Want To Save Lives? Don’t Ban “Assault Weapons”

Gun control advocates are ignoring the life-saving reality of American firearm ownership.

Over the weekend, after speaking at the funeral of one of the victims of the white supremacist domestic terror attack in Buffalo, New York, Vice President Kamala Harris repeated one of the Democratic Party’s favorite policy suggestions: ban “assault weapons.”

"On the issue of gun violence, I will say, as I've said countless times, we are not sitting around waiting to figure out what the solution looks like. You know, we're not looking for a vaccine," Harris said. "We know what works on this. It includes, let's have an assault weapons ban."

"You know what an assault weapon is? You know how an assault weapon was designed?" she continued. "It was designed for a specific purpose — to kill a lot of human beings quickly. An assault weapon is a weapon of war with no place, no place in a civil society."

There are several arguments which are obvious counters to this tired and routine response. One such argument is the inescapable fact that all guns are designed to kill human beings (and other living entities). As weapons, that is their purpose.

But there is another point which should be considered if the actual goal is — as they claim — to end gun violence, rather than banning the guns they don’t like: “assault weapons” bans won’t end mass shootings, and even if they did, “assault weapons” save lives ever year in the United States.

In recent years, “assault weapons” have been placed at the forefront of the “gun control” debate in the context of mass shootings, and understandably so.

According to The Violence Project, 48 of 172 mass shooters (27.9%) in their study database used a “semi-automatic assault weapon.” Meanwhile, 134 mass shooters (77.9%) used a handgun. It is fair to point out, however, that the deadliest mass shootings in recent history usually involve some form of semi-automatic rifle. For example, according to Mother Jones’ database, seven of the ten most deadly mass shootings used an “AR-15 style” rifle.

But none of these facts address the important issue underlying this policy proposal: the efficacy of an “assault weapons” ban.