 = Mark|s2cid = 154746184}}</ref> A 2014 book published by [[Oxford University Press]] noted that "There is no compelling evidence that [the ban] saved lives."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.propublica.org/article/fact-checking-feinstein-on-the-assault-weapons-ban|title=Fact-Checking Feinstein on the Assault Weapons Ban|last=Beckett|first=Lois|date=2014-09-24|website=ProPublica|language=en|access-date=2019-07-13}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274747450|title=The Gun Debate: What Everyone Needs to Know. |author1=Philip J. Cook |author2-link=Kristin Goss|author2=Kristin A. Goss |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2014 }}</ref> A 2013 study showed that the expiration of the FAWB in 2004 "led to immediate violence increases within areas of Mexico located close to American states where sales of assault weapons became legal. The estimated effects are sizable... the additional homicides stemming from the FAWB expiration represent 21% of all homicides in these municipalities during 2005 and 2006."<ref>{{cite journal|last1= Dube|first1= Arindrajit|last2= Dube|first2= Oeindrila|last3= García-Ponce|first3= Omar|title=Cross-Border Spillover: U.S. Gun Laws and Violence in Mexico|journal=American Political Science Review|date=July 10, 2013|volume=107|issue=3|pages=397–417|doi=10.1017/S0003055413000178|hdl=10419/69479|s2cid= 9252246|hdl-access=free}}</ref> In 2013, [[Christopher S. Koper]], a criminology scholar, reviewed the literature on the ban's effects and concluded that its effects on crimes committed with assault weapons were mixed due to its various loopholes. He stated that the ban did not seem to affect gun crime rates, and suggested that it might have been able to reduce shootings if it had been renewed in 2004.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://cebcp.org/wp-content/publications/Koper2013AWchapter.pdf|title=Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis|author=Koper, Christopher S.|publisher=Johns Hopkins University Press|year=2013}}</ref> In 2004, a research report commissioned by the [[National Institute of Justice]] found that if the ban was renewed, the effects on gun violence would likely be small and perhaps too small for reliable measurement, because rifles in general, including rifles referred to as "assault rifles" or "assault weapons," are rarely used in gun crimes. That study, by the Jerry Lee Center of Criminology, [[University of Pennsylvania]], found no significant evidence that either the assault weapons ban or the ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds had reduced gun murders. The report found that the share of gun crimes involving assault weapons had declined by 17 to 72 percent in the studied localities. The authors reported that "there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence, based on indicators like the percentage of gun crimes resulting in death or the share of gunfire incidents resulting in injury." The report also concluded that it was "premature to make definitive assessments of the ban's impact on gun crime," since millions of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines manufactured prior to the ban had been exempted and would thus be in circulation for years following the ban's implementation.<ref name="Koper 204431">{{cite web |last1=Koper |first1=Christopher S. |last2=Woods |first2=Daniel J. |last3=Roth |first3=Jeffrey A. |date=June 2004 |title=An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994–2003 – Report to the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice |location=Philadelphia |publisher=Jerry Lee Center for Criminology, University of Pennsylvania |url=http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf }}</ref> In 2003, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services, an independent, non-federal task force, examined an assortment of firearms laws, including the AWB, and found "insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence."<ref name="MMWR RR5214">{{cite journal |year=2003 |title=First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Early Childhood Home Visitation and Firearms Laws. Findings from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. |journal=MMWR |volume=52 |issue=RR-14 |pages=11–20 |issn=1057-5987 |url=https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr5214.pdf }}</ref> A review of firearms research from 2001 by the [[United States National Research Council|National Research Council]] "did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes." The committee noted that guns were relatively rarely used criminally before the ban and that its maximum potential effect on gun violence outcomes would likely be very small.<ref name="nap.edu 10881">{{cite book |editor1-first=Charles F |editor1-last=Wellford |editor2-first=John V |editor2-last=Pepper |editor3-first=Carol V |editor3-last=Petrie |title=Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review |url=http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=97 |year=2005 |edition=Electronic |orig-year=Print ed. 2005 |publisher=National Academies Press |location=Washington, D.C. |isbn=978-0-309-54640-9 |page=97|doi=10.17226/10881 }}</ref> In relation to a 2001 study the [[National Research Council (United States)|National Research Council]] in 2005, stated "evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes."<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.nap.edu/read/10881/chapter/6|title=Read "Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review" at NAP.edu|language=en|doi=10.17226/10881|year=2004|isbn=978-0-309-09124-4}}</ref> Research published by [[John Lott]] in 1998 found no impact of these bans on violent crime rates.<ref name="Lott MGLC3rd">{{cite book |last=Lott |first=John R. |title=More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZPAHlwEACAAJ |access-date=December 31, 2012 |edition=3rd |date=May 24, 2010 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-49367-1}}</ref> Koper, Woods, and Roth studies focus on gun murders, while Lott's look at murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assaults.<ref name="Lott MGLC3rd" /> Unlike their work, Lott's research accounted for state assault weapon bans and twelve other different types of gun control laws.<ref name="Lott MGLC3rd" /> ===Mass shootings=== [[File:Total deaths in US mass shootings.png|thumb|upright=1.4|Total deaths in US mass shootings, according to ''[[Mother Jones (magazine)|Mother Jones]]''. A mass shooting is defined as 4+ people shot and killed in one incident, excluding the perpetrator(s), at a public place, excluding gang-related killings.<ref name="MotherJones">{{Cite web | url=https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data | title=US mass shootings, 1982–2019: Data from Mother Jones' investigation}}</ref>]] {{See also|Mass shootings in the United States}} A 2019 DiMaggio et al. study looked at mass shooting data for 1981 to 2017 and found that mass-shooting fatalities were 70% less likely to occur during the 1994 to 2004 federal ban period, and that the ban was associated with a 0.1% reduction in total firearm homicide fatalities due to the reduction in mass-shootings' contribution to total homicides.<ref name=Di2019>{{cite journal |last1=DiMaggio |first1=C |last2=Avraham |first2=J |last3=Berry |first3=C |last4=Bukur |first4=M |last5=Feldman |first5=J |last6=Klein |first6=M |last7=Shah |first7=N |last8=Tandon |first8=M |last9=Frangos |first9=S |title=Changes in US mass shooting deaths associated with the 1994–2004 federal assault weapons ban: Analysis of open-source data. |journal=The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery |date=January 2019 |volume=86 |issue=1 |pages=11–19 |doi=10.1097/TA.0000000000002060 |pmid=30188421|s2cid=52166454 |quote=In a linear regression model controlling for yearly trend, the federal ban period was associated with a statistically significant 9 fewer mass shooting related deaths per 10,000 firearm homicides (p = 0.03). Mass-shooting fatalities were 70% less likely to occur during the federal ban period (relative rate, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.39). }}</ref> A study by Mark Gius, professor of economics at [[Quinnipiac University]], studied the law's impact on public mass shootings.<ref name=Gius_study /> Gius defined this subset of mass shootings as those occurring in a relatively public place, targeted random victims, were not otherwise related to a crime (a robbery or act of terrorism), and that involved four or more victim fatalities. Gius found that while assault weapons were not the primary weapon used in this subset of mass shootings, fatalities and injuries were statistically lower during the period the federal ban was active. The 2018 Rand analysis noted that the federal law portion of this analysis lacked a comparison group.<ref name=Gius_study >{{cite journal |first=Mark |last=Gius |year=2015 |title=The impact of state and federal assault weapons bans on public mass shootings |journal=[[Applied Economics Letters]] |volume=22 |issue=4 |pages=281–284 |doi=10.1080/13504851.2014.939367 |s2cid=154581892 }}</ref> A 2018 Rand review found two studies that looked at the impact of assault weapons laws, including the 1994 federal law, on mass shootings that controlled for other factors which affected mass shootings. The results were inconclusive with the 2015 Gius study showing an impact while the other study did not.