Federal Assault Weapons Ban

Created and Presented by Nicholas Scalice

Introduction

• Where it all began• What the ban covered• Five areas of policy evaluation

– Policy Environment– Policy Formation and Adoption– Policy Regulation– Policy Enforcement– Policy Evaluation

• Conclusion

2

Where It All Began

• Cleveland School Massacre– January 17, 1989– Stockton, California– Patrick Edward Purdy– Type 56 Assault Rifle– Fired 106 rounds in 3 minutes– Killed 5 and injured 30

• Bans in California and 6 other states• Federal ban enacted in 1994

3

What the Ban Covered

• The Act made it unlawful to “manufacture, transfer or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon,” as well as large capacity magazines (LCMs) capable of holding more than 10 rounds

• However, assault weapons and large capacity magazines legally possessed on the effective date of the Act remain legal under the Act’s “grandfather clause”

4

The “Features Test” Provision

• It also banned assault weapons (AWs) with certain military features, such as semiautomatics with the ability to accept a detachable ammunition magazine and at least two of the following traits:– A folding or telescoping stock– A pistol grip that protrudes beneath the

firing action– A bayonet mount– A flash hider or a threaded barrel

designed to accommodate one– A grenade launcher

5

Large Capacity Magazines

• LCMs are perhaps the most functionally important feature of many AWs

• Most prohibited AWs came equipped with magazines holding 30 rounds and could accept magazines holding as many as 50 or 100 rounds

6

Policy Environment

• Setting the stage in the early 1990s• The logic of the assault weapons ban• 1994: The definitive year

– The Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act (The Federal Assault Weapons Ban)

• Actors involved:– Congress– President of the United States– National, state and local law enforcement– Brady Center for Gun Violence– National Rifle Association

7

Policy Environment

• Main opponent was the NRA– Argued a violation of the 2nd amendment– Argued that any attack on gun rights is an

attack on freedom– Successfully lobbied for non-renewal

8

Policy Formation

• Specific legislative title:– Violent Crime Control and Law

Enforcement Act of 1994, (Public Law 103-322), Title IX, subtitle A

• Sponsor:– Representative Jack B. Brooks (TX)

• Co-sponsors:– Representative William J. Hughes (NJ)– Representative Charles E. Schumer (NY)

• Passed House on November 3, 1993• Passed Senate on November 19, 1993• Signed by Pres. Clinton on Sept.13, 1994

9

Policy Adoption

• Jurisdiction began on federal level and covered to all 50 states

• The end of the ban– Expired September 13, 2004– Sunset provision– No successful efforts to renew ban

• Effective period of the ban– 1994 to 2004

10

The Copycat Problem

• How the gun industry responded to ban– Renaming guns– Making minor changes

• Difficult to determine this impact on ban

11

Policy Regulation

• The industry’s success in introducing copycat guns, along with the federal government’s failure to move against copycats under the “copies and duplicates” language of the statute, has raised concerns about the impact of the ban on the use of assault weapons in criminal activities

12

Policy Enforcement

• Federal enforcement– Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms– ATF regulations are published as Title 27,

Chapter II, Code of Federal Regulations by the Government Printing Office• Section 478 pertained to the ban• This section is no longer in effect

– Other regulations are found in United States Code, Title 18 – Crimes and Criminal Procedures, Part I – Crimes, Chapter 44 – Firearms, Sec. 922 – Unlawful Acts• This section is no longer in effect

13

Compliance Outcomes

• Number of police recoveries of assault weapons reported to ATF as a percentage of all traced guns, during the ban period– Such recoveries declined continually after

the implementation of the ban– In 1994, approximately 4% of all traced

guns recovered by police were classified as assault weapons

– That number declined to just over 2% by 1997, and continued to decline to 1.6%by 2001

14

Effects on Assault Weapon Use

• Police Recoveries of Assault Weapons Reported to ATF (National), 1990-2002

15

Brady Study (2004)

• In answering the question of whether or not the ban reduced the incident of assault weapons used in crimes, researchers found that in the five-year period prior to the act (1990-1994), assault weapons were accounted for in 4.82% of ATF crime gun traces

• However, after enactment, such guns accounted for only 1.61% of traces, which shows a decline of 66% from the pre-ban rate

16

Koper, Woods & Roth Study (2004)

• Following implementation of the ban, the share of gun crimes involving AWs declined by 17% to 72% across the localities examined for this study (Baltimore, Miami, Milwaukee, Boston, St. Louis, and Anchorage), based on data covering all or portions of the 1995-2003 post-ban period

• Concluded that the much bigger impact on gun violence is the prevalence of large capacity magazines, which were also outlawed by the ban

17

Effects on Gun Markets

• The assault weapons ban had clear short-term effects on the gun market, some of which were unintended consequences

• Production of the banned weapons increased before the law took effect and prices fell afterward

• These effects suggest that the weapons became more available generally, but they must have become less accessible to criminals because there was at least a short-term decrease in criminal use of the banned weapons

18

Effects on Gun Markets

• Annual Price Trends for Assault Rifles and Comparison Rifles, 1991-1999

19

Effects on Lethal Consequences

• Gun homicides plummeted from approximately 16,300 in 1994 to 10,100 in 1999, a reduction of about 38% 

• Experts believe numerous factors contributed to the drop in these and other crimes, such as:– Changing drug markets, a strong

economy, better policing, and higher incarceration rates 

• Attributing the decline solely to the ban is problematic, considering that crimes with LCMs appear to have been steady or rising in the post-ban era20

Policy Evaluation

• Finding #1 (2004 Brady Study)– Assault weapons banned by name in the

Federal Assault Weapons Act declined significantly as a percentage of guns ATF has traced to crime, and in absolute numbers of traces, during the active years of the ban

• Finding #2 (2004 Brady Study)– The gun industry’s efforts to evade the Act

through the sale of “copycat” guns has hampered but not substantially undercut the positive effect of the statute in reducing the incidence of assault weapons among crime guns21

Conclusion

• Success in reducing criminal use of the banned AWs and LCMs has been mixed

• The ban’s exemption of millions of pre-ban AWs and LCMs ensured that the effects of the law would occur gradually

• Alternative wording of the Act in order to avoid the “copycat problem” could have improved the impact of the ban

• LCMs continue to be the bigger issue• While 10 years seems like a long time, it

was not a long enough period to see the full effects of the ban22

References• Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (2004). On Target: The

Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Act. • Koper, C. S., Woods, D. J., & Roth, J. A. (2004). 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.

• National Archives and Records Administration. (n.d.). Title 27: Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. Retrieved September 20, 2012, from

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr • Roth, J. A., & Koper, C. S. (1997). Evaluation of the Public

Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994 (Rep.). Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

• U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote - H.R. 3355. (n.d.). U.S. Senate Legislation & Records. Retrieved September 20, 2012, from http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103

• Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, H.R. 3355, 103d Cong., 2nd Sess. (1993).