Federal Assault Weapons Ban#Provisions

Efforts to create restrictions on assault weapons at the federal government level intensified in 1989 after the shooting of a teacher and 34 children, five of whom died, in Stockton, California, with a semi-automatic Kalashnikov-pattern rifle.{{cite news |author= |date=May 23, 1990 |title=Senate restricts assault weapon imports, production |url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=onk0AAAAIBAJ&dq=assault-weapon&pg=7212%2C4372530 |newspaper=The Pittsburgh Press |agency=Associated Press |page=A13 |access-date=September 30, 2013 |quote=A campaign for curbs on assault weapons began in January 1989 after a deranged gunman with an AK-47 semiautomatic rifle opened fire on a Stockton, Calif., schoolyard at recess time, leaving five children dead and 30 wounded. }}{{cite news |last=Pazniokas |first=Mark |date=December 20, 1993 |title=One Gun's Journey Into A Crime |url=https://www.courant.com/1993/12/20/one-guns-journey-into-a-crime/ |newspaper=The Courant |location=Hartford, Connecticut |access-date=September 30, 2013 |quote=The campaign to ban assault weapons began Jan. 17, 1989, after Patrick Purdy shot 34 children and a teacher in a Stockton, Calif., schoolyard, using a semiautomatic replica of an AK-47 assault rifle. }}More Stockton schoolyard shooting sources:

• {{cite news |last=Adams |first=Jane Meredith |date=May 29, 1995 |title=Sparked By School Massacre, Gun Debate Still Rages |url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/1995/05/29/sparked-by-school-massacre-gun-debate-still-rages/ |newspaper=Chicago Tribune |access-date=March 17, 2014 |quote=Every murder is horrific, but the massacre of five children as they ran screaming that sunny January morning, and the wounding of 30 others, including a teacher, packed such emotional power it ignited the nascent anti-assault weapons movement. }}
• {{cite news |last1=Roth |first1=Jeffrey A. |last2=Koper |first2=Christopher S. |year=1997 |title=Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994 |url=http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/aw_final.pdf |publisher=The Urban Institute |location=Washington, D.C. |access-date=September 30, 2013 |quote=Nonetheless, the involvement of assault weapons in several mass murder incidents such as those discussed above [including the Stockton schoolyard shooting] provided an important impetus to the movement to ban assault weapons. |archive-date=November 26, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131126203846/http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/aw_final.pdf |url-status=dead }}{{rp|12}}
• {{cite news |last=Cowan |first=Lee |date=December 16, 2012 |title=1989 Calif. school shooting led to assault weapons ban |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/1989-calif-school-shooting-led-to-assault-weapons-ban/ |work=CBS News |access-date=March 17, 2014 }}
• {{cite news |last=Johnson |first=Kevin |date=April 2, 2013 |title=Stockton school massacre: A tragically familiar pattern |url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/01/stockton-massacre-tragically-familiar-pattern-repeats/2043297/ |newspaper=USA Today |access-date=March 17, 2014 |quote=Like Newtown, the Stockton shooting helped prompt a heated national debate about gun control, culminating in a landmark, 10-year federal ban on assault weapons, which expired in 2004. }} The Luby's shooting in October 1991, which left 23 people dead and 27 wounded, was another factor."Assault Weapons Ban". Encyclopedia of Gun Control and Gun Rights. Glenn H. Utter and Robert J. Spitzer. 2nd ed. Amenia, NY: Grey House Publishing, 2011. 24–25. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. August 20, 2016. Quote: "Two events spurred the introduction of an assault weapon ban in Congress: the January 1989 schoolyard shooting in Stockton, California, that left five children dead and 29 others wounded; and the Killeen, Texas, cafeteria shooting in which 22 people were killed and 23 others wounded before the shooter took his own life." The July 1993 101 California Street shooting that killed eight people and wounded six, also contributed to the passage of the ban. Two of the three firearms he used were TEC-9 semi-automatic handguns with Hell-Fire triggers.{{cite news |last=Bingham |first=Amy |date=July 27, 2012 |title=Shootings That Shaped Gun Control Laws: 101 California Street Shooting |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/shootings-shaped-gun-control/story?id=16863844#4 |publisher=ABC News Internet Ventures |url-status=deviated |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120729233751/http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/shootings-shaped-gun-control/story?id=16863844#4 |archive-date= Jul 29, 2012 }} The ban tried to address public concerns about mass shootings by restricting firearms that met the criteria for what it defined as a "semiautomatic assault weapon," as well as magazines that met the criteria for what it defined as a "large capacity ammunition feeding device".{{cite report |last=Roth |first=Jeffrey A. |author2=Christopher S. Koper |title="Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban" |url=https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/173405.pdf |work=National Institute of Justice: Research in Brief |id=NCJ 173405 |date=March 1999 |hdl=2027/mdp.39015055835501 |hdl-access=free |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201211231447/https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/173405.pdf |archive-date= Dec 11, 2020 }}{{rp|1–2}}