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Smart |first1=Rosanna |title=Effects of Bans on the Sale of Assault Weapons and High-Capacity Magazines on Mass Shootings |url=https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/ban-assault-weapons/mass-shootings.html#fn1 |publisher=Rand Corporation |date=2 March 2018}}</ref> A 2015 study found a small decrease in the rate of mass shootings followed by increases beginning after the ban was lifted.<ref name="LemieuxBricknell2015">{{cite journal|last1=Lemieux|first1=Frederic|last2=Bricknell|first2=Samantha|last3=Prenzler|first3=Tim|title=Mass shootings in Australia and the United States, 1981–2013|journal=Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice|volume=1|issue=3|year=2015|pages=131–142|issn=2056-3841|doi=10.1108/JCRPP-05-2015-0013|url=http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/jcrpp.htm}}</ref> Even with this ban in place, the [[Columbine High School massacre]] happened, using weapons that were illegal under the ban. <ref>{{cite web |last1=Plumer |first1=Brad |title=Everything you need to know about the assault weapons ban, in one post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/?noredirect=on |work=Washington Post |date=17 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Olinger |first1=David |title=Massacre energizes gun debate - but not lawmakers |url=https://extras.denverpost.com/news/col0419g.htm |newspaper=Denver Post |date=19 April 2000}}</ref> ===Economic=== A 2002 study by Koper and Roth found that around the time when the ban became law, assault weapon prices increased significantly, but the increase was reversed in the several months afterward by a surge in assault weapons production that occurred just before the ban took effect.<ref name=impact>{{cite journal|last1=Koper|first1=Christopher S.|last2=Roth|first2=Jeffrey A.|title=The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban on Gun Markets: An Assessment of Short-Term Primary and Secondary Market Effects |journal=Journal of Quantitative Criminology|date=2002|volume=18|issue=3|pages=239–266|doi=10.1023/A:1016055919939|s2cid=140321420}}</ref> John Lott found that the bans may have reduced the number of gun shows by over 20 percent.<ref name="Lott BAG2003">{{cite book |last=Lott |first=John R. |title=The Bias Against Guns |date=February 1, 2003 |publisher=Regnery Publishing |location=Washington, D.C. |isbn=978-0895261144}}</ref> ==Efforts at renewal== The assault weapons ban expired on September 13, 2004. Legislation to renew or replace the ban was proposed numerous times unsuccessfully. Between May 2003 and June 2008, U.S. Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]], D-CA, and Representatives [[Michael Castle]], R-DE, [[Alcee Hastings]], D-FL, and [[Mark Kirk]], R-IL, introduced bills to reauthorize the ban.<ref name="AWB Reauthorization Act">{{USBill|108|S.|1034}}, {{USBill|108|S.|2109}}, {{USBill|109|S.|620}}, {{USBill|108|H.R.|3831}}, {{USBill|108|H.R.|5099}}, {{USBill|110|HR|6257}}</ref> At the same time, Senator [[Frank Lautenberg]], D-NJ, and Representative [[Carolyn McCarthy]], D-NY, introduced similar bills to create a new ban with a revised definition for assault weapons. None of the bills left committee.<ref name="AWB & Law Enforcement Protection Act">{{USBill|108|S.|1431}}, {{USBill|109|S.|645}}, {{USBill|108|H.R.|2038}}, {{USBill|109|H.R.|1312}}, {{USBill|110|H.R.|1022}}</ref> After the [[2008 United States presidential election|November 2008 election]], the website of [[President of the United States|President-elect]] [[Barack Obama]] listed a detailed agenda for the forthcoming administration. The stated positions included "making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent."<ref name="archive.org change.gov">{{cite web |title=Urban Policy Agenda |url=http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy_agenda/ |publisher=Office of President-elect Barack Obama |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081116144703/http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy_agenda/ |archive-date=November 16, 2008 |access-date=December 31, 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Three months later, newly sworn-in [[United States Attorney General|Attorney General]] [[Eric Holder]] reiterated the [[Obama administration]]'s desire to reinstate the ban.<ref name="ryan 090225">{{cite news |title=Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban |first=Jason |last=Ryan |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1 |work=ABC News |id=6960824 |date=February 25, 2009 |access-date=December 31, 2012}}</ref> The mention came in response to a question during a joint press conference with [[Drug Enforcement Administration|DEA]] Acting Administrator [[Michele Leonhart]], discussing efforts to crack down on [[Mexican Drug War|Mexican drug cartels]]. Attorney General Holder said that "there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons."<ref>[http://www.c-span.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-A-15821 C-SPAN.org] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090228133334/http://www.c-span.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-A-15821 |date=February 28, 2009}}</ref> Efforts to pass a new federal assault weapons ban were made in December 2012 after the [[Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting]], in [[Newtown, Connecticut]].<ref name=Barron121215>{{cite news |last=Barron |first=James |date=December 15, 2012 |title=Children Were All Shot Multiple Times With a Semiautomatic, Officials Say |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/nyregion/gunman-kills-20-children-at-school-in-connecticut-28-dead-in-all.html |newspaper=New York Times |access-date=April 12, 2014 }}</ref><ref name=Levy121221>{{cite news |last=Levy |first=Gabrielle |date=December 21, 2012 |title=Obama responds to gun violence petition |url=http://www.upi.com/blog/2012/12/21/Obama-responds-to-gun-violence-petition/1021356100902/ |publisher=United Press International |type=blog |access-date=May 26, 2014 }}</ref><ref name=Steinhauer130124>{{cite news |title=Senator Unveils Bill to Limit Semiautomatic Arms |author=Steinhauer, Jennifer |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/us/politics/senator-unveils-bill-to-limit-semiautomatic-arms.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=January 24, 2013 |access-date=May 26, 2014}}</ref> On January 24, 2013, Senator Feinstein introduced {{USBill|113|S.|150}}, the [[Assault Weapons Ban of 2013]] (AWB 2013).<ref name=CSPAN130124>{{cite AV media |people=Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Rev. Gary Hall, Rep. [[Carolyn McCarthy]] |date=January 24, 2013 |title=Assault Weapons Ban Bill |medium=video |url=http://www.c-span.org/video/?310581-1/assault-weapons-ban-bill |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=National Cable Satellite Corporation |access-date=April 13, 2014 |display-authors=etal}}</ref> The bill was similar to the 1994 ban, but differed in that it would not expire after 10 years,<ref name=Steinhauer130124/> and it used a one-feature test for a firearm to qualify as an assault weapon rather than the two-feature test of the defunct ban.<ref name=USAToday130124>{{cite news |last=Kucinich |first=Jackie |date=January 24, 2013 |title=Democrats reintroduce assault weapons ban |url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/01/24/assault-weapons-ban-feinstein-democrats/1861493/ |newspaper=USA Today |access-date=April 13, 2014 }}</ref> The GOP Congressional delegation from Texas and the NRA condemned Feinstein's bill.<ref name="freedman 130124">{{cite news |title=Feinstein offers new assault weapons ban |first=Dan |last=Freedman |url=http://www.chron.com/default/article/Feinstein-offers-new-assault-weapons-ban-4221873.php |newspaper=Houston Chronicle |date=January 24, 2013 |access-date=January 24, 2013}}</ref> On March 14, 2013, the [[United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary|Senate Judiciary Committee]] approved a version of the bill along party lines.<ref name="steinhauer 130314">{{cite news |title=Party-Line Vote in Senate Panel for Ban on Assault Weapons |first=Jennifer |last=Steinhauer |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/15/us/politics/panel-approves-reinstatement-of-assault-weapons-ban.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=March 14, 2013 |access-date=March 14, 2013}}</ref> On April 17, 2013, AWB 2013 failed on a Senate vote of 40 to 60.<ref name=Simon130417>{{cite news |title=Senate votes down Feinstein's assault weapons ban |last=Simon |first=Richard |url=http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-dianne-feinstein-assault-weapons-vote-20130417,0,5349684.story |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |date=April 17, 2013 }}</ref> On March 23, 2021, President Joe Biden proposed a new ban on assault weapons after the [[2021 Atlanta spa shootings]] and [[2021 Boulder shooting]] both occurred in the previous week. <ref>{{Cite news|last=Karni|first=Annie|last2=Edmondson|first2=Catie|date=2021-03-23|title=Biden Seeks Assault Weapons Ban and Background Checks|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/23/us/politics/biden-gun-control.html|access-date=2021-03-25|issn=0362-4331}}</ref> ==See also== {{Wikiquote}} {{Portal|United States|Law}} *[[Assault weapon]] *[[Gun politics in the United States]] *[[National Firearms Agreement]] (Australia) {{Clear}} ==References== {{Reflist}} [[Category:103rd United States Congress]] [[Category:Gun politics in the United States]] [[Category:Legal history of the United States]] [[Category:United States federal firearms legislation]]'
