Terry Everett, September 20, 2004

Last week, the ten-year-old Federal assault weapons ban expired amid much hype from gun opponents and the national media that the law's disappearance would suddenly escalate gun-related crime in America. These alarmist claims ring hollow when one looks at the actual facts about the gun ban. The U.S. House leadership has already made it clear that this weapons law will not be renewed.

Gun rights opponents have long made no secret about their intent to limit Americans' ability to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms. Any way they can block gun access and ownership is a victory for them and a defeat for law-abiding citizens who wish to have guns for their own protection and recreation. The 1994 Federal assault weapons ban is a classic example of why gun control does nothing to stop violent crime.

A decade ago, the Clinton Administration and liberals in Congress fooled many in America into believing that passage of the assault weapons ban was essential to controlling violent crime in the United States. The law banned semi-automatic rifles featuring detachable magazines with more than ten rounds of ammunition and more than one attachment such as a pistol grip, a flash suppressor or a bayonet mount. Gun opponents said that classic military style assault weapons such as the AK-47 and Uzi would be prohibited under this new law.

What is most interesting about the assault weapons ban is that it really had no appreciable difference in the ownership of such weapons. Many of the high profile rifles supposedly banned by the assault weapons law were already prohibited from importation into the United States since 1989. Gun opponents didn't seem to care that their new gun ban law was just hype. After all, they are more interested in passing anti-gun laws than in actually fighting crime in America.

An independent study of gun-related violence in this country recently released by the National Institute of Justice says the gun law was practically irrelevant in reducing crime. This examination of criminal activity for over a decade carefully considered the impact of the ten-year-old gun ban. While violent crime involving guns has been on a steady decline since 1993 - a year before the passage of the Federal assault weapons ban - the study said the law was not responsible. "Should it be renewed, the ban's effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for measurement," the report stated.

So there you have it. While gun opponents and the liberal media would have you believe that the expiration of the gun ban would unleash waves of gun violence across our land, the truth is the law was toothless and redundant. So why make such a fuss over a hollow law? It was a deliberate attempt by anti Second Amendment politicians to pass laws restricting lawful gun ownership. Again, it is not important to them that the result of such laws is only to keep guns from law-abiding citizens - not the criminals.

A glaring example of what total gun control would really mean is Washington, DC which currently has a 28-year gun ban on the books. Published reports have noted that the homicide rate in the nation's capital has risen 200 percent from 1976 to 2001 while the national rate climbed only 12 percent. Where from this can one conclude that banning lawful gun ownership lowers violent crime?

I have recently joined 227 of my House colleagues in cosponsoring legislation to repeal the Washington, DC gun ban and return the right of gun ownership to law-abiding citizens. The "D.C. Personal Protection Act" is expected to come up for a vote in the House this year.

Congressman Terry Everett, a Republican, represents Alabama's Second Congressional District, which includes the state capitol, Montgomery.