Did 1994’s assault weapons ban reduce mass shootings in the United States? These are the facts.
There have been a lot of high-profile incidents mass shootings in the U.S. There were calls from Congress for Congress to consider imposing a ban on cigarette smoking in 2022. ban on so-called assault weapons – covering the types of guns used in both the recent Buffalo grocery attack You can also find that information at elementary school in Uvalde, Texas.
This prohibition was in place previously. President Joe Biden noted in his June 2, 2022, speech In addressing gun violence, almost 30 years ago, bipartisan support at Congress helped to push through a federal attack weapons ban in 1994 as part the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act.
That ban was limited – it covered only certain categories of semi-automatic weapons such as AR-15s and applied to a ban on sales only after the act was signed into law, allowing people to keep hold of weapons purchased before that date. And it also had in it a so-called “sunset provision” that allowed the ban to expire in 2004.
Nonetheless, the 10-year life span of that ban – with a clear beginning and end date – gives researchers the opportunity to compare what happened with mass shooting deaths before, during and after the prohibition was in place. Our group of trauma surgeons, injury epidemiologists, and trauma surgeons did just this. A population-based study was published in 2019 analyzing the data To assess the effect of the federal ban against assault weapons on mass shootings defined by the FBI As a shooting with at least four fatalities, but not the shooter. Here’s what the data shows:
Before 1994’s ban
From 1981 – the earliest year in our analysis – to the rollout of the assault weapons ban in 1994, the proportion of deaths in mass shootings in which an assault rifle was used was lower than it is today.
However, the number and severity of mass shootings was on the rise in that period. Indeed, high-profile mass shootings involving assault rifles – such as the killing of five children in Stockton, California, in 1989 You can also find out more about a 1993 San Francisco office attack that left eight victims dead – provided the impetus There is a push for banning certain types of guns.
During the 1994-2004 ban
After the assault weapons ban became effective, the death toll from mass shootings dropped and the increase in incidents per year slowed down. Even including 1999’s Columbine High School massacre – the deadliest mass shooting during the period of the ban – the 1994 to 2004 period saw lower average annual rates of both mass shootings and deaths resulting from such incidents than before the ban’s inception.
Starting in 2004:
The data shows an almost immediate – and steep – rise in mass shooting deaths in the years after the assault weapons ban expired in 2004.
Breaking the data into absolute numbers, between 2004 and 2017 – the last year of our analysis – the average number of yearly deaths attributed to mass shootings was 25, compared with 5.3 during the 10-year tenure of the ban and 7.2 in the years leading up to the prohibition on assault weapons.
The saving of hundreds of lives
We found that the risk of an American citizen being killed in a massacre was 70% lower during the time the assault weapons ban has been in place. The proportion of overall gun homicides resulting from mass shootings was also down, with nine fewer mass-shooting-related fatalities per 10,000 shooting deaths.
Taking population trends into account, a model we created based on this data suggests that had the federal assault weapons ban been in place throughout the whole period of our study – that is, from 1981 through 2017 – it may have prevented 314 of the 448 mass shooting deaths that occurred during the years in which there was no ban.
This almost certainly understates the number of lives that could have been saved. Our study included only mass shooting incidents that were reported to and approved by all three of the data sources. Los Angeles Times, Stanford University?, and Mother Jones magazine.
Furthermore, for uniformity, we also chose to use the strict federal definition of an assault weapon – which may not include the entire spectrum of what many people may now consider to be assault weapons.
Are you looking for cause or correlation?
Noting that we cannot prove that 1994’s assault weapons ban resulted a decrease of mass shootings and 2004’s expiration resulted largely in an increase of fatal incidents, it is important to keep in mind that this analysis does not definitively prove that.
There are many other factors that could contribute to these shootings’ increasing frequency, including changes in domestic violence rates and political extremism.
Nonetheless, according to our study, President Biden’s claim that the rate of mass shootings during the period of the assault weapons ban “went down” only for it to rise again after the law was allowed to expire in 2004 holds true.
As the U.S. looks toward a solution to the country’s epidemic of mass shootings, it is difficult to say conclusively that reinstating the assault weapons ban would have a profound impact, especially given the growth in sales in the 18 years in which Americans have been allowed to purchase and stockpile such weapons. Not surprising, given the fact that most of the mass shooters who have made headlines in recent years bought their weapons. less than one year before committing their actsThe evidence supports this possibility.
This article has been republished from The ConversationThe non-profit news site, which is dedicated to sharing ideas with academic experts. You could also share it if you find it interesting. subscribe to our weekly newsletter.
It was written by: Michael J. Klein, New York University.
Continue reading:
Michael J. Klein is not affiliated with any company or organization that Michael J. Klein consults, owns shares in, or receives funding from. He has also not disclosed any affiliations other than their academic appointment.