New page wikitext, after the edit (new_wikitext)
'{{About|the U.S. Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 that expired in 2004|other assault weapons bans in the U.S.|Assault weapons legislation in the United States}} {{Short description|United States federal law}} {{Use mdy dates|date=February 2018}} [[Image:Clinton signing AWB.jpg|thumb|300px|President [[Bill Clinton]] signing the bill into law.]] {{USgunlegalbox}} The '''Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act''' or '''Federal Assault Weapons Ban''' ('''AWB''') was a subsection of the [[Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act|Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994]], a United States [[federal law]] which included a prohibition on the manufacture for civilian use of certain [[semi-automatic firearm]]s that were defined as [[assault weapon]]s as well as certain ammunition [[magazine (firearms)|magazines]] that were defined as "[[high-capacity magazine|large capacity]]." The 10-year ban was passed by the [[103rd United States Congress|US Congress]] on September 13, 1994, following a close 52–48 vote in the [[United States Senate|US Senate]], and was signed into law by US President [[Bill Clinton]] on the same day. The ban applied only to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment. It expired on September 13, 2004, in accordance with its [[sunset provision]]. Several constitutional challenges were filed against provisions of the ban, but all were rejected by the courts. There were multiple attempts to renew the ban, but none succeeded. There is evidence that the frequency of mass shootings had decreased substantially while the ban was in effect. Studies have shown it is difficult to assess the complete effect the ban had in overall criminal activity, firearm homicides, and the lethality of gun crimes as it was only if effect for 10 years. <ref>See the [[Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Effects|Effects]] section for the many studies which support this statement.</ref> ==Background== Efforts to create restrictions on assault weapons at the federal government level intensified in 1989 after [[Cleveland Elementary School shooting (Stockton)|34 children and a teacher were shot and five children killed in Stockton, California]] with a semi-automatic Kalashnikov pattern rifle.<ref name=PittsPress900523>{{cite news |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=May 23, 1990 |title=Senate restricts assault weapon imports, production |url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=onk0AAAAIBAJ&dq=assault-weapon&pg=7212%2C4372530 |newspaper=The Pittsburgh Press |agency=Associated Press |page=A13 |access-date=September 30, 2013 |quote=A campaign for curbs on assault weapons began in January 1989 after a deranged gunman with an AK-47 semiautomatic rifle opened fire on a Stockton, Calif., school yard at recess time, leaving five children dead and 30 wounded. }}</ref><ref name=Pazniokas931220>{{cite news |last=Pazniokas |first=Mark |date=December 20, 1993 |title=One Gun's Journey Into A Crime |url=http://articles.courant.com/1993-12-20/news/0000000491_1_gun-control-assault-weapons-assault-weapon-law |newspaper=The Courant |location=Hartford, Connecticut |access-date=September 30, 2013 |quote=The campaign to ban assault weapons began Jan. 17, 1989, after Patrick Purdy shot 34 children and a teacher in a Stockton, Calif., schoolyard, using a semiautomatic replica of an AK-47 assault rifle. }}</ref><ref>More Stockton schoolyard shooting sources: *{{cite news |last=Adams |first=Jane Meredith |date=May 29, 1995 |title=Sparked By School Massacre, Gun Debate Still Rages |url=http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1995-05-29/news/9505290097_1_assault-weapon-ban-patrick-purdy-opened-fire-anti-assault |newspaper=Chicago Tribune |access-date=March 17, 2014 |quote=Every murder is horrific, but the massacre of five children as they ran screaming that sunny January morning, and the wounding of 30 others, including a teacher, packed such emotional power it ignited the nascent anti-assault weapons movement.}} *{{cite news |last1=Roth |first1=Jeffrey A. |last2=Koper |first2=Christopher S. |year=1997 |title=Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994 |url=http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/aw_final.pdf |publisher=The Urban Institute |location=Washington, D.C. |access-date=September 30, 2013 |quote=Nonetheless, the involvement of assault weapons in a number of mass murder incidents such as those discussed above [including the Stockton schoolyard shooting] provided an important impetus to the movement to ban assault weapons. }}{{rp|12}} *{{cite news |last=Cowan |first=Lee |date=December 16, 2012 |title=1989 Calif. school shooting led to assault weapons ban |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/1989-calif-school-shooting-led-to-assault-weapons-ban/ |work=CBS News |access-date=March 17, 2014 }} *{{cite news |last=Johnson |first=Kevin |date=April 2, 2013 |title=Stockton school massacre: A tragically familiar pattern |url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/01/stockton-massacre-tragically-familiar-pattern-repeats/2043297/ |newspaper=USA Today |access-date=March 17, 2014 |quote=Like Newtown, the Stockton shooting helped prompt a heated national debate about gun control, culminating in a landmark, 10-year federal ban on assault weapons, which expired in 2004.}}</ref> The [[Luby's shooting]] in October 1991, which left 23 people dead and 27 wounded, was another factor.<ref>"Assault Weapons Ban." Encyclopedia of Gun Control and Gun Rights. Glenn H. Utter and Robert J. Spitzer. 2nd ed. Amenia, NY: Grey House Publishing, 2011. 24–25. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. August 20, 2016. Quote: "Two events spurred the introduction of an assault weapon ban in Congress: the January 1989 schoolyard shooting in Stockton, California, that left five children dead and 29 others wounded; and the Killeen, Texas, cafeteria shooting in which 22 people were killed and 23 others wounded before the shooter took his own life."</ref> The July 1993 [[101 California Street shooting]] also contributed to passage of the ban. The shooter killed eight people and wounded six. Two of the three firearms he used were [[TEC-9]] semi-automatic handguns with [[Hell-Fire trigger]]s.<ref name=Bingham120727>{{cite news |last=Bingham |first=Amy |date=July 27, 2012 |title=Shootings That Shaped Gun Control Laws: 101 California Street Shooting |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/shootings-shaped-gun-control/story?id=16863844#4 |publisher=ABC News Internet Ventures }}</ref> The ban tried to address public concerns about mass shootings by restricting firearms that met the criteria for what it defined as a "semiautomatic assault weapon," as well as magazines that met the criteria for what it defined as a "large capacity ammunition feeding device."<ref name="Roth-Koper ImpactsBrief1999">{{cite journal |last=Roth |first=Jeffrey A. |author2=Christopher S. Koper |title=Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban |url=https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/173405.pdf |journal=National Institute of Justice Research in Brief |issue=NCJ 173405 |date=March 1999 }}</ref>{{rp|1–2}} In November 1993, the proposed legislation passed the [[U.S. Senate]]. The bill's author, [[Dianne Feinstein]] (D-CA) and other advocates said that it was a weakened version of the original proposal.<ref name="Bunting 931109">{{cite news |title=Feinstein Faces Fight for Diluted Gun Bill |first=Glenn F. |last=Bunting |url=http://articles.latimes.com/1993-11-09/news/mn-54844_1_assault-weapon |newspaper=Los Angeles Time |date=November 9, 1993 }}</ref> In May 1994, former presidents [[Gerald Ford]], [[Jimmy Carter]], and [[Ronald Reagan]], wrote to the U.S. House of Representatives in support of banning "semi-automatic assault guns." They cited a 1993 CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll that found 77 percent of Americans supported a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of such weapons.<ref name="Eaton 940505">{{cite news |title=Ford, Carter, Reagan Push for Gun Ban |first=William J. |last=Eaton |url=http://articles.latimes.com/1994-05-05/news/mn-54185_1_assault-weapons-ban/2 |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |date=May 5, 1994 }}</ref> US Representative [[Jack Brooks (American politician)|Jack Brooks]] (D-TX), then chair of the House Judiciary Committee, tried unsuccessfully to remove the assault weapons ban section from the crime bill.<ref name="Seelye 940728">{{cite news |title=Assault Weapons Ban Allowed To Stay in Anti-crime Measure |first=Katharine Q. |last=Seelye |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1994/07/28/us/assault-weapons-ban-allowed-to-stay-in-anti-crime-measure.