[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 53 (Wednesday, April 27, 2005)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E782-E783]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. PHIL GINGREY

                               of georgia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, April 27, 2005

  Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, the so-called Assault Weapons ban passed in 
1994 has now been expired for seven months and our nation has yet to 
feel the ill effects proponents of the '94 legislation predicted. The 
following article by Deborah Sontag of the New York Times, provides a 
great description of how little has changed since the ban was lifted. 
Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert this article into the Congressional 
Record.

                [From the New York Times, Apr. 24, 2005]

               Many Say End of Firearm Ban Changed Little

                          (By Deborah Sontag)

       Despite dire predictions that the streets would be awash in 
     military-style guns, the expiration of the decade-long 
     assault weapons ban last September has not set off a 
     sustained surge in the weapons' sales, gun makers and sellers 
     say. It also has not caused any noticeable increase in gun 
     crime in the past seven months, according to several 
     metropolitan police departments.
       The uneventful expiration of the assault weapons ban did 
     not surprise gun owners, nor did it surprise some advocates 
     of gun control. Rather, it underscored what many of them had 
     said all along: that the ban was porous--so porous that 
     assault weapons remained widely available throughout their 
     prohibition.
       ``The whole time that the American public thought there was 
     an assault weapons ban, there never really was one,'' said 
     Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy 
     Center, a gun control group.
       What's more, law enforcement officials say that military-
     style weapons, which were never used in many gun crimes but 
     did enjoy some vogue in the years before the ban took effect, 
     seem to have gone out of style in criminal circles.
       ``Back in the early 90's, criminals wanted those Rambo-type 
     weapons they could brandish,'' said Jim Pasco, executive 
     director of the Fraternal Order of Police. ``Today they are 
     much happier with a 9-millimeter handgun they can stick in 
     their belt.''
       When the ban took effect in 1994, it exempted more than 1.5 
     million assault weapons already in private hands. Over the 
     next 10 years, at least 1.17 million more assault weapons 
     were produced--legitimately--by manufacturers that availed 
     themselves of loopholes in the law, according to an analysis 
     of firearms production data by the Violence Policy Center.
       Throughout the decade-long ban, for instance, the gun 
     manufacturer DPMS/Panther Arms of Minnesota continued selling 
     assault rifles to civilians by the tens of thousands. In 
     compliance with the ban, the firearms manufacturer 
     ``sporterized'' the military-style weapons, sawing off 
     bayonet lugs, securing stocks so they were not collapsible 
     and adding muzzle brakes. But the changes did not alter the 
     guns' essence; they were still semiautomatic rifles with 
     pistol grips.
       After the ban expired in September, DPMS reintroduced its 
     full-featured weapons to the civilian market and enjoyed a 
     slight spike in sales. That increase was short-lived, 
     however, and predictably so, said Randy E. Luth, the 
     company's owner.
       ``I never thought the sunset of the ban would be that big a 
     deal,'' Mr. Luth said.
       No gun production data are yet available for the seven 
     months since the ban expired. And some gun-control advocates 
     say they don't trust the self-reporting of gun industry 
     representatives, who may want to play down the volume of 
     their sales to ward off a revival of the ban.
       Indeed, a replica of the ban is again before the Senate.
       ``In my view, the assault weapons legislation was 
     working,'' said Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of 
     California, a chief sponsor of the new bill. ``It was drying 
     up supply and driving up prices. The number of those guns 
     used in crimes dropped because they were less available.'' 
     Assault weapons account for a small fraction of gun crimes: 
     about 2 percent, according to most studies, and no more than 
     8 percent. But they have been used in many high-profile 
     shooting sprees. The snipers in the 2002 Washington-area 
     shootings, for instance, used semiautomatic assault rifles 
     that were copycat versions of banned carbines.
       Gun crime has plummeted since the early 1990's. But a study 
     for the National Institute of Justice said that it could not 
     ``clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent 
     drops in gun violence.'' Research for the

[[Page E783]]