In November 1993, the proposed legislation passed the U.S. Senate. The bill's author, Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and other advocates said that it was a weakened version of the original proposal.{{cite news |title=Feinstein Faces Fight for Diluted Gun Bill : Crime: Her amendment to stop the sale and manufacture of assault weapons has been watered down. But it still may not squeak through the Senate. |first=Glenn F. |last=Bunting |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-11-09-mn-54844-story.html |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |date=November 9, 1993 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181110151344/http://articles.latimes.com/1993-11-09/news/mn-54844_1_assault-weapon |archive-date= Nov 10, 2018 }} In May 1994, former presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan, wrote to the U.S. House of Representatives in support of banning "semi-automatic assault guns". They cited a 1993 CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll that found 77 percent of Americans supported a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of such weapons.{{cite news |title=Ford, Carter, Reagan Push for Gun Ban |first=William J. |last=Eaton |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-05-05-mn-54185-story.html |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |date=May 5, 1994 |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20190323002449/https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-05-05-mn-54185-story.html |archive-date=March 23, 2019 |url-status=live}}

US Representative Jack Brooks (D-TX), then chair of the House Judiciary Committee, tried unsuccessfully to remove the assault weapons ban section from the crime bill.{{cite news |title=Assault Weapons Ban Allowed To Stay in Anti-crime Measure |first=Katharine Q. |last=Seelye |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1994/07/28/us/assault-weapons-ban-allowed-to-stay-in-anti-crime-measure.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=July 28, 1994 |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20131003014215/https://www.nytimes.com/1994/07/28/us/assault-weapons-ban-allowed-to-stay-in-anti-crime-measure.html |archive-date=October 3, 2013 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}} The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) opposed the ban. In November 1993, NRA spokesman Bill McIntyre said that assault weapons "are used in only 1 per cent of all crimes", without acknowledging that crimes involving assault weapons are known to be far deadlier on a per-incident basis.{{cite news |title=Senate Acts To Ban Assault Weapons: Brady Bill Still Awaiting Action |url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/1993/11/18/senate-acts-to-ban-assault-weapons/ |newspaper=Chicago Tribune |date=November 18, 1993 |access-date=March 17, 2014 |archive-date=March 18, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140318001455/http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993-11-18/news/9311180157_1_brady-bill-ban-assault-weapons-violent-crime |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last=Mascia |first=Jennifer |date=2023-07-18 |title=Are Handguns or Rifles Used More Often in Mass Shootings? |url=https://www.thetrace.org/2023/07/mass-shooting-type-of-gun-used-data/ |access-date=2025-07-05 |website=The Trace |language=en-us}} The low usage statistic was supported in a 1999 Department of Justice brief.

The legislation passed in September 1994 with the assault weapon ban section expiring in 2004 due to its sunset provision.

The Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Act was enacted as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.Vivian S. Chu, [https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42957.pdf Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Legal Issues], Congressional Research Service (February 14, 2013), pp. 3–5. The prohibitions expired on September 13, 2004.

The Act prohibited the manufacture, transfer, or possession of "semiautomatic assault weapons", as defined by the Act. "Weapons banned were identified either by specific make or model (including copies or duplicates thereof, in any caliber), or by specific characteristics that slightly varied according to whether the weapon was a pistol, rifle, or shotgun" (see below). The Act also prohibited the manufacture of "large capacity ammunition feeding devices" (LCAFDs) except for sale to government, law enforcement or military, though magazines made before the effective date ("pre-ban" magazines) were legal to possess and transfer. An LCAFD was defined as "any magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device manufactured after the date [of the act] that has the capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition."

The Act included several exemptions and exclusions from its prohibitions:

• The Act included a "grandfather clause" to allow for the possession and transfer of weapons and ammunition that "were otherwise lawfully possessed on the date of enactment".
• The Act exempted some 650 firearm types or models (including their copies and duplicates) which would be considered manufactured in October 1993. The list included the Ruger Mini-14 Auto Loading Rifle without side folding stock, Ruger Mini Thirty Rifle, Iver Johnson M-1 Carbine, Marlin Model 9 Camp Carbine, Marlin Model 45 Carbine, and others. The complete list is in section 110106, Appendix A to section 922 of Title 18. This list was non-exhaustive.
• The Act "also exempted any firearm that (1) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action; (2) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or (3) is an antique firearm".
• The Act "also did not apply to any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than ten rounds of ammunition or semiautomatic shotguns that cannot hold more than five rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine." Tubular magazine fed rimfire guns were exempted regardless of tubular magazine capacity.
• The Act provided an exemption for the use of "semiautomatic assault weapons and LCAFDs to be manufactured for, transferred to, and possessed by law enforcement and for authorized testing or experimentation purposes" as well as transfers for federal-security purposes under the Atomic Energy Act and "possession by retired law enforcement officers who are not otherwise a prohibited possessor under law".