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=July 28, 1994 }}</ref> The [[National Rifle Association]] (NRA) opposed the ban. In November 1993, NRA spokesman Bill McIntyre said that assault weapons "are used in only 1 percent of all crimes."<ref name="Daley 940508">{{cite news |title=Senate Acts To Ban Assault Weapons: Brady Bill Still Awaiting Action |url=http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993-11-18/news/9311180157_1_brady-bill-ban-assault-weapons-violent-crime |newspaper=Chicago Tribune |date=November 18, 1993 }}</ref> The low usage statistic was supported in a 1999 [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]] brief.<ref name="Roth-Koper ImpactsBrief1999"/> The legislation passed in September 1994 with the assault weapon ban section expiring in 2004 due to its [[sunset provision]]. ==Provisions== The Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Act was enacted as part of the [[Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994]].<ref name="ChuFAWB">Vivian S. Chu, [https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42957.pdf Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Legal Issues], [[Congressional Research Service]] (February 14, 2013), pp. 3–5.</ref> The prohibitions expired on September 13, 2004.<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> The Act prohibited the manufacture, transfer, or possession of "semiautomatic assault weapons," as defined by the Act. "Weapons banned were identified either by specific make or model (including copies or duplicates thereof, in any caliber), or by specific characteristics that slightly varied according to whether the weapon was a pistol, rifle, or shotgun" (see [[#Criteria of an assault weapon|below]]).<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> The Act also prohibited the manufacture of "large capacity ammunition feeding devices" (LCAFDs) except for sale to government, law enforcement or military, though magazines made before the effective date ("pre-ban" magazines) were legal to possess & transfer. An LCAFD was defined as "any magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device manufactured after the date [of the act] that has the capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> The Act included a number of exemptions and exclusions from its prohibitions: *The Act included a "[[grandfather clause]]" to allow for possession and transfer of weapons and ammunition that "were otherwise lawfully possessed on the date of enactment."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> *The Act exempted some 650 firearm types or models (including their copies and duplicates) which would be considered manufactured in October 1993. The list included the Ruger Mini-14 Auto Loading Rifle without side folding stock, Ruger Mini Thirty Rifle, Iver Johnson M-1 Carbine, Marlin Model 9 Camp Carbine, Marlin Model 45 Carbine, and others. The complete list is in section 110106, Appendix A to section 922 of Title 18. This list was non-exhaustive.<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> *The Act "also exempted any firearm that (1) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action; (2) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or (3) is an [[antique firearms|antique firearm]]."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> *The Act "also did not apply to any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than ten rounds of ammunition or semiautomatic shotguns that cannot hold more than five rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> Tubular magazine fed rimfire guns were exempted regardless of tubular magazine capacity. *The Act provided an exemption for the use of "semiautomatic assault weapons and LCAFDs to be manufactured for, transferred to, and possessed by law enforcement and for authorized testing or experimentation purposes" as well as transfers for federal-security purposes under the [[Atomic Energy Act]] and "possession by retired law enforcement officers who are not otherwise a prohibited possessor under law."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> In 1989, the [[George H. W. Bush administration]] had banned the importation of foreign-made, semiautomatic rifles deemed not to have "a legitimate sporting use." It did not affect similar but domestically-manufactured rifles.<ref name="Rasky 890708">{{cite news |title=Import Ban on Assault Rifles Becomes Permanent |first=Susan F. |last=Rasky |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1989/07/08/us/import-ban-on-assault-rifles-becomes-permanent.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=July 8, 1989 }}</ref> (The [[Gun Control Act of 1968]] gives discretion to the [[Attorney General of the United States]] to choose whether to "authorize a firearm or ammunition to be imported or brought into the United States," under what is known as "the sporting purposes test."<ref name="ChuFAWB"/>) Following the enactment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the [[Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives|ATF]] determined that "certain semiautomatic assault rifles could no longer be imported even though they were permitted to be imported under the 1989 'sporting purposes test' because they had been modified to remove all of their military features other than the ability to accept a detachable magazine" and so in April 1998, it "prohibited the importation of 56 such rifles, determining that they did not meet the 'sporting purposes test.'"<ref name="ChuFAWB"/> ===Definition of assault weapon=== Under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, the definition of "assault weapon" included specific semi-automatic firearm models by name, and other semi-automatic firearms that possessed two or more from a set certain features:<ref name=FedBan94>[http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-103hr3355enr/pdf/BILLS-103hr3355enr.pdf Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, H.R.3355, 103rd Congress (1993–1994)], Government Printing Office. Retrieved January 26, 2013.</ref> [[Image:Zastava M70AB2 with folded stock Hunter la5.JPG|right|thumb|300px|A semi-automatic [[Zastava M70|Yugoslavian M70AB2]] rifle.]] [[Image:kg99.jpg|right|thumb|300px|An Intratec [[TEC-DC9]] with 32-round magazine; a semi-automatic pistol formerly classified as an assault weapon under federal law.]] :[[Semi-automatic rifle]]s able to accept detachable magazines and has two or more of the following: :*Folding or [[telescoping stock]] :*[[Pistol grip]] :*[[Bayonet]] mount :*[[Flash suppressor|Flash hider]] or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one :*[[Grenade launcher]] :[[Semi-automatic pistol]]s with detachable magazines and two or more of the following: :*Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip :*Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or [[suppressor]] :*[[Barrel shroud]] safety feature that prevents burns to the operator :*A manufactured weight of 50 ounces (1.41kg) or more when the pistol is unloaded :*A semi-automatic version of a fully [[automatic firearm]]. :[[Semi-automatic shotgun]]s with two or more of the following: :*Folding or telescoping stock :*Pistol grip :*Detachable magazine. The law also categorically banned the following makes and models of semi-automatic firearms and any copies or duplicates of them, in any caliber: {| class="wikitable" |- ! Name of firearm !! Preban federal legal status |- | [[Norinco]], Mitchell, and [[Poly Technologies]] [[AK-47|Avtomat Kalashnikovs (AKs)]] (all models) || Imports banned in 1989* |- | Action Arms Israeli Military Industries [[UZI]] and [[Galil]] || Imports banned in 1989* |- | [[Beretta]] [[AR-70]] (SC-70) || Imports banned in 1989* |- | Colt [[AR-15]] || Legal |- | Fabrique National [[FN FAL|FN/FAL]], [[FN LAR|FN-LAR]], [[FN FNC|FNC]] || Imports banned in 1989* |- | SWD (MAC type) [[MAC-10|M-10]], [[MAC-11|M-11]], M11/9, M12 || Legal |- | [[Steyr AUG]] || Imports banned in 1989* |- | INTRATEC [[TEC-9]], [[TEC-DC9]], [[Intratec TEC-22|TEC-22]] || Legal |- | [[Revolver|Revolving]] cylinder [[shotgun]]s such as (or similar to) the [[Armsel Striker|Street Sweeper]] and [[Striker 12]] || Legal |} ===Cosmetic features=== [[Gun control]] advocates and [[gun politics in the United States|gun rights]] advocates have referred to at least some of the features outlined in the federal Assault Weapon Ban of 1994 as cosmetic. The [[National Rifle Association#Political advocacy|NRA Institute for Legislative Action]] and the [[Violence Policy Center]] both used the term in publications that were released by them in September 2004, when the ban expired.<ref name="NRA040913">{{cite web |author=<!--no byline--> |date=September 13, 2004 |title=Finally, the End of a Sad Era—Clinton Gun Ban Stricken from Books! |url=http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2004/finally,-the-end-of-a-sad-era-clinton.aspx |publisher=National Rifle Association, Institute for Legislative Action |location=Fairfax, Virginia |quote=Law-abiding citizens, however, will once again be free to purchase semi-automatic firearms, regardless of their cosmetic features, for target shooting, shooting competitions, hunting, collecting, and most importantly, self-defense.