     study in several cities did show a significant decline in the 
     criminal use of assault weapons during the ban. According to 
     the study, however, that decline was offset by the ``steady 
     or rising use'' of other guns equipped with high-capacity 
     magazines--ammunition-feeding devices that hold more than 10 
     rounds.
       While the 1994 ban prohibited the manufacture and sale of 
     such magazines, it did not outlaw an estimated 25 million of 
     them already in circulation, nor did it stop the importation 
     of millions more into the country.
       Senator Feinstein said she wished she could outlaw the 
     ``flood of big clips'' from abroad, calling that the ``one 
     big loophole'' in the ban. But that would require amending 
     the bill, and Republicans like Senator John W. Warner of 
     Virginia and Senator Mike DeWine of Ohio are willing to back 
     it only without amendments, she said.
       Some gun-control advocates say it is pointless to 
     reintroduce the 1994 ban without amending it to include large 
     magazines and a wider range of guns. They see more promise in 
     enacting or strengthening state or local bans. Seven states--
     California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Maryland, New 
     Jersey and New York--already have bans, most based on the 
     federal one. The model ban, gun-control advocates say, is a 
     comprehensive one in California (referred to as 
     ``Commiefornia'' on some gun enthusiast Web sites).
       The Fraternal Order of Police has not made a new federal 
     ban a legislative priority, either. Mr. Pasco, the 
     organization's director, said he could not recall a single 
     ``inquiry from the field about the reauthorization of the 
     ban--and we have 330,000 members who are very vocal.''
       ``In 1994, I was the principal administration lobbyist on 
     this ban,'' said Mr. Pasco, who then worked for the federal 
     Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. ``But here we are 10 
     years later, and these weapons do not appear to pose any more 
     significant threat to law enforcement officers than other 
     weapons of similar caliber and capability.''
       The ban made it illegal to possess or sell a semiautomatic 
     weapon manufactured after September 1994 if the weapon 
     accepted a detachable magazine and contained at least two 
     features from a list that included protruding pistol grips 
     and threaded muzzles. The ban outlawed 19 weapons by name, 
     among them some foreign semiautomatics already banned under 
     the 1989 firearms importation law, which still stands.
       But gun manufacturers increased production of assault 
     weapons while the ban was being debated. Then, by making 
     minor changes in design, they were able to produce, as they 
     called them, ``post-ban'' assault weapons that were the 
     functional equivalent of the originals.
       Colt came out with a ``sporterized'' version of its popular 
     AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, leaving off some military features 
     that were ``meaningless as far as its lethality,'' said 
     Carlton S. Chen, vice president and general counsel for Colt.
       ``People might think it looks less evil,'' Mr. Chen said, 
     ``but it's the same weapon. It was a hoax, a Congressional 
     hoax, to ban all these different features.''
       Mr. Pasco of the police organization disagreed. ``We knew 
     exactly what we were doing by trying to ban guns with certain 
     features,'' he said. ``While it didn't affect their function 
     or capability, those features, at that point in time, seemed 
     to make those weapons more attractive to those who wanted to 
     commit crimes.''
       Gun-control advocates say military-style semiautomatics do 
     not belong in civilian hands. ``They are weapons of war,'' 
     Senator Feinstein said, ``and you don't need these assault 
     weapons to hunt.''
       Gun makers, however, say the weapons do have sporting uses, 
     in hunting and in target shooting. ``People buy these rifles 
     because they're fun to shoot and they perform well,'' Mr. 
     Luth of DPMS said. ``They also like them because you can jazz 
     them up like you can your car. You can custom-paint them, put 
     on a multitude of handguards or buttstocks.''
       Some collectors simply admire certain guns. Charles 
     Cuzalina, a gun dealer in Oklahoma who specializes in banned 
     weapons, is taken with the Colt AR-15.
       ``I just like the look of the weapon,'' Mr. Cuzalina said. 
     ``When I bought my first, I went out on the farm shooting at 
     a pie plate, and I realized how accurate it makes you. You 
     think you're the world's best shot.''
       Mark Westrom, owner of ArmaLite Inc., a gun maker in 
     Illinois, said prey hunters and target shooters did not miss 
     bayonet lugs and other features that disappeared with the 
     post-ban rifles. Collectors looking for an exact civilian 
     replica of a military rifle, however, consider the removal of 
     a bayonet lug ``a matter of design defacement,'' Mr. Westrom 
     said.
       Several manufacturers are offering factory conversions or 
     selling kits so gun owners can retrofit their post-ban 
     weapons. They are also increasing their production of pre-ban 
     weapons and decreasing production of post-ban weapons.
       Many gun store owners say that sales of assault weapons 
     spiked briefly in September and October. Gun dealers sought 
     to capitalize on the ban's sunset and, during the 
     presidential campaign, to raise the specter of a tougher ban 
     if John Kerry won.
       ``We view this time as a `pause' and urge you to take 
     advantage of the opportunity to exercise your Second 
     Amendment rights,'' Tapco, a shooting and military gear 
     company, said on its Web site last fall. ``Anti-gun 
     politicians learned much over the past 10 years. They will 
     surely not leave as many loopholes in future legislation.''
       After President Bush was re-elected and the novelty of the 
     ban's expiration waned, sales leveled off at many gun shops. 
     But Mike Mathews, the owner of Gunworld in Del City, Okla., 
     said sales had been holding steady at a higher level.
       Norm Giguere of Norm's Gun & Ammo in Biddeford, Me., on the 
     other hand, said that he had not sold any military-style 
     semiautomatic rifles since right after the Sept. 11 terrorist 
     attacks, and that the gun business in general was ``going 
     down the tubes.''
       Mr. Luth of DPMS, however, said that his sales had been 
     increasing for years, to the law enforcement community, the 
     civilian market and an unexpected new clientele. ``We've 
     picked up new customers with the troops returning from 
     Iraq,'' he said, ``who had never shot an AR-15 before and now 
     want one.''
       The war in Iraq has had another unintended consequence for 
     the marketplace. Colt, one of the biggest manufacturers, has 
     decided against putting its AR-15 back on the civilian market 
     because the company is backlogged with military orders.
       Unlike assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, which are 
     used with many guns, have been selling briskly since the ban 
     ended because prices have dropped considerably.
       ``The only thing Clinton ever did for us was drive up the 
     price of magazines,'' said a weapons specialist named Stuart 
     at TargetMaster, a shooting range and gun shop in Garland, 
     Tex. (He declined to give his last name.) ``A 17-round Glock 
     magazine crept up to $150 during the ban. It's $75 now.''
       Since September, the Web site of Taurus International 
     Manufacturing Inc., a major maker of small arms, has 
     celebrated the demise of the prohibition on magazines, 
     flashing in red letters, ``10 years of 10 rounds are over!''

                          ____________________