In 1989, the George H. W. Bush administration banned the importation of foreign-made, semiautomatic rifles deemed not to have "a legitimate sporting use". It did not affect similar but domestically manufactured rifles.{{cite news |title=Import Ban on Assault Rifles Becomes Permanent |first=Susan F. |last=Rasky |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1989/07/08/us/import-ban-on-assault-rifles-becomes-permanent.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=July 8, 1989 }} (The Gun Control Act of 1968 gives discretion to the Attorney General of the United States to choose whether to "authorize a firearm or ammunition to be imported or brought into the United States", under what is known as "the sporting purposes test".) Following the enactment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the ATF determined that "certain semiautomatic assault rifles could no longer be imported even though they were permitted to be imported under the 1989 'sporting purposes test' because they had been modified to remove all of their military features other than the ability to accept a detachable magazine" and so in April 1998, it "prohibited the importation of 56 such rifles, determining that they did not meet the 'sporting purposes test{{'"}}.

Under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, the definition of "semi-automatic assault weapon" ("SAW") (commonly shortened to "assault weapon") included specific semi-automatic firearm models by name and other semi-automatic firearms that possessed two or more from a set certain features:[http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-103hr3355enr/pdf/BILLS-103hr3355enr.pdf "Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act"], H.R.3355, 103rd Congress (1993–1994), Government Printing Office. Retrieved January 26, 2013.

Image:Zastava M70AB2 with folded stock Hunter la5.JPG rifle]]

Image:kg99.jpg Mini with 32-round magazine; a semi-automatic pistol formerly classified as an assault weapon under federal law]]

• Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and has two or more of the following:
• Folding or telescoping stock
• Pistol grip
• Bayonet mount
• Flash hider or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
• Grenade launcher
• Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
• Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
• Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, hand grip, or suppressor
• Barrel shroud safety feature that prevents burns to the operator
• A manufactured weight of 50 ounces (1.42kg) or more when the pistol is unloaded
• A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm
• Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
• Folding or telescoping stock
• Pistol grip
• A fixed magazine capacity over 5 rounds
• Detachable magazine

The law also categorically banned the following makes and models of semi-automatic firearms and any copies or duplicates of them, in any caliber:

class="wikitable"
Name of firearm	Pre-ban federal legal status
Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (AKs) (all models)	Imports banned in 1989*
Action Arms Israeli Military Industries Uzi and Galil	Imports banned in 1989*
Beretta AR-70 (SC-70)	Imports banned in 1989*
Colt AR-15	Legal
Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN-LAR, FNC	Imports banned in 1989*
SWD (MAC type) M-10, M-11, M11/9, M12	Legal
Steyr AUG	Imports banned in 1989*
INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22	Legal
Revolving cylinder shotguns such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12	Legal

Gun control advocates and gun rights advocates have referred to at least some of the features outlined in the federal Assault Weapon Ban of 1994 as cosmetic. The NRA Institute for Legislative Action and the Violence Policy Center both used the term in publications that were released by them in September 2004, when the ban expired.{{cite web |author= |date=September 13, 2004 |title=Finally, the End of a Sad Era—Clinton Gun Ban Stricken from Books! |url=http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2004/finally,-the-end-of-a-sad-era-clinton.aspx |publisher=National Rifle Association, Institute for Legislative Action |location=Fairfax, Virginia |quote=Law-abiding citizens, however, will once again be free to purchase semi-automatic firearms, regardless of their cosmetic features, for target shooting, shooting competitions, hunting, collecting, and most importantly, self-defense. |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20130921061502/http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2004/finally,-the-end-of-a-sad-era-clinton.aspx |archive-date=September 21, 2013 |url-status=live}}{{cite press release |author= |date=September 13, 2004 |title=Violence Policy Center Issues Statement on Expiration of Federal Assault Weapons Ban |url=http://www.vpc.org/press/0409aw.htm |publisher=Violence Policy Center |location=Washington, D.C. |quote=Soon after its passage in 1994, the gun industry made a mockery of the federal assault weapons ban, manufacturing 'post-ban' assault weapons with only slight, cosmetic differences from their banned counterparts. |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131010231937/http://www.vpc.org/press/0409aw.htm |archive-date=October 10, 2013 }} In May 2012, the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence said that "the inclusion in the list of features that were purely cosmetic in nature created a loophole that allowed manufacturers to successfully circumvent the law by making minor modifications to the weapons they already produced."{{cite web |author= |date=May 21, 2012 |title=Assault Weapons Policy Summary |url=http://smartgunlaws.org/assault-weapons-policy-summary/ |publisher=Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence |location=San Francisco, California |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20120723073505/http://smartgunlaws.org/assault-weapons-policy-summary |archive-date=July 23, 2012 |url-status=usurped}} The term was repeated in several stories after the 2012 Aurora, Colorado shooting and the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.{{cite web |url=http://www.salon.com/2013/02/06/dont_mourn_the_assault_weapons_bans_impending_demise/ |title=Don't mourn the assault weapons ban's impending demise| work=Salon |first=Alex |last=Seitz-Wald |date=February 6, 2013 |quote=[The National Rifle Association] says the ban created an artificial distinction between 'assault weapons' and other semi-automatic weapons, based almost entirely on cosmetic features. This is largely true.}}More cosmetic sources:

• {{cite news |url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/21/just-say-no-to-dumb-gun-laws.html |title=Just Say No to Dumb Gun Laws |newspaper=The Daily Beast |first=Megan |last=McArdle |date=November 12, 2012 |quote=... 'assault weapon' is a largely cosmetic rather than functional description.}}
• {{cite web |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323723104578185271857424036 |title=Guns, Mental Illness and Newtown |newspaper=Wall Street Journal |first=David |last=Kopel |date=December 17, 2012 |quote=None of the guns that the Newtown murderer used was an assault weapon under Connecticut law. This illustrates the uselessness of bans on so-called assault weapons, since those bans concentrate on guns' cosmetics, such as whether the gun has a bayonet lug, rather than their function.}}
• {{cite news |url=https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/139509-the-problem-with-assault-weapons/ |title=The problem with 'assault weapons' |newspaper=The Hill |first=Jordy |last=Yager |date=January 16, 2013 |quote=Gun companies quickly realized they could stay within the law and continue to make rifles with high-capacity magazine clips if they steered away from the cosmetic features mentioned in the law.}}
• {{cite web |url=http://reason.com/archives/2013/01/30/whats-an-assault-weapon |title=What's an Assault Weapon?| publisher=Reason |first=Jacob |last=Sullum |date=January 30, 2013 |quote=The distinguishing characteristics of 'assault weapons' are mainly cosmetic and have little or no functional significance in the context of mass shootings or ordinary gun crimes.}}

Senator Marco Rubio cited that issue during a town hall forum, responding to questions from survivors of the 2018 Stoneman-Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida.{{Cite news|url=https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/22/politics/cnn-town-hall-full-video-transcript/index.html|title=Read Stoneman students' questions at the CNN town hall|work=CNN|access-date=February 22, 2018}}

Several constitutional challenges were filed against provisions of the ban, but all were rejected by the courts. There were multiple attempts to renew the ban, but none succeeded.

A February 2013 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report to Congress said that the "Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 was unsuccessfully challenged as violating several constitutional provisions" but that challenges to three constitutional provisions were easily dismissed.{{cite web |last=Chu |first=Vivian S. |date=February 14, 2013 |title=Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Legal Issues |publisher=Congressional Research Service |url=http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42957.pdf |access-date=April 24, 2014}}{{rp|7}} The ban did not make up an impermissible bill of attainder.{{cite court|litigants=Navegar Inc. v. United States|vol=103 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=994 |pinpoint= |court=D.C. Cir.|date=1999|url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-caDC-98-05491/pdf/USCOURTS-caDC-98-05491-0.pdf}}{{rp|31}} It was not unconstitutionally vague.{{cite court|litigants= United States v. Starr |vol=945 |reporter=F. Supp. |opinion=257 |pinpoint= |court= M.D. Ga. |date=1996 |url= http://www.leagle.com/decision/19961202945FSupp257_11149 |quote=Accordingly, the statute is not unconstitutionally vague and Defendant Starr's motion is hereby DENIED.}} Also, it was ruled to be compatible with the Ninth Amendment by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.{{cite court|litigants= San Diego Gun Rights Comm. v. Reno |vol=98 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=1121 |pinpoint= |court= 9th Cir. |date=1996 |url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1413776.html |quote=To grant plaintiffs standing to challenge the constitutionality of the Crime Control Act in the circumstances of this case would eviscerate the core standing requirements of Article III and throw all prudential caution to the wind.}}

Challenges to two other provisions took more time to decide.{{rp|7}}

In evaluating challenges to the ban under the Commerce Clause, the court first evaluated Congress's authority to regulate under the clause and then analyzed the ban's prohibitions on manufacture, transfer, and possession. The court held that "it is not even arguable that the manufacture and transfer of 'semiautomatic assault weapons' for a national market cannot be regulated as activity substantially affecting interstate commerce."{{rp|8–9}}{{rp|12}} It also held that the "purpose of the ban on possession has an 'evident commercial nexus'."{{rp|9}}{{rp|14}}

The law was also challenged under the Equal Protection Clause. It was argued that it banned some semi-automatic weapons that were functional equivalents of exempted semi-automatic weapons and that to do so, based upon a mix of other characteristics, served no legitimate governmental interest. The reviewing court held that it was "entirely rational for Congress... to choose to ban those weapons commonly used for criminal purposes and to exempt those weapons commonly used for recreational purposes."{{rp|10}}{{cite court|litigants= Olympic Arms v. Buckles |vol=301 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=384 |pinpoint= |court= 6th Cir. |date=2002 |url= https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1156271.html |quote=Accordingly, it is entirely rational for Congress, in an effort to protect public safety, to choose to ban those weapons commonly used for criminal purposes and to exempt those weapons commonly used for recreational purposes.}} It also found that each characteristic served to make the weapon "potentially more dangerous" and were not "commonly used on weapons designed solely for hunting."{{rp|10–11}}{{cite court|litigants= Olympic Arms v. Buckles |vol=301 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=384 |pinpoint= |court= 6th Cir. |date=2002|url= https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1156271.html |quote=Each of the individual enumerated features makes a weapon potentially more dangerous. Additionally, the features are not commonly used on weapons designed solely for hunting.}}