}}</ref><ref name="VPC040913">{{cite press release |author=<!--no byline--> |date=September 13, 2004 |title=Violence Policy Center Issues Statement on Expiration of Federal Assault Weapons Ban |url=http://www.vpc.org/press/0409aw.htm |publisher=Violence Policy Center |location=Washington, D.C. |quote=Soon after its passage in 1994, the gun industry made a mockery of the federal assault weapons ban, manufacturing 'post-ban' assault weapons with only slight, cosmetic differences from their banned counterparts. |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131010231937/http://www.vpc.org/press/0409aw.htm |archive-date=October 10, 2013 }}</ref> In May 2012, the [[Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence]] said that "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."<ref name="AWPS120521">{{cite web |author=<!--no byline--> |date=May 21, 2012 |title=Assault Weapons Policy Summary |url=http://smartgunlaws.org/assault-weapons-policy-summary/ |publisher=Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence |location=San Francisco, California }}</ref> The term was repeated in several stories after the [[2012 Aurora, Colorado shooting]] and the [[Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting]].<ref name="Seitz-Wald130206">{{cite web |url=http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/dont_mourn_the_assault_weapons_bans_impending_demise/ |title=Don't mourn the assault weapons ban's impending demise| work=Salon |first=Alex |last=Seitz-Wald |date=February 6, 2013 |quote=[The National Rifle Association] says the ban created an artificial distinction between 'assault weapons' and other semi-automatic weapons, based almost entirely on cosmetic features. This is largely true.}}</ref><ref>More ''cosmetic'' sources: *{{cite news |url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/21/just-say-no-to-dumb-gun-laws.html |title=Just Say No to Dumb Gun Laws |newspaper=The Daily Beast |first=Megan |last=McArdle |date=November 12, 2012 |quote=... 'assault weapon' is a largely cosmetic rather than functional description.}} *{{cite web |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323723104578185271857424036 |title=Guns, Mental Illness and Newtown |newspaper=Wall Street Journal |first=David |last=Kopel |date=December 17, 2012 |quote=None of the guns that the Newtown murderer used was an assault weapon under Connecticut law. This illustrates the uselessness of bans on so-called assault weapons, since those bans concentrate on guns' cosmetics, such as whether the gun has a bayonet lug, rather than their function.}} *{{cite news |url=http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/277663-assault-weapons-pose-a-problem-of-definition |title=The problem with 'assault weapons' |newspaper=The Hill |first=Jordy |last=Yager |date=January 16, 2013 |quote=Gun companies quickly realized they could stay within the law and continue to make rifles with high-capacity magazine clips if they steered away from the cosmetic features mentioned in the law.}} *{{cite web |url=http://reason.com/archives/2013/01/30/whats-an-assault-weapon |title=What's an Assault Weapon?| publisher=Reason |first=Jacob |last=Sullum |date=January 30, 2013 |quote=The distinguishing characteristics of 'assault weapons' are mainly cosmetic and have little or no functional significance in the context of mass shootings or ordinary gun crimes.}} </ref> [[Senator Marco Rubio]] cited that issue during a town hall forum, responding to questions from survivors of the 2018 [[Stoneman Douglas High School shooting|Stoneman-Douglas High School]] shooting in Parkland, Florida.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/22/politics/cnn-town-hall-full-video-transcript/index.html|title=Read Stoneman students' questions at the CNN town hall|work=CNN|access-date=February 22, 2018}}</ref> ==Legal challenges== Several constitutional challenges were filed against provisions of the ban, but all were rejected by the courts. There were multiple attempts to renew the ban, but none succeeded. A February 2013 [[Congressional Research Service]] (CRS) report to [[United States Congress|Congress]] said that the "Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 was unsuccessfully challenged as violating several constitutional provisions" but that challenges to three constitutional provisions were easily dismissed.<ref name=CRSr42957130214>{{cite web |last=Chu |first=Vivian S. |date=February 14, 2013 |title=Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Legal Issues |publisher=Congressional Research Service |url=http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42957.pdf |access-date=April 24, 2014}}</ref>{{rp|7}} The ban did not make up an impermissible [[bill of attainder]].<ref name=Navegar-US1996>{{cite court|litigants=Navegar Inc. v. United States|vol=103 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=994 |pinpoint= |court=D.C. Cir.|date=1999|url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-caDC-98-05491/pdf/USCOURTS-caDC-98-05491-0.pdf}}</ref>{{rp|31}} It was not [[unconstitutionally vague#Unconstitutional vagueness|unconstitutionally vague]].<ref name=US-Starr1996>{{cite court|litigants= United States v. Starr |vol=945 |reporter=F. Supp. |opinion=257 |pinpoint= |court= M.D. Ga. |date=1996 |url= http://www.leagle.com/decision/19961202945FSupp257_11149 |quote=Accordingly, the statute is not unconstitutionally vague and Defendant Starr's motion is hereby DENIED.}}</ref> Also, it was ruled to be compatible with the [[Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Ninth Amendment]] by the [[Ninth Circuit|Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals]].<ref>{{cite court|litigants= San Diego Gun Rights Comm. v. Reno |vol=98 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=1121 |pinpoint= |court= 9th Cir. |date=1996 |url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1413776.html |quote=To grant plaintiffs standing to challenge the constitutionality of the Crime Control Act in the circumstances of this case would eviscerate the core standing requirements of Article III and throw all prudential caution to the wind.}}</ref> Challenges to two other provisions took more time to decide.<ref name=CRSr42957130214/>{{rp|7}} In evaluating challenges to the ban under the [[Commerce Clause]], the court first evaluated Congress's authority to regulate under the clause and then analyzed the ban's prohibitions on manufacture, transfer, and possession. The court held that "it is not even arguable that the manufacture and transfer of 'semiautomatic assault weapons' for a national market cannot be regulated as activity substantially affecting interstate commerce."<ref name=CRSr42957130214/>{{rp|8–9}}<ref name=Navegar-US1996/>{{rp|12}} It also held that the "purpose of the ban on possession has an 'evident commercial [[:wikt:nexus#Noun|nexus]]'."<ref name=CRSr42957130214/>{{rp|9}}<ref name=Navegar-US1996/>{{rp|14}} The law was also challenged under the [[Equal Protection Clause]]. It was argued that it banned some semi-automatic weapons that were functional equivalents of exempted semi-automatic weapons and that to do so, based upon a mix of other characteristics, served no legitimate governmental interest. The reviewing court held that it was "entirely rational for Congress... to choose to ban those weapons commonly used for criminal purposes and to exempt those weapons commonly used for recreational purposes."<ref name=CRSr42957130214/>{{rp|10}}<ref name=OA-Buckles2002>{{cite court|litigants= Olympic Arms v. Buckles |vol=301 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=384 |pinpoint= |court= 6th Cir. |date=2002 |url= https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1156271.html |quote=Accordingly, it is entirely rational for Congress, in an effort to protect public safety, to choose to ban those weapons commonly used for criminal purposes and to exempt those weapons commonly used for recreational purposes.}}</ref> It also found that each characteristic served to make the weapon "potentially more dangerous" and were not "commonly used on weapons designed solely for hunting."<ref name=CRSr42957130214/>{{rp|10–11}}<ref>{{cite court|litigants= Olympic Arms v. Buckles |vol=301 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=384 |pinpoint= |court= 6th Cir. |date=2002|url= https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1156271.html |quote=Each of the individual enumerated features makes a weapon potentially more dangerous. Additionally, the features are not commonly used on weapons designed solely for hunting.}}</ref> The Federal Assault Weapons Ban was never directly challenged under the Second Amendment. Since its 2004 expiration, there has been debate on how the ban would fare in light of cases decided in following years, especially ''[[District of Columbia v. Heller]]'' (2008).<ref name=Kopen120808>{{cite news |last=Kopan |first=Tal |date=August 8, 2012 |title=If Congress, W.H. wanted to ban assault weapons, could they? |url=http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/08/if-congress-wh-wanted-to-ban-assault-weapons-could-131451.html |publisher=POLITICO |access-date=April 24, 2014 }}</ref> =={{anchor|Expiration and effect on crime}}Effects== ===Overall crime=== A 2021 Northwestern University review found the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (FAWB) — that included a ban on large capacity magazines (limiting the number and caliber of bullets) — from 1994 to 2004 — resulted in a significant decrease in public mass shootings, number of gun deaths and number of gun injuries. An older 2017 review found that there was no evidence that ban had a significant effect on firearm homicides.