So I agree, and I said in a prior post the true solution is really just a multi-decade evolution of our society into a better one. The problem there is A.) active social/political changes to speed this up are both impractical and likely impossible to know, B.) we can’t agree on what’s more likely to affect the change we want let alone WHAT the changes we want are C.) if we try to let this occur organically there’s no guarantee we evolve rather than devolve into a worse state, and finally D.) we don’t have the time to wait.
So that leaves us with doing something actively imo.
I also agree that if you just look at statistics then of course handguns cause more deaths in this country. By a lot. Most crime or suicides are undertaken by handguns. So sure, I’d love to just magically disappear all handguns and “ARs” (I fully admit not knowing the semantics or definitions as you would) but I also fully recognize there’s a ZERO percent chance we get rid of handguns in this country. Even if we banned the sale/import of handguns in the US, there’s millions here. They’re not going away.
But I’d absolutely argue that 20 dead grade school kids murdered by a short barrel semi auto rifle is worse than 100 handgun perpetrated murders. There’s undoubtedly a socioeconomic bias to that statement, and I am not saying those 100 victims deserved it by any means. Many are likely innocent bystanders, many more are victims of circumstance etc. But holy crap, we can’t be ok with kids gunned down in school. There’s a line somewhere, but that’s absolutely across it.
And lastly, the idea that if we banned ARs, or made them incredibly expensive or regulated them into an almost intolerable annoyance to acquire that handguns would just replace them…. Is of course absolutely true. But you and I both know, you can’t hit anything with a pistol unless quite practiced and you aren’t having an entire police squad afraid of a guy with 6 pistols in his belt like you are with a kid with an AR.
Slippery slope aside, we can reduce these completely senseless public shootings, if not in number of events, in numbers killed by reducing the availability of ARs. Do we still have a gun problem in this country if we do that? Yes. Is incremental change a change not worth doing? No.
I see your argument and understand where you're coming from ... I just disagree on several fronts.
First and foremost, legalities and other pros/cons aside, it just isn't more possible/practical to ban rifles than pistols.
In 1994 when the first federal AWB passed, private ownership of AR-pattern rifles was much, much less common than it is now. In the 18 years since the AWB expired, there has been an enormous surge in ownership of these rifles. There are lots of reasons why, but the simplest is just that they are exceptionally well designed, inexpensive rifles. They're accurate, ergonomic, low recoil, light, easily customizable. Attributes that are seized on by gun control advocates as "assault-y" like the pistol grip and collapsible stock are just ergonomic improvements over ye olde wood-stocked musket or hunting rifle. Anyone who's ever fired a traditional wood stock deer rifle and then fired an AR15 will tell you which is easier and more comfortable to use.
I shoot AR15s in competition and every once in a while one of my Garands. It's just night and day difference.
There are 10s of millions of AR15s in circulation now. I can't find a good data source at the moment but I think in 1994 when the AWB was passed there were something like 1% or fewer of the current count. Despite that, the AWB didn't work, for lots of reasons. It was hard to rigorously define what an "assault rifle" is, because it's mostly a cosmetic distinction. An entire industry of "post-ban" rifles and "featureless" rifles grew and essentially anyone who wanted one could get an AR-pattern rifle, with some silly cosmetic compromises. Even in the most restrictive states, like California. Or they just bought mini-14s or ranch rifles which are functionally equivalent to ARs. Same cartridge. Some even use the same magazines.
Constitutional legalities aside, the absurdity of a new AWB lies in a few things
1 - There are far too many in circulation. You recognize that there is ZERO percent chance we're getting rid of handguns because there are so many of them. I don't think you've realized yet that there's also a ZERO percent chance we're getting rid of black anodized aluminum rifles.
1b - Same issue for "high capacity" magazines. States have been banning them in fits and starts for the 18 years since the AWB expired and every few years there's another run on them. There are probably a couple hundred million 30-round AR magazines in the USA today. No exaggeration.
2 - They're easy to make at home, and getting easier. The furor and angst over "ghost guns" is just yapping over an open barn door when the other three walls are completely missing. 3D printers are only getting better and cheaper. I personally have a hobbyist mill in my garage that I have personally used to turn square chunks of 7075 aluminum into AR15 lower receivers.
3 - A repeat of the 1994 AWB would be even less effective now than it was then, because evading cosmetic definitions is so easy. Meaning that any new AWB would really have to be a confiscation of, and ban of new sale of, and ban of manufacture of, ALL semi-automatic rifles. Otherwise you can't expect it to cover the black rifles in production now, or the ones that would be produced to comply with the law.
A ban of ALL semi-automatic rifles just can't happen without a straight up repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
I don't think 26 kids & adults in a 2012 school shooting plus 21 in a 2022 school shooting outweigh the non-school murders that happen every day.
I don't think it's reasonable to make token gun control gestures that (1) won't work and (2) are unconstitutional, just to handwave some good feelings and pretend to be doing something.
I don't think punitive taxes to dissuade people from buying rifles are acceptable. I will never agree with any government action that reserves a privilege for the wealthy. Particularly when the issue at hand is a Constitutionally enumerated civil right.
Despite the difficulty, and the generation or more that it'll take, I do think the cultural fight is the one that's worth having. Although success isn't guaranteed, success is actually possible. The worst part of it all is that I think that on the whole, the left has the better ideas for getting there. And every time the left gets distracted by futile gun control and all the associated virtue signaling and futile handwaving ... they lose elections and any actual ability to do any of those things. It's about to happen again - Democrats are going to lose the House and Senate over this.