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban was never directly challenged under the Second Amendment. Since its 2004 expiration, there has been debate on how the ban would fare in light of cases decided in following years, especially District of Columbia v. Heller (2008).{{cite news |last=Kopan |first=Tal |date=August 8, 2012 |title=If Congress, W.H. wanted to ban assault weapons, could they? |url=https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/08/if-congress-wh-wanted-to-ban-assault-weapons-could-they-131451 |publisher=POLITICO |access-date=April 24, 2014 }}

Following the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, Congress mandated a study on the impact of the law. A 6.7% reduction in homicide rate was found but the result was not statistically significant. The authors suggested this was due to the brief time period in which the law was in effect.{{cite journal |last1=Lee |first1=LK |last2=Fleegler |first2=EW |last3=Farrell |first3=C |last4=Avakame |first4=E |last5=Srinivasan |first5=S |last6=Hemenway |first6=D |last7=Monuteaux |first7=MC |date=1 January 2017 |title=Firearm Laws and Firearm Homicides: A Systematic Review |journal=JAMA Internal Medicine |volume=177 |issue=1 |pages=106–119 |doi=10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7051 |pmid=27842178 |quote=Limited data from 4 studies on the effects of the federal assault weapons ban (in effect from 1994 to 2004) do not provide evidence that the ban was associated with a significant decrease in firearm homicides. |s2cid=205119294}}

A 2017 review on the effects of firearm laws on homicides found that limited data from 4 studies published regarding the Federal Assault Weapons Ban did not provide significant evidence that the ban was associated with a decrease on overall firearm homicides.

A 2020 RAND Corporation review of five studies regarding the effects of state assault weapon bans on violent crime concluded that there is inconclusive evidence of an effect on total homicides and firearm homicides.{{cite web |date=22 April 2020 |title=Effects of Assault Weapon and High-Capacity Magazine Bans on Violent Crime |url=https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/ban-assault-weapons/violent-crime.html |publisher=RAND Corporation}}

A 2014 study found no impacts on homicide rates with an assault weapon ban.{{Cite journal |last1=Gius |first1=Mark |year=2014 |title=An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates |journal=Applied Economics Letters |volume=21 |issue=4 |pages=265–267 |doi=10.1080/13504851.2013.854294 |s2cid=154746184}} A 2014 book published by Oxford University Press noted that "There is no compelling evidence that [the ban] saved lives," but added that "a more stringent or longer-lasting ban might well have been more effective."{{Cite web |last=Beckett |first=Lois |date=2014-09-24 |title=Fact-Checking Feinstein on the Assault Weapons Ban |url=https://www.propublica.org/article/fact-checking-feinstein-on-the-assault-weapons-ban |access-date=2019-07-13 |website=ProPublica |language=en}}{{Cite web |author1=Philip J. Cook |author2=Kristin A. Goss |author2-link=Kristin Goss |year=2014 |title=The Gun Debate: What Everyone Needs to Know. |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274747450 |publisher=Oxford University Press}}

{{multiple image

| total_width = 450

| image1 = 1982- Deaths from mass shootings in the U.S - scatterplot and line chart.svg

| caption1 = Total deaths in US mass shootings—defined as four or more people shot and killed in one incident, excluding the perpetrator, at a public place, excluding gang-related killings{{cite web |last1=Follman |first1=Mark |last2=Aronsen |first2=Gavin |last3=Pan |first3=Deanna |title=US Mass Shootings, 1982–2023: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation |url=https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/ |publisher=Mother Jones |access-date=March 31, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230331034144/https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/ |archive-date=March 31, 2023 |url-status=live }}{{cite web |last1=Follman |first1=Mark |last2=Aronsen |first2=Gavin |last3=Pan |first3=Deanna |title=A Guide to Mass Shootings in America |url=https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map/ |publisher=MotherJones.com |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230310230204/https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map/ |archive-date=March 10, 2023 |date=2012 |quote=Updated March 27, 2023 |url-status=live }} Describes inclusion criteria.

| image2 = 1990- AR-15 production as percentage of guns produced in US.svg

| caption2 = After the 2004 expiration of the Assault Weapons Ban, the firearms industry embraced the AR-15's political and cultural significance for marketing. Almost every major gunmaker produces its own version, with ~16 million Americans owning at least one.{{cite news |last1=Frankel |first1=Todd C. |last2=Boburg |first2=Shawn |last3=Dawsey |first3=Josh |last4=Parker |first4=Ashley |last5=Horton |first5=Alex |title=The gun that divides a nation |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/interactive/2023/ar-15-america-gun-culture-politics/ |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=27 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230327153545/https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/interactive/2023/ar-15-america-gun-culture-politics/ |archive-date=27 March 2023 |url-status=live }} Frankel et al. credit: "Source: National Shooting Sports Foundation and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives." Frankel et al. quote: "The shift began after the 2004 expiration of a federal assault weapons ban that had blocked the sales of many semiautomatic rifles. A handful of manufacturers saw a chance to ride a post-9/11 surge in military glorification while also stoking a desire among new gun owners to personalize their weapons with tactical accessories."