<ref name="Lee2017">{{cite journal|last1=Lee|first1=LK|last2=Fleegler|first2=EW|last3=Farrell|first3=C|last4=Avakame|first4=E|last5=Srinivasan|first5=S|last6=Hemenway|first6=D|last7=Monuteaux|first7=MC|date=1 January 2017|title=Firearm Laws and Firearm Homicides: A Systematic Review|journal=JAMA Internal Medicine|volume=177|issue=1|pages=106–119|doi=10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7051|pmid=27842178|s2cid=205119294|quote=Limited data from 4 studies on the effects of the federal assault weapons ban (in effect from 1994 to 2004) do not provide evidence that the ban was associated with a significant decrease in firearm homicides.}}</ref> A 2014 study found no impacts on homicide rates with an assault weapon ban.<ref>{{Cite journal | doi=10.1080/13504851.2013.854294|title = An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates| journal=Applied Economics Letters| volume=21| issue=4| pages=265–267|year = 2014|last1 = Gius|first1 = Mark|s2cid = 154746184}}</ref> A 2014 book published by [[Oxford University Press]] noted that "There is no compelling evidence that [the ban] saved lives."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.propublica.org/article/fact-checking-feinstein-on-the-assault-weapons-ban|title=Fact-Checking Feinstein on the Assault Weapons Ban|last=Beckett|first=Lois|date=2014-09-24|website=ProPublica|language=en|access-date=2019-07-13}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274747450|title=The Gun Debate: What Everyone Needs to Know. |author1=Philip J. Cook |author2-link=Kristin Goss|author2=Kristin A. Goss |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2014 }}</ref> A 2013 study showed that the expiration of the FAWB in 2004 "led to immediate violence increases within areas of Mexico located close to American states where sales of assault weapons became legal. The estimated effects are sizable... the additional homicides stemming from the FAWB expiration represent 21% of all homicides in these municipalities during 2005 and 2006."<ref>{{cite journal|last1= Dube|first1= Arindrajit|last2= Dube|first2= Oeindrila|last3= García-Ponce|first3= Omar|title=Cross-Border Spillover: U.S. Gun Laws and Violence in Mexico|journal=American Political Science Review|date=July 10, 2013|volume=107|issue=3|pages=397–417|doi=10.1017/S0003055413000178|hdl=10419/69479|s2cid= 9252246|hdl-access=free}}</ref> In 2013, [[Christopher S. Koper]], a criminology scholar, reviewed the literature on the ban's effects and concluded that its effects on crimes committed with assault weapons were mixed due to its various loopholes. He stated that the ban did not seem to affect gun crime rates, and suggested that it might have been able to reduce shootings if it had been renewed in 2004.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://cebcp.org/wp-content/publications/Koper2013AWchapter.pdf|title=Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis|author=Koper, Christopher S.|publisher=Johns Hopkins University Press|year=2013}}</ref> In 2004, a research report commissioned by the [[National Institute of Justice]] found that if the ban was renewed, the effects on gun violence would likely be small and perhaps too small for reliable measurement, because rifles in general, including rifles referred to as "assault rifles" or "assault weapons," are rarely used in gun crimes. That study, by the Jerry Lee Center of Criminology, [[University of Pennsylvania]], found no significant evidence that either the assault weapons ban or the ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds had reduced gun murders. The report found that the share of gun crimes involving assault weapons had declined by 17 to 72 percent in the studied localities. The authors reported that "there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence, based on indicators like the percentage of gun crimes resulting in death or the share of gunfire incidents resulting in injury." The report also concluded that it was "premature to make definitive assessments of the ban's impact on gun crime," since millions of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines manufactured prior to the ban had been exempted and would thus be in circulation for years following the ban's implementation.<ref name="Koper 204431">{{cite web |last1=Koper |first1=Christopher S. |last2=Woods |first2=Daniel J. |last3=Roth |first3=Jeffrey A. |date=June 2004 |title=An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994–2003 – Report to the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice |location=Philadelphia |publisher=Jerry Lee Center for Criminology, University of Pennsylvania |url=http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf }}</ref> In 2003, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services, an independent, non-federal task force, examined an assortment of firearms laws, including the AWB, and found "insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence."<ref name="MMWR RR5214">{{cite journal |year=2003 |title=First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Early Childhood Home Visitation and Firearms Laws. Findings from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. |journal=MMWR |volume=52 |issue=RR-14 |pages=11–20 |issn=1057-5987 |url=https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr5214.pdf }}</ref> A review of firearms research from 2001 by the [[United States National Research Council|National Research Council]] "did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes." The committee noted that guns were relatively rarely used criminally before the ban and that its maximum potential effect on gun violence outcomes would likely be very small.<ref name="nap.edu 10881">{{cite book |editor1-first=Charles F |editor1-last=Wellford |editor2-first=John V |editor2-last=Pepper |editor3-first=Carol V |editor3-last=Petrie |title=Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review |url=http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=97 |year=2005 |edition=Electronic |orig-year=Print ed. 2005 |publisher=National Academies Press |location=Washington, D.C. |isbn=978-0-309-54640-9 |page=97|doi=10.17226/10881 }}</ref> In relation to a 2001 study the [[National Research Council (United States)|National Research Council]] in 2005, stated "evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes."<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.nap.edu/read/10881/chapter/6|title=Read "Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review" at NAP.edu|language=en|doi=10.17226/10881|year=2004|isbn=978-0-309-09124-4}}</ref> Research published by [[John Lott]] in 1998 found no impact of these bans on violent crime rates.<ref name="Lott MGLC3rd">{{cite book |last=Lott |first=John R. |title=More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZPAHlwEACAAJ |access-date=December 31, 2012 |edition=3rd |date=May 24, 2010 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-49367-1}}</ref> Koper, Woods, and Roth studies focus on gun murders, while Lott's look at murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assaults.<ref name="Lott MGLC3rd" /> Unlike their work, Lott's research accounted for state assault weapon bans and twelve other different types of gun control laws.<ref name="Lott MGLC3rd" /> ===Mass shootings=== [[File:Total deaths in US mass shootings.png|thumb|upright=1.4|Total deaths in US mass shootings, according to ''[[Mother Jones (magazine)|Mother Jones]]''. A mass shooting is defined as 4+ people shot and killed in one incident, excluding the perpetrator(s), at a public place, excluding gang-related killings.<ref name="MotherJones">{{Cite web | url=https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data | title=US mass shootings, 1982–2019: Data from Mother Jones' investigation}}</ref>]] {{See also|Mass shootings in the United States}} A 2019 DiMaggio et al. study looked at mass shooting data for 1981 to 2017 and found that mass-shooting fatalities were 70% less likely to occur during the 1994 to 2004 federal ban period, and that the ban was associated with a 0.1% reduction in total firearm homicide fatalities due to the reduction in mass-shootings' contribution to total homicides.<ref name=Di2019>{{cite journal |last1=DiMaggio |first1=C |last2=Avraham |first2=J |last3=Berry |first3=C |last4=Bukur |first4=M |last5=Feldman |first5=J |last6=Klein |first6=M |last7=Shah |first7=N |last8=Tandon |first8=M |last9=Frangos |first9=S |title=Changes in US mass shooting deaths associated with the 1994–2004 federal assault weapons ban: Analysis of open-source data. |journal=The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery |date=January 2019 |volume=86 |issue=1 |pages=11–19 |doi=10.1097/TA.0000000000002060 |pmid=30188421|s2cid=52166454 |quote=In a linear regression model controlling for yearly trend, the federal ban period was associated with a statistically significant 9 fewer mass shooting related deaths per 10,000 firearm homicides (p = 0.03). Mass-shooting fatalities were 70% less likely to occur during the federal ban period (relative rate, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.39). }}</ref> A study by Mark Gius, professor of economics at [[Quinnipiac University]], studied the law's impact on public mass shootings.