Just dug up this essay I wrote a couple years ago, where I used many of the exact same points you guys use to argue against an assault weapons ban. That doesn't mean my views haven't evolved enough to favor a much smaller gun control measure, but it's still pretty ironic.
Assault is a Behavior
“No Free man shall ever be debarred of arms” – Thomas Jefferson. The controversial subject of gun control and more specifically semi-automatic weapons, more commonly referred to as “assault weapons”, has been debated for decades by politicians. Webster’s dictionary defines an assault weapon as “any of various semiautomatic or automatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use.” Following in the footsteps of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons ban, many politicians today are attempting to reinstate a similar plan. In my view, having the right to bear arms, assault weapons in this case, is a right given in the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution, a form of self-defense and sport, and not any more likely to cause murder or mayhem.
The 2nd Amendment states that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This amendment was made by our Founding Fathers to ensure that the government never had a monopoly of force it could use to oppress the citizens. With many people owning weapons, no future tyrant would be able to impose his will on a helpless population as has happened many times in the past such as China and the Soviet Union. Once a government gains enough power to take away certain rights, there is no limit to what is possibly attainable. While banning assault weapons may not directly lead to a tyranny of any sort, it lays the seed for such oppression to thrive ten, fifty, or one hundred years from now.
Many ban supporters claim that assault type weapons are simply unnecessary. However, what about the legitimate people who use them for self-defense, hunting, or sport shooting. Last time I checked, owning a 48” widescreen TV wasn’t very necessary either, when having a black-and white 12” TV would work just fine. The same could be said about having the latest cell-phone. Why do you need one when you could have a Maxwell Smart shoe-phone? The concepts of freedom and personal choice shouldn’t just be disregarded in the matter of gun control.
Another argument brought up by pro-ban groups is that banning assault weapons will cause a reduction in violent crimes. Many cite a report done by the National Institute of Justice in 1999 on the impact of the 1994 Assault weapon ban saying that overall violent crime was reduced by an overall 9% between 1994 and 1995. What many fail to recognize is that the violent crime rate was already on a descending trend, with violent crime rate dropping about 5% between 1993 and 1994. This crime rate occurred in a time when assault weapons were on the market and were relatively easy to access. This mass banning of a certain product has been done before in the example of Prohibition, but that didn’t stop thousands from creating their own “homebrews.” The bottom line is that if people want to commit a violent crime, there are plenty of illegal ways for criminals to gain access to assault weapons. National renowned publisher Alan Korwin summed it up pretty well when he said that “Assault is a type of behavior, not a type of hardware.”
This hot topic has been argued for many years, and for good reason. Let's face it: assault weapons are deadly and were designed with the intention of killing people. But the reality of it is that most use them responsibly and for genuine reasons: they are a very effective form of self-defense and offer competitive opportunities in hunting and sport shooting. Not only that, but according to the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution, it is well within our rights as American citizens to bear arms, including assault weapons. It is for the aforementioned reasons that I believe that assault weapons should not be banned in the United States.
