Share “Gun ban would protect more than 2,200...”

Gun ban would protect more than 2,200 firearms

Published on NewsOK Modified: February 16, 2013 at 5:29 pm •  Published: February 16, 2013
Advertisement

A list of exempted firearms was not part of Feinstein's original assault weapons ban two decades ago, said Michael Lenett, one of the lead congressional staffers on gun control issues in 1994. A separate bill in circulation exempted far fewer hunting and sporting firearms, Lenett said.

The purpose of creating such a list was to assure people that the government was not going after any legitimate hunting or sporting weapons. "The other purpose of the list was to have a high profile way of assuring certain folks — including legislators — that we would not be going after their weapons that they use for those legitimate purposes," Lenett said.

"It was a win-win situation," Lenett recalled, because, he said, if the list could help pick up votes needed to pass the bill and temper some of the opposition, it could assuage some opponents of the ban without making the law less effective.

But gun experts say the lists in 1994 and the expanded lists of today don't make much sense.

"The bill demonstrates a shocking ignorance of the product they are purporting to regulate," said Lawrence Keane, senior vice president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association based in Newtown, Conn., that represents gun manufacturers. "I have no idea how they arrived at this list. It would seem to be random, bordering on throwing darts at a dart board."

For instance, Feinstein's current proposal includes exemptions for three specific types of the M-1 Carbine, an assault rifle designed for the military that the U.S. currently bans from being imported. A draft of the legislation, created and modified in November and early December last year, banned the M-1 Carbine and didn't exempt any models, according to a copy obtained by the AP.

Feinstein said there was disagreement among firearms experts, law enforcement and gun safety organizations about whether to include the M-1 Carbine on the list of banned weapons.

"It has been used in multiple police shootings, and was originally used by U.S. soldiers on the battlefield," Feinstein said. "On the other hand, it comes in models that would not meet the military characteristics test." She said she decided to limit banned weapons to those that met the definition outlined in the bill.

At a Jan. 30 hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee on gun violence, National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre said Feinstein's bill is "based on falsehoods to people that do not understand firearms, to convince them that the performance characteristics of guns that they are trying to ban through that bill are different than the performance characteristics that they're not trying to ban."

The Ruger Mini-14 is a perfect example.

The model that has a fixed stock would be exempted by Feinstein's ban; the weapon was protected in the 1994 law as well. A Ruger Mini-14 with a collapsible and folding stock would be illegal.

The guns fire the same caliber bullet and can take detachable magazines that could hold dozens of rounds of ammunition. The folding stock only reduces the gun's length by 2.75 inches, according to the manufacturer's website.

"It's irrelevant," Edmund Mireles, an FBI agent who survived the Miami shootout, said of the differences in features. "They're equally dangerous."

Mark D. Jones, a senior law enforcement adviser for the University of Chicago Crime Lab, said the folding stock does not affect the firearm's lethal potential.

"Given that both firearms will accept a 30 round or larger magazine, it renders the differences between them entirely cosmetic," Jones said.

Kristen Rand, the legislative director at the Washington-based Violence Policy Center, said the Ruger Mini-14 model that would be banned under Feinstein's legislation is easier to hold while firing because it has a pistol grip, and it's easier to hide because it has a collapsible stock. That's what makes it more dangerous that the Ruger Mini-14 with the fixed stock which would be exempted under the Feinstein bill, she said.

"And that's supposed to save somebody's life?" asked Hanlon, the FBI agent shot alongside Mireles.

Hanlon considered the differences between the two models and whether the events of April 11, 1986, would have been different if the shooter used a Ruger Mini-14 with a fixed stock. "I don't think it would have changed a damn thing," he said. "I don't see what makes that gun less dangerous."

___

Follow Eileen Sullivan on Twitter: http://twitter.com/esullivanap