<ref name=Gius_study /> Gius defined this subset of mass shootings as those occurring in a relatively public place, targeted random victims, were not otherwise related to a crime (a robbery or act of terrorism), and that involved four or more victim fatalities. Gius found that while assault weapons were not the primary weapon used in this subset of mass shootings, fatalities and injuries were statistically lower during the period the federal ban was active. The 2018 Rand analysis noted that the federal law portion of this analysis lacked a comparison group.<ref name=Gius_study >{{cite journal |first=Mark |last=Gius |year=2015 |title=The impact of state and federal assault weapons bans on public mass shootings |journal=[[Applied Economics Letters]] |volume=22 |issue=4 |pages=281–284 |doi=10.1080/13504851.2014.939367 |s2cid=154581892 }}</ref> A 2018 Rand review found two studies that looked at the impact of assault weapons laws, including the 1994 federal law, on mass shootings that controlled for other factors which affected mass shootings. The results were inconclusive with the 2015 Gius study showing an impact while the other study did not.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Smart |first1=Rosanna |title=Effects of Bans on the Sale of Assault Weapons and High-Capacity Magazines on Mass Shootings |url=https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/ban-assault-weapons/mass-shootings.html#fn1 |publisher=Rand Corporation |date=2 March 2018}}</ref> A 2015 study found a small decrease in the rate of mass shootings followed by increases beginning after the ban was lifted.<ref name="LemieuxBricknell2015">{{cite journal|last1=Lemieux|first1=Frederic|last2=Bricknell|first2=Samantha|last3=Prenzler|first3=Tim|title=Mass shootings in Australia and the United States, 1981–2013|journal=Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice|volume=1|issue=3|year=2015|pages=131–142|issn=2056-3841|doi=10.1108/JCRPP-05-2015-0013|url=http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/jcrpp.htm}}</ref> Even with this ban in place, the [[Columbine High School massacre]] happened, using weapons that were illegal under the ban. <ref>{{cite web |last1=Plumer |first1=Brad |title=Everything you need to know about the assault weapons ban, in one post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/?noredirect=on |work=Washington Post |date=17 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Olinger |first1=David |title=Massacre energizes gun debate - but not lawmakers |url=https://extras.denverpost.com/news/col0419g.htm |newspaper=Denver Post |date=19 April 2000}}</ref> ===Economic=== A 2002 study by Koper and Roth found that around the time when the ban became law, assault weapon prices increased significantly, but the increase was reversed in the several months afterward by a surge in assault weapons production that occurred just before the ban took effect.<ref name=impact>{{cite journal|last1=Koper|first1=Christopher S.|last2=Roth|first2=Jeffrey A.|title=The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban on Gun Markets: An Assessment of Short-Term Primary and Secondary Market Effects |journal=Journal of Quantitative Criminology|date=2002|volume=18|issue=3|pages=239–266|doi=10.1023/A:1016055919939|s2cid=140321420}}</ref> John Lott found that the bans may have reduced the number of gun shows by over 20 percent.<ref name="Lott BAG2003">{{cite book |last=Lott |first=John R. |title=The Bias Against Guns |date=February 1, 2003 |publisher=Regnery Publishing |location=Washington, D.C. |isbn=978-0895261144}}</ref> ==Efforts at renewal== The assault weapons ban expired on September 13, 2004. Legislation to renew or replace the ban was proposed numerous times unsuccessfully. Between May 2003 and June 2008, U.S. Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]], D-CA, and Representatives [[Michael Castle]], R-DE, [[Alcee Hastings]], D-FL, and [[Mark Kirk]], R-IL, introduced bills to reauthorize the ban.<ref name="AWB Reauthorization Act">{{USBill|108|S.|1034}}, {{USBill|108|S.|2109}}, {{USBill|109|S.|620}}, {{USBill|108|H.R.|3831}}, {{USBill|108|H.R.|5099}}, {{USBill|110|HR|6257}}</ref> At the same time, Senator [[Frank Lautenberg]], D-NJ, and Representative [[Carolyn McCarthy]], D-NY, introduced similar bills to create a new ban with a revised definition for assault weapons. None of the bills left committee.<ref name="AWB & Law Enforcement Protection Act">{{USBill|108|S.|1431}}, {{USBill|109|S.|645}}, {{USBill|108|H.R.|2038}}, {{USBill|109|H.R.|1312}}, {{USBill|110|H.R.|1022}}</ref> After the [[2008 United States presidential election|November 2008 election]], the website of [[President of the United States|President-elect]] [[Barack Obama]] listed a detailed agenda for the forthcoming administration. The stated positions included "making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent."<ref name="archive.org change.gov">{{cite web |title=Urban Policy Agenda |url=http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy_agenda/ |publisher=Office of President-elect Barack Obama |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081116144703/http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy_agenda/ |archive-date=November 16, 2008 |access-date=December 31, 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Three months later, newly sworn-in [[United States Attorney General|Attorney General]] [[Eric Holder]] reiterated the [[Obama administration]]'s desire to reinstate the ban.<ref name="ryan 090225">{{cite news |title=Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban |first=Jason |last=Ryan |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1 |work=ABC News |id=6960824 |date=February 25, 2009 |access-date=December 31, 2012}}</ref> The mention came in response to a question during a joint press conference with [[Drug Enforcement Administration|DEA]] Acting Administrator [[Michele Leonhart]], discussing efforts to crack down on [[Mexican Drug War|Mexican drug cartels]]. Attorney General Holder said that "there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons."<ref>[http://www.c-span.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-A-15821 C-SPAN.org] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090228133334/http://www.c-span.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-A-15821 |date=February 28, 2009}}</ref> Efforts to pass a new federal assault weapons ban were made in December 2012 after the [[Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting]], in [[Newtown, Connecticut]].<ref name=Barron121215>{{cite news |last=Barron |first=James |date=December 15, 2012 |title=Children Were All Shot Multiple Times With a Semiautomatic, Officials Say |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/nyregion/gunman-kills-20-children-at-school-in-connecticut-28-dead-in-all.html |newspaper=New York Times |access-date=April 12, 2014 }}</ref><ref name=Levy121221>{{cite news |last=Levy |first=Gabrielle |date=December 21, 2012 |title=Obama responds to gun violence petition |url=http://www.upi.com/blog/2012/12/21/Obama-responds-to-gun-violence-petition/1021356100902/ |publisher=United Press International |type=blog |access-date=May 26, 2014 }}</ref><ref name=Steinhauer130124>{{cite news |title=Senator Unveils Bill to Limit Semiautomatic Arms |author=Steinhauer, Jennifer |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/us/politics/senator-unveils-bill-to-limit-semiautomatic-arms.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=January 24, 2013 |access-date=May 26, 2014}}</ref> On January 24, 2013, Senator Feinstein introduced {{USBill|113|S.|150}}, the [[Assault Weapons Ban of 2013]] (AWB 2013).<ref name=CSPAN130124>{{cite AV media |people=Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Rev. Gary Hall, Rep. [[Carolyn McCarthy]] |date=January 24, 2013 |title=Assault Weapons Ban Bill |medium=video |url=http://www.c-span.org/video/?310581-1/assault-weapons-ban-bill |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=National Cable Satellite Corporation |access-date=April 13, 2014 |display-authors=etal}}</ref> The bill was similar to the 1994 ban, but differed in that it would not expire after 10 years,<ref name=Steinhauer130124/> and it used a one-feature test for a firearm to qualify as an assault weapon rather than the two-feature test of the defunct ban.<ref name=USAToday130124>{{cite news |last=Kucinich |first=Jackie |date=January 24, 2013 |title=Democrats reintroduce assault weapons ban |url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/01/24/assault-weapons-ban-feinstein-democrats/1861493/ |newspaper=USA Today |access-date=April 13, 2014 }}</ref> The GOP Congressional delegation from Texas and the NRA condemned Feinstein's bill.<ref name="freedman 130124">{{cite news |title=Feinstein offers new assault weapons ban |first=Dan |last=Freedman |url=http://www.chron.com/default/article/Feinstein-offers-new-assault-weapons-ban-4221873.php |newspaper=Houston Chronicle |date=January 24, 2013 |access-date=January 24, 2013}}</ref> On March 14, 2013, the [[United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary|Senate Judiciary Committee]] approved a version of the bill along party lines.