Welcome to DU!
    The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
    Join the community:
    Create a free account
    Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
    Become a Star Member
    Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
    All Forums
        Issue Forums
        Culture Forums
        Alliance Forums
        Region Forums
        Support Forums
        Help & Search
    
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Banning all Muslims vs. Banning all guns: an examination [View all]TeddyR
(2,493 posts)26. As I pointed out in another response to you
        The last assault weapon ban had negligible if any impact.  Here's an excerpt of that post:
They learned that while assault weapons played a prominent part in many mass shootings, they play only a tiny role in Americas overall gun violence problem. The loophole-ridden 1994 federal assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004, produced no clear evidence of reducing gun violence. An in-depth evaluation of the law concluded that the impact of even a more comprehensive ban would be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement. 
That was not a surprise to anyone who had been paying attention. In the early 1990s, even some gun control advocates criticized the push for an assault weapon ban as a distraction with little crime-fighting benefit. But the ban generated intense, visceral reactions from the public. A former Democratic staffer who helped craft the assault weapon ban said he had hoped passing it would give Democrats the political momentum they needed to pass the drier, more technical gun laws that might actually save more lives.
Instead, the push for a political victory backfired. President Bill Clinton later blamed the assault weapon ban for the 1994 midterm victories that allowed Republicans to take over both houses of Congress. Many prominent gun control groups have since moved away from an assault ban  through hard, bitter experience, said Matt Bennett, a gun policy expert who advised Sandy Hook Promise.
Democrats know the research behind the ban. While a ban on high-capacity magazines could help some, the assault weapons ban does nothing, a former senior Obama administration official said last year.
That was not a surprise to anyone who had been paying attention. In the early 1990s, even some gun control advocates criticized the push for an assault weapon ban as a distraction with little crime-fighting benefit. But the ban generated intense, visceral reactions from the public. A former Democratic staffer who helped craft the assault weapon ban said he had hoped passing it would give Democrats the political momentum they needed to pass the drier, more technical gun laws that might actually save more lives.
Instead, the push for a political victory backfired. President Bill Clinton later blamed the assault weapon ban for the 1994 midterm victories that allowed Republicans to take over both houses of Congress. Many prominent gun control groups have since moved away from an assault ban  through hard, bitter experience, said Matt Bennett, a gun policy expert who advised Sandy Hook Promise.
Democrats know the research behind the ban. While a ban on high-capacity magazines could help some, the assault weapons ban does nothing, a former senior Obama administration official said last year.
The rest is here - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/20/gun-control-orlando-attack-newtown-mass-shooting
While an assault weapon ban certainly might be constitutional it will have little impact on crime and will simply cost Democrats seats in the next election. Handguns are used in vastly more murders and a handgun ban is both unconstitutional and a fantasy of gun-controllers that will never happen.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
  Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
						
							29 replies
							
								 = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
 = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
					
                    
					
                     = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
 = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
					
                    
					
        
        So you ban handgrips that stick out, leaving equally capable firearms without protruding handgrips.
        benEzra
        Jun 2016
        #23
      
        
        Logic fail - the actual common denominator (the 'problem') is a PERSON intent on killing.
        jonno99
        Jun 2016
        #6