}}

A 2019 DiMaggio et al. study looked at mass shooting data for 1981 to 2017 and found that mass-shooting fatalities were 70% less likely to occur during the 1994 to 2004 federal ban period, and that the ban was associated with a 0.1% reduction in total firearm homicide fatalities due to the reduction in mass-shootings' contribution to total homicides.{{cite journal |last1=DiMaggio |first1=C |last2=Avraham |first2=J |last3=Berry |first3=C |last4=Bukur |first4=M |last5=Feldman |first5=J |last6=Klein |first6=M |last7=Shah |first7=N |last8=Tandon |first8=M |last9=Frangos |first9=S |title=Changes in US mass shooting deaths associated with the 1994–2004 federal assault weapons ban: Analysis of open-source data. |journal=The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery |date=January 2019 |volume=86 |issue=1 |pages=11–19 |doi=10.1097/TA.0000000000002060 |pmid=30188421|s2cid=52166454 |quote=In a linear regression model controlling for yearly trend, the federal ban period was associated with a statistically significant 9 fewer mass shooting related deaths per 10,000 firearm homicides (p = 0.03). Mass-shooting fatalities were 70% less likely to occur during the federal ban period (relative rate, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.39). }}

A 2020 RAND Corporation review of five studies regarding the effects of state assault weapon bans concluded that evidence for an effect on mass shootings is inconclusive while limited evidence was found that high-capacity magazine bans may decrease mass shootings.{{cite web |date=22 April 2020 |title=Effects of Assault Weapon and High-Capacity Magazine Bans on Mass Shootings |url=https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/ban-assault-weapons/mass-shootings.html |publisher=RAND Corporation}}

A 2015 study by Mark Gius, professor of economics at Quinnipiac University, studied the law's impact on public mass shootings.{{cite journal |last=Gius |first=Mark |year=2015 |title=The impact of state and federal assault weapons bans on public mass shootings |journal=Applied Economics Letters |volume=22 |issue=4 |pages=281–284 |doi=10.1080/13504851.2014.939367 |s2cid=154581892}} Gius defined this subset of mass shootings as those occurring in a relatively public place, targeted random victims, were not otherwise related to a crime (a robbery or act of terrorism), and that involved four or more victim fatalities. Gius found that fatalities and injuries due to mass shootings were statistically lower during the period the federal ban was active. Gius concluded that although the study showed assault weapons bans are effective in reducing mass shooting fatalities, their effects on the overall murder rate are probably minimal at best. This is due to the fact that assault weapons are used much more frequently in mass shootings than they are in murders in general. Gius calculated that in 2012 there were 72 fatalities due to mass public shootings of which at least 30 were committed using a rifle. In the same year, there were 12765 murders, of which only 322 were committed using a rifle.

A 2015 study found a small decrease in the rate of mass shootings followed by increases beginning after the ban was lifted.{{cite journal|last1=Lemieux|first1=Frederic|last2=Bricknell|first2=Samantha|last3=Prenzler|first3=Tim|title=Mass shootings in Australia and the United States, 1981–2013|journal=Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice|volume=1|issue=3|year=2015|pages=131–142|issn=2056-3841|doi=10.1108/JCRPP-05-2015-0013|url=http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/jcrpp.htm}}

The Columbine High School massacre, in which two shooters murdered 13 people, occurred in 1999 while the ban was in place. One of the shooters used a semi-automatic pistol and high-capacity magazines that were prospectively banned by the law.{{cite news |last1=Olinger |first1=David |date=19 April 2000 |title=Massacre energizes gun debate - but not lawmakers |newspaper=Denver Post |url=https://extras.denverpost.com/news/col0419g.htm}}{{Cite web |title=Banned Gun Used in School Shooting |url=https://apnews.com/article/b5040489ff6eea011e94e3a560ae6412 |access-date=2022-05-27 |website=AP NEWS |language=en}}{{Cite magazine |last=Fortgang |first=Erika |date=1999-06-10 |title=How They Got The Guns |url=https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/how-they-got-the-guns-175676/ |magazine=Rolling Stone |language=en-US |access-date=2022-05-27}}

According to research done by the Violence Policy Center, in 2016 one in four law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty were killed by an assault weapon.{{Cite web |title=Assault Weapons and Large Capacity Magazines |url=https://efsgv.org/learn/policies/assault-weapons-and-large-capacity-magazines/ |access-date=2021-12-01 |website=The Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence |language=en-US}} A 2018 study examined the types of crime guns recovered by law enforcement in ten different cities and found that assault weapons and semiautomatic guns outfitted with large capacity magazines generally accounted for between 22 and 36% of crime guns recovered by police.

