Review: Assault Weapon Bans: Can They Survive Rational Basis Scrutiny?

Gun Watch ^ | 14 April, 2016 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Assault Weapon Bans: Can They Survive Rational Basis Scrutiny?

By Clayton Cramer

April 13, 2016


Clayton Cramer has hit another home run with this paper on the irrationality of "assault weapon" bans.

Anyone who has studied the literature knows that "Assault Weapons Bans" have no rational basis.  Their basis is an emotional appeal that requires a profound ignorance of the facts of crime statistics and weapons technology. They also require a media that benefits from promoting mass murder for ratings and political gain.

Clayton Cramer does excellent work in the paper.  He puts the facts and statistics in a logical order that is irrefutable.  The paper is an worthwhile resource to show that there is no rational basis for the various "assault weapon" bans.

Cramer shows that they have been imposed for political and emotional reasons, not to reduce crime or murder. His logic is impeccable and this paper is a fine read for anyone who wishes to understand the irrational basis for these laws.  From the paper:

While most AW bans also have functional definitions of the banned weapons, named list definitions based on manufacturer’s name and model number are a common part of these laws. These are similar to “bills of attainder,” in which legislative acts punish persons by name for alleged crimes instead of specifying a crime and allowing due process by the courts to determine guilt. While Colt Industries is not a person, and Colt’s AR-15 is not a person, it is clear that a law banning sale of a named product made by Colt, with no similar ban on sales by another manufacturer would effectively deny Colt equal protection of the law. To make these distinctions in an arbitrary manner is contrary to existing case law.13 

Not only does the named list approach lead to equal protection problems, but it makes it very easy to subvert these laws. As an example of the defective nature of named lists, California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) banned the Intratec  TEC-9 by name. The manufacturer responded by making minor non-functional changes to the gun and giving it a new model number: DC914 (presumably “Designed for California”). The TEC-9 and TEC-DC9 are otherwise identical.”15 When the 1994 federal ban took effect listing the TEC-9: “Intratec... manufactured an AB-10 (‘after ban’) model that does not have a threaded barrel or a barrel shroud but is identical to the TEC-9 in other respects, including the ability to accept an ammunition magazine outside the pistol grip.” While the federal AW ban prohibited new manufacture of 32 round magazines, ones made before the new law work in the AB-10.16

Cramer only touches the political strategy that motivates the bans.  His remarks on the politics involved are clear and correct.  But an analysis of the motivations of the politicians involved, and the power structures that allow for the courts to uphold these clearly irrational laws, are beyond the scope of this academic paper.   

Download and read the entire paper.  You will be educated on the lack of logic used by those who want the public disarmed. 

They are reduced to emotional arguments because they dare not state their ultimate purpose.  Gradually, slowly, large numbers of otherwise uninformed people are becoming informed.

Once informed on the topic, they stay informed.  That is why the numbers of people opposed to more infringements on the Second Amendment has been growing for 50 years. 

Use the information in this paper to inform others.

Link to paper for download.   It is file of 24 pdf pages, about 571K.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

Clayton is right about "Assault Weapon Bans" not being rational. But he is wrong about the rational basis test. It is not rational, has no real basis, and is not really a test.

It is a way for the courts to justify bad law that they want to justify.

[V_TWIN]

rational being the key word...................lib / dems, well, Ain’t.

[from occupied ga]

Anyone who has studied the literature knows that "Assault Weapons Bans" have no rational basis.

This is not entirely true. If you make the assumption that the left wants to remove ALL firearms from the hands of anyone who isn't a government JBT (and I think that this is a very realistic assumption), then there is a rational basis for any gun ban - the basis being that this is just another salami slice off our rights.

[Farmer Dean]

Yes,it’s not gun control-it’s people control.

[Cboldt]

-- Clayton is right about "Assault Weapon Bans" not being rational. But he is wrong about the rational basis test. It is not rational, has no real basis, and is not really a test. --

Exactly right. The only way a regulation fails "rational basis" is when the court can't even conjur up a pretext/pretense. A false or failed reason is deemed to be rational.

[RC one]

I wouldn’t ever accuse the Democrats of being rational. perhaps spiteful, hateful, arrogant, vengeful, envious, petty, hedonistic, but not rational.

[Scrambler Bob]

M4L AW Ban

[Pollster1]

If I’m ever in a bank/store that is being robbed by criminals with rifles, the first thing I’m going to check is whether their weapons have a bayonet mount, flash suppressor, threaded barrel, or a grenade launcher mount. If they don’t have one of those, I’m ignoring the robbery, just like the couple in this video. The robbers didn’t even have a threaded barrel, let alone something even more dangerous like a bayonet mount, so the couple kept kissing.

https://youtu.be/y4Wf9pzeuFs [Love Is Blind: Couple Making Out at Bar Continue to Kiss During Armed Robbery]

[If You Want It Fixed - Fix It]

Men using womens restrooms. Rational thinking is too hard nowadays. Lets allow gays and tattooed folks to potentially poison the blood supply. Lets have both genders sitting over a log taking a dump during combat actions like ww1

[zeugma]

BFL

[deoetdoctrinae]

Click the Pic

Support Free Republic