<ref name="steinhauer 130314">{{cite news |title=Party-Line Vote in Senate Panel for Ban on Assault Weapons |first=Jennifer |last=Steinhauer |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/15/us/politics/panel-approves-reinstatement-of-assault-weapons-ban.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=March 14, 2013 |access-date=March 14, 2013}}</ref> On April 17, 2013, AWB 2013 failed on a Senate vote of 40 to 60.<ref name=Simon130417>{{cite news |title=Senate votes down Feinstein's assault weapons ban |last=Simon |first=Richard |url=http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-dianne-feinstein-assault-weapons-vote-20130417,0,5349684.story |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |date=April 17, 2013 }}</ref> On March 23, 2021, President Joe Biden proposed a new ban on assault weapons after the [[2021 Atlanta spa shootings]] and [[2021 Boulder shooting]] both occurred in the previous week. <ref>{{Cite news|last=Karni|first=Annie|last2=Edmondson|first2=Catie|date=2021-03-23|title=Biden Seeks Assault Weapons Ban and Background Checks|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/23/us/politics/biden-gun-control.html|access-date=2021-03-25|issn=0362-4331}}</ref> ==See also== {{Wikiquote}} {{Portal|United States|Law}} *[[Assault weapon]] *[[Gun politics in the United States]] *[[National Firearms Agreement]] (Australia) {{Clear}} ==References== {{Reflist}} [[Category:103rd United States Congress]] [[Category:Gun politics in the United States]] [[Category:Legal history of the United States]] [[Category:United States federal firearms legislation]]'
Unified diff of changes made by edit (edit_diff)
'@@ -10,5 +10,5 @@ The 10-year ban was passed by the [[103rd United States Congress|US Congress]] on September 13, 1994, following a close 52–48 vote in the [[United States Senate|US Senate]], and was signed into law by US President [[Bill Clinton]] on the same day. The ban applied only to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment. It expired on September 13, 2004, in accordance with its [[sunset provision]]. Several constitutional challenges were filed against provisions of the ban, but all were rejected by the courts. There were multiple attempts to renew the ban, but none succeeded. -Studies have shown the ban had little effect in overall criminal activity, firearm homicides, and the lethality of gun crimes. There is tentative evidence that the frequency of mass shootings may have slightly decreased while the ban was in effect.<ref>See the [[Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Effects|Effects]] section for the many studies which support this statement.</ref> +There is evidence that the frequency of mass shootings had decreased substantially while the ban was in effect. Studies have shown it is difficult to assess the complete effect the ban had in overall criminal activity, firearm homicides, and the lethality of gun crimes as it was only if effect for 10 years. <ref>See the [[Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Effects|Effects]] section for the many studies which support this statement.</ref> ==Background== @@ -108,5 +108,7 @@ ===Overall crime=== -A 2017 review found that there was no evidence that ban had a significant effect on firearm homicides.<ref name="Lee2017">{{cite journal|last1=Lee|first1=LK|last2=Fleegler|first2=EW|last3=Farrell|first3=C|last4=Avakame|first4=E|last5=Srinivasan|first5=S|last6=Hemenway|first6=D|last7=Monuteaux|first7=MC|date=1 January 2017|title=Firearm Laws and Firearm Homicides: A Systematic Review|journal=JAMA Internal Medicine|volume=177|issue=1|pages=106–119|doi=10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7051|pmid=27842178|s2cid=205119294|quote=Limited data from 4 studies on the effects of the federal assault weapons ban (in effect from 1994 to 2004) do not provide evidence that the ban was associated with a significant decrease in firearm homicides.}}</ref> +A 2021 Northwestern University review found the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (FAWB) — that included a ban on large capacity magazines (limiting the number and caliber of bullets) — from 1994 to 2004 — resulted in a significant decrease in public mass shootings, number of gun deaths and number of gun injuries. + +An older 2017 review found that there was no evidence that ban had a significant effect on firearm homicides.<ref name="Lee2017">{{cite journal|last1=Lee|first1=LK|last2=Fleegler|first2=EW|last3=Farrell|first3=C|last4=Avakame|first4=E|last5=Srinivasan|first5=S|last6=Hemenway|first6=D|last7=Monuteaux|first7=MC|date=1 January 2017|title=Firearm Laws and Firearm Homicides: A Systematic Review|journal=JAMA Internal Medicine|volume=177|issue=1|pages=106–119|doi=10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7051|pmid=27842178|s2cid=205119294|quote=Limited data from 4 studies on the effects of the federal assault weapons ban (in effect from 1994 to 2004) do not provide evidence that the ban was associated with a significant decrease in firearm homicides.}}</ref> A 2014 study found no impacts on homicide rates with an assault weapon ban.<ref>{{Cite journal | doi=10.1080/13504851.2013.854294|title = An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates| journal=Applied Economics Letters| volume=21| issue=4| pages=265–267|year = 2014|last1 = Gius|first1 = Mark|s2cid = 154746184}}</ref> A 2014 book published by [[Oxford University Press]] noted that "There is no compelling evidence that [the ban] saved lives."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.propublica.org/article/fact-checking-feinstein-on-the-assault-weapons-ban|title=Fact-Checking Feinstein on the Assault Weapons Ban|last=Beckett|first=Lois|date=2014-09-24|website=ProPublica|language=en|access-date=2019-07-13}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274747450|title=The Gun Debate: What Everyone Needs to Know. |author1=Philip J. Cook |author2-link=Kristin Goss|author2=Kristin A. Goss |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2014 }}</ref> '
New page size (new_size)
47217
Old page size (old_size)
46830
Size change in edit (edit_delta)
387
Lines added in edit (added_lines)
[ 0 => 'There is evidence that the frequency of mass shootings had decreased substantially while the ban was in effect. Studies have shown it is difficult to assess the complete effect the ban had in overall criminal activity, firearm homicides, and the lethality of gun crimes as it was only if effect for 10 years. <ref>See the [[Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Effects|Effects]] section for the many studies which support this statement.</ref>', 1 => 'A 2021 Northwestern University review found the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (FAWB) — that included a ban on large capacity magazines (limiting the number and caliber of bullets) — from 1994 to 2004 — resulted in a significant decrease in public mass shootings, number of gun deaths and number of gun injuries.', 2 => ' ', 3 => 'An older 2017 review found that there was no evidence that ban had a significant effect on firearm homicides.<ref name="Lee2017">{{cite journal|last1=Lee|first1=LK|last2=Fleegler|first2=EW|last3=Farrell|first3=C|last4=Avakame|first4=E|last5=Srinivasan|first5=S|last6=Hemenway|first6=D|last7=Monuteaux|first7=MC|date=1 January 2017|title=Firearm Laws and Firearm Homicides: A Systematic Review|journal=JAMA Internal Medicine|volume=177|issue=1|pages=106–119|doi=10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7051|pmid=27842178|s2cid=205119294|quote=Limited data from 4 studies on the effects of the federal assault weapons ban (in effect from 1994 to 2004) do not provide evidence that the ban was associated with a significant decrease in firearm homicides.}}</ref>' ]
Lines removed in edit (removed_lines)
[ 0 => 'Studies have shown the ban had little effect in overall criminal activity, firearm homicides, and the lethality of gun crimes. There is tentative evidence that the frequency of mass shootings may have slightly decreased while the ban was in effect.<ref>See the [[Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Effects|Effects]] section for the many studies which support this statement.</ref>', 1 => 'A 2017 review found that there was no evidence that ban had a significant effect on firearm homicides.<ref name="Lee2017">{{cite journal|last1=Lee|first1=LK|last2=Fleegler|first2=EW|last3=Farrell|first3=C|last4=Avakame|first4=E|last5=Srinivasan|first5=S|last6=Hemenway|first6=D|last7=Monuteaux|first7=MC|date=1 January 2017|title=Firearm Laws and Firearm Homicides: A Systematic Review|journal=JAMA Internal Medicine|volume=177|issue=1|pages=106–119|doi=10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7051|pmid=27842178|s2cid=205119294|quote=Limited data from 4 studies on the effects of the federal assault weapons ban (in effect from 1994 to 2004) do not provide evidence that the ban was associated with a significant decrease in firearm homicides.}}</ref>' ]
Whether or not the change was made through a Tor exit node (tor_exit_node)
false
Unix timestamp of change (timestamp)
1626656656