Assault Rifles/Weapons Artifact

Henry Laks

Stephanie Brown

English 306

4/14/16

                                                            Artifact: Assault Rifles

            One of the largest gun controversies in the gun debate is assault weapons within that argument “assault rifles” are the hottest topic.  This paper is primarily focusing on the gun rights identity, as a result I will pay more attention to the gun rights side of this protest artifact and how they fought against the suggested bans on these weapons.  Gun rights activists think assault weapons should be legal, because of their effectiveness for self-defense and their adaptability which allows it to be used in multiple ways.  Gun control activists, on the other hand, think that the guns are effective for self-defense, but they are too effective.  Therefore, if the guns are too effective they are too dangerous for any civilians to own.    “Assault rifles” get a lot of attention because of their appearance, tactical performance, detachable magazines, and misconceptions of their functionality as a firearm. 
Many people ask the question of what makes assault rifles so special.  Assault rifles are gun manufactures clever scheme to bypass the laws and restrictions on machineguns.  Assault rifles are an American citizen’s legal alternative to a machinegun.  The Firearm Owners Protection Act in 1986 made the possession of burst fires and fully automatic rifles illegal, with the exception of ones made before May 1986 (ATF).  However, motivated law abiding citizens can obtain a permit which allows for legal possession of machineguns made at any point, but it is an extremely tedious time eating process which only a few pass.  For that reason

Photo Provided by YouHF

, gun manufacturers started making semi-auto civilian versions of the military’s automatic rifles. When you compare a civilian assault rifle to a military assault rifle they look identical that explains a lot, because as mentioned earlier there is a lot of confusion surrounding assault rifles because of their appearance.  The picture to the right is a picture of the military’s M4A1 and civilians AR15.  Both guns have a similar external frame and they shoot the same rounds.  The civilian rifle the AR15 is according to the 1986 Act is fitted with more restrictive parts than the military m4.  The Ar15 is a semiautomatic rifle, and the m4, depending on the model, is either a burst-fire or a fully automatic rifle.  Semi-automatic weapons can fire one shot as quickly as the finger can pull the trigger.  Burst fire weapons shoot a small group of two to three bullets for every pull of the trigger.  A fully automatic rifle can fire many rounds with one pull of the trigger.                            

In 1994 the assault weapons ban was enacted.  This legislation banned the possession, transfer, and manufacturing of semi-auto civilian assault rifles (Koper, Christopher S. and Jeffrey A. Roth).  Just to clarify this ban not only prohibited assault rifles but it also included assault pistols too.  This ban prohibited any weapons specified as assault weapons “that appear to be useful for the military or criminal actions,” (Koper, Christopher S. and Jeffrey A. Roth). It also banned guns that had two or more military-style features.  The military style features give assault rifles and weapons the capability to use equipment that other guns need modification to use.   The ban also included prohibition of large capacity magazines or contraptions that function as magazines which hold more than 10 rounds that can be attached to semiautomatic firearms.  Large magazines are certainly one of the most important features of assault weapons.  This ban did not prohibit semi-auto weapons with internal magazines and semi-autos only capable of holding 5 round detachable magazines (Koper, Christopher S. and Jeffrey A. Roth).

As you can imagine this was huge step for the gun control advocates.  A decade before the ban a number of publicized shootings occurred with an assault weapons equipped with large magazines.  That really helped to fuel the support for the ban.  The logic was behind this ban was the presumption that assault weapons with large clips are capable of firing more rounds at a faster rate which increases the probability that criminals can wound more people during a shooting rampage (Koper, Christopher S. and Jeffrey A. Roth).  As a result, the ban lasted until 2004, and the ban expired under the Bush administration.

Since the expiration of the 1994 Assault weapons ban a number of politicians have tried to reinstate a new more restrictive ban.  All attempts so far under Obama’s administration have been unsuccessful.  One reason these bans have not been successful is that the ban did not seem to have any noticeable effect on crimes (Koper, Christopher S. and Jeffrey A. Roth).  Despite the failures to get another Act passed that will prohibit assault rifles the gun control advocates will not give up. 

Today one major misconceptions surrounding assault rifles and weapons is some variation of, “Semi-automatic "assault weapons" are high-powered guns that are meant for war,” (Background Information: NSSF).  Gun rights activists like to counter this by saying assault weapons and rifles in most cases use much smaller rounds than commonly used hunting calibers.  For an instance assault rifles are chambered in many different calibers, but by far the most popular is the 223. Aka “5.56 AR”.  It is a powerful round, but it does not even come close to the extremely popular hunting round the 308. in its power and mass.  According to GunNoob.com “if you own a AR 15 it probably shoots this round,” .223 it’s good for small and medium game,

223. vs. 308. provided by weapons Informer

but it’s not a big round, some states don’t allow its use for large game (Rifle Bullet/Cartridge Guide).  Although, the gun control advocates are right the 223. round was made for the military, but there are other rounds much bigger and even more deadly such as the 30-06 (which is even larger than the .308); it’s the legendary World War II, M1 Garand caliber now used as a hunting rifle round.  Upon that basis, gun rights activists say that just because it was made for the military doesn’t mean it should be kept away from citizens. 

            Gun rights advocates like assault rifles for a few different reasons.  One, they think that assault rifles are very effective for self-defense situations with all equip able gadgets that can be mounted on them.  Two, assault rifles are good all-around firearms that can be used for certain types of hunting, and they shoot cheap ammo making them affordable plinking firearms.  Some activists simply think they are cool firearms, consequently they should own one.  The reasons for them liking their assault rifles are almost endless.     

                    The gun debate surrounding assault rifles is very interesting considering all of the elements which make it more complicated.  A firearm that essentially is a replica of a military firearms but functions differently is enough to fuel a debate that has lasted many years.  Right now the verdict on the table, at least from the government’s view, seems to be that there isn’t significant enough evidence that assault rifles are increasing crime, why keep from the citizens?  That could change at any moment if another string of shootings involves assault rifles or weapons.  Eventually one side will most likely be shown to be correct.