Of Arms and the Law
Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home
Get an autographed copy of our Heller brief! $7.99 incl. S&H
Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography

ISOcover150x200sm.jpg

I've released my documentary film on the history of the right to arms, "In Search of the Second Amendment." It stars twelve professors of constitutional law, plus Steve Halbrook, David Kopel, Don Kates, and Clayton Cramer. You can order the DVD here. And here's the Wikipedia page on it. SUPREME COURT SPECIAL: additional orders only $10 each.


2nd Amendment Discussions
1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
The BitchGirls
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Visitors since April 1, 2005: Free Web Counter
Free Hit Counter

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 3.15
Site Design by Sekimori

« Prof. Volokh on DC gun mfr decision | Main | How often do you see a Federal agent admitting perjury on videotape? »

NY Time: end of "assault gun ban" meaningless

Posted by David Hardy · 24 April 2005 11:43 AM

(Via Instapundit) The N.Y. Times acknowledges the expiration of the assault gun ban has had no effect.

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.

Of course, the Times has to claim that the reason the ban was meaningless was that it was too "porous." Hard to reconcile with its admission that assault weapons "were never used in many gun crimes" and "Assault weapons account for a small fraction of gun crimes: about 2 percent, according to most studies, and no more than 8 percent."

Now, I'm NOT claiming that the AW ban had no good effects at all. It played a substantial role in costing the Democrats control of both houses of Congress. One of these days maybe they'll ask whether passing legislation aimed at guns which "were never used in many gun crimes" was worth it.

· contemporary issues

Comments

Someone really should fact-check Dianne Feinstein's assertion that price of assault weapons increased after the so-called "assault weapons ban"?

And I also noticed that she resorted to the classic liberal logic that because no citizen has a "legitimate need" to own an assault weapon, it is perfectly fine for the government to ban them. And logical arguement that wouldn't even pass the smell test if it was applied to anything else other then fire-arms.

Posted by: Farix at April 24, 2005 07:16 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)