California was the first state to ban “assault weapons” after a school shooting in Stockton. A federal ban went into 1994 and since then, eight states have “assault weapons”. However, these laws have had very little significance. This is because these firearms are just ordinary rifles, it is almost impossible for legislators to effectively regulate them without putting a ban on half of the handguns in the country and many hunting rifles. Instead, lawmakers have focused on the cosmetic aspect of the firearm. The ban was on all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines and two or more military-style features like bayonet attachments and a flash suppressor. Gun makers have been relatively unaffected by these changes. They can sell the same …show more content…
Former Vice President Joe Biden said, “I’m much less concerned, quite frankly with what you’d call an assault weapon than I am with magazines and the number of rounds that can be held in a high capacity magazine”(Biden). The phrase high-capacity magazines was made up by Emily Miller who wrote in the Washington Times that “Many firearms come from the factory with devices that feed between 15 to 30 rounds - some hold more, some less depending on their configuration and purpose. Ten is a number chosen out of thin air for reasons of political theater”(Miller). All of the existing so-called “high capacity magazines” would be grandfathered in under the proposed bills. 60 Minutes discovered during the last assault weapons ban, that it is not really a ban at all. They found that the legislation had no impact on sales and availability of “high capacity” magazines. It also does not seem very likely that a ban like this would prevent any mass shootings. To add, magazines can be changed very rapidly in a matter of seconds. One of the shooters at Columbine used a Hi-Point 995 carbine rifle, which used ten round magazines. He just carried thirteen of them. Magazines like this would not have been at all affected by the proposed