A 2013 study showed that the expiration of the FAWB in 2004 "led to immediate violence increases within areas of Mexico located close to American states where sales of assault weapons became legal. The estimated effects are sizable... the additional homicides stemming from the FAWB expiration represent 21% of all homicides in these municipalities during 2005 and 2006."{{cite journal|last1= Dube|first1= Arindrajit|last2= Dube|first2= Oeindrila|last3= García-Ponce|first3= Omar|title=Cross-Border Spillover: U.S. Gun Laws and Violence in Mexico|journal=American Political Science Review|date=July 10, 2013|volume=107|issue=3|pages=397–417|doi=10.1017/S0003055413000178|hdl=10419/69479|s2cid= 9252246|url= https://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:iza:izadps:dp7098|hdl-access=free}}

In 2013, Christopher S. Koper, a criminology scholar, reviewed the literature on the ban's effects and concluded that its effects on crimes committed with assault weapons were mixed due to its various loopholes. He stated that the ban did not seem to affect gun crime rates, and suggested that it might have been able to reduce shootings if it had been renewed in 2004.{{cite book|url=https://cebcp.org/wp-content/publications/Koper2013AWchapter.pdf|title=Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis|author=Koper, Christopher S.|publisher=Johns Hopkins University Press|year=2013}}

In 2004, a research report commissioned by the National Institute of Justice found that if the ban was renewed, the effects on gun violence would likely be small and perhaps too small for reliable measurement, because rifles in general, including rifles referred to as "assault rifles" or "assault weapons," are rarely used in gun crimes. That study, by the Jerry Lee Center of Criminology, University of Pennsylvania, found no significant evidence that either the assault weapons ban or the ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds had reduced gun murders. The report found that the share of gun crimes involving assault weapons had declined by 17 to 72 percent in the studied localities. The authors reported that "there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence, based on indicators like the percentage of gun crimes resulting in death or the share of gunfire incidents resulting in injury." The report also concluded that it was "premature to make definitive assessments of the ban's impact on gun crime," since millions of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines manufactured prior to the ban had been exempted and would thus be in circulation for years following the ban's implementation.{{cite web |last1=Koper |first1=Christopher S. |last2=Woods |first2=Daniel J. |last3=Roth |first3=Jeffrey A. |date=June 2004 |title=An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994–2003 – Report to the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice |location=Philadelphia |publisher=Jerry Lee Center for Criminology, University of Pennsylvania |url=http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf }}

In 2003, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services, an independent, non-federal task force, examined an assortment of firearms laws, including the AWB, and found "insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence."{{cite journal |year=2003 |title=First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Early Childhood Home Visitation and Firearms Laws. Findings from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. |journal=MMWR |volume=52 |issue=RR-14 |pages=11–20 |issn=1057-5987 |url=https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr5214.pdf }} A review of firearms research from 2001 by the National Research Council "did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes." The committee noted that guns were relatively rarely used criminally before the ban and that its maximum potential effect on gun violence outcomes would likely be very small.{{cite book |editor1-first=Charles F |editor1-last=Wellford |editor2-first=John V |editor2-last=Pepper |editor3-first=Carol V |editor3-last=Petrie |title=Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review |url=http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=97 |year=2005 |edition=Electronic |orig-date=Print ed. 2005 |publisher=National Academies Press |location=Washington, D.C. |isbn=978-0-309-54640-9 |page=97|doi=10.17226/10881 }}

About a 2001 study the National Research Council in 2005, stated "evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes."{{Cite book|url=https://www.nap.edu/read/10881/chapter/6|title=Read "Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review" at NAP.edu|language=en|doi=10.17226/10881|year=2004|isbn=978-0-309-09124-4}}

A book published by John Lott in 1998 found no impact of these bans on violent crime rates.{{cite book |last=Lott |first=John R. |title=More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZPAHlwEACAAJ |access-date=December 31, 2012 |edition=3rd |date=May 24, 2010 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-49367-1}} Koper, Woods, and Roth studies focus on gun murders, while Lott's look at murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assaults. Unlike their work, Lott's research accounted for state assault weapon bans and twelve other different types of gun control laws.

A 2002 study by Koper and Roth found that around the time when the ban became law, assault weapon prices increased significantly, but the increase was reversed in the several months afterward by a surge in assault weapons production that occurred just before the ban took effect.{{cite journal|last1=Koper|first1=Christopher S.|last2=Roth|first2=Jeffrey A.|title=The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban on Gun Markets: An Assessment of Short-Term Primary and Secondary Market Effects

|journal=Journal of Quantitative Criminology|date=2002|volume=18|issue=3|pages=239–266|doi=10.1023/A:1016055919939|s2cid=140321420}} John Lott found that the bans may have reduced the number of gun shows by over 20 percent.{{cite book |last=Lott |first=John R. |title=The Bias Against Guns |date=February 1, 2003 |publisher=Regnery Publishing |location=Washington, D.C. |isbn=978-0895261144}} Koper also discovered that street prices of assault weapons and other guns can be three to six times higher than legal retail prices in jurisdictions with strict gun controls and lower level of gun ownership.

