Time To Ban Assault Weapons, Again
There is no justification for owning an assault weapon. One does not go turkey hunting with one, or use it for ‘personal protection’. Assault weapons are only designed to kill. Jon Meacham makes it clear that such a ban on these deadly weapons needs to again be the law of the land.
A 1994 law banned these kinds of guns and magazines. It was a ferocious legislative fight in that first Clinton term, and I know more than a few Southern Democrats — the red state/blue state designations had not yet entered the vernacular — who say the assault-weapons bill was what defeated them in the Gingrich-led Republican landslide that November. Since then, the gun lobby has proved so powerful that it effectively shut down debate after the expiration of the assault-weapons ban in 2004.
In recent years, few political figures — notable exceptions include New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and New York Representative Carolyn McCarthy — have made serious efforts to pass commonsense gun legislation.
But we once agreed that weapons like the one used in Aurora (and the magazine that armed it), as well as the type of high-capacity magazines that were used in the Glock attack on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson should be banned. To borrow the language of the right, did that mean outlaws could not obtain such things if they tried? No, of course not: when certain kinds of guns are outlawed, outlaws will find ways to get them. But why not make it more difficult? Isn’t that the least we can do?