Attorney General Eric Holder reiterated the Obama administration's desire to reinstate the ban.{{cite news |title=Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban |first=Jason |last=Ryan |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1 |work=ABC News |id=6960824 |date=February 25, 2009 |access-date=December 31, 2012}} The mention came in response to a question during a joint press conference with DEA Acting Administrator Michele Leonhart, discussing efforts to crack down on Mexican drug cartels. Attorney General Holder said that "there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons."[http://www.c-span.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-A-15821 C-SPAN.org] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090228133334/http://www.c-span.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-A-15821 |date=February 28, 2009}}

Efforts to pass a new federal assault weapons ban were made in December 2012 after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, in Newtown, Connecticut.{{cite news |last=Barron |first=James |date=December 15, 2012 |title=Children Were All Shot Multiple Times With a Semiautomatic, Officials Say |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/nyregion/gunman-kills-20-children-at-school-in-connecticut-28-dead-in-all.html |newspaper=New York Times |access-date=April 12, 2014 }}{{cite news |last=Levy |first=Gabrielle |date=December 21, 2012 |title=Obama responds to gun violence petition |url=http://www.upi.com/blog/2012/12/21/Obama-responds-to-gun-violence-petition/1021356100902/ |publisher=United Press International |type=blog |access-date=May 26, 2014 }}{{cite news |title=Senator Unveils Bill to Limit Semiautomatic Arms |author=Steinhauer, Jennifer |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/us/politics/senator-unveils-bill-to-limit-semiautomatic-arms.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=January 24, 2013 |access-date=May 26, 2014}} On January 24, 2013, Senator Feinstein introduced {{USBill|113|S.|150}}, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 (AWB 2013).{{cite AV media |people=Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Rev. Gary Hall, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy |date=January 24, 2013 |title=Assault Weapons Ban Bill |medium=video |url=http://www.c-span.org/video/?310581-1/assault-weapons-ban-bill |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=National Cable Satellite Corporation |access-date=April 13, 2014 |display-authors=etal}} The bill was similar to the 1994 ban, but differed in that it would not expire after 10 years, and it used a one-feature test for a firearm to qualify as an assault weapon rather than the two-feature test of the defunct ban.{{cite news |last=Kucinich |first=Jackie |date=January 24, 2013 |title=Democrats reintroduce assault weapons ban |url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/01/24/assault-weapons-ban-feinstein-democrats/1861493/ |newspaper=USA Today |access-date=April 13, 2014 }} The GOP Congressional delegation from Texas and the NRA condemned Feinstein's bill.{{cite news |title=Feinstein offers new assault weapons ban |first=Dan |last=Freedman |url=http://www.chron.com/default/article/Feinstein-offers-new-assault-weapons-ban-4221873.php |newspaper=Houston Chronicle |date=January 24, 2013 |access-date=January 24, 2013}} On March 14, 2013, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a version of the bill along party lines.{{cite news |title=Party-Line Vote in Senate Panel for Ban on Assault Weapons |first=Jennifer |last=Steinhauer |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/15/us/politics/panel-approves-reinstatement-of-assault-weapons-ban.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=March 14, 2013 |access-date=March 14, 2013}} On April 17, 2013, AWB 2013 failed on a Senate vote of 40 to 60.{{cite news |title=Senate votes down Feinstein's assault weapons ban |last=Simon |first=Richard |url=http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-dianne-feinstein-assault-weapons-vote-20130417,0,5349684.story |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |date=April 17, 2013 }}

On March 23, 2021, President Joe Biden proposed a new ban on assault weapons after the 2021 Atlanta spa shootings and 2021 Boulder shooting both occurred in the previous week.{{Cite news|last1=Karni|first1=Annie|last2=Edmondson|first2=Catie|date=2021-03-23|title=Biden Seeks Assault Weapons Ban and Background Checks|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/23/us/politics/biden-gun-control.html|access-date=2021-03-25|issn=0362-4331}}

On July 29, 2022, the House of Representatives narrowly voted in favor of passing new sweeping firearms restrictions, 217 in favor to 213 against.{{cite web | url=https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/29/politics/house-vote-assault-weapons-ban/index.html | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220731172033/https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/29/politics/house-vote-assault-weapons-ban/index.html | archive-date=July 31, 2022 | title=House passes assault-style weapons ban | date=July 29, 2022 }} The bill went to the Senate where it lingered until expiring at the end of the term.

{{Wikiquote}}

{{Portal|United States|Law}}

• Assault weapon
• Gun politics in the United States
• National Firearms Agreement (Australia)

{{Clear}}

{{Reflist}}

Category:103rd United States Congress

Category:Legal history of the United States

Category:United States federal firearms legislation