Posted 5/15/23

“LEGAL” GUN BUYERS CAN BE A PROBLEM

They figure in many killings, as both doers and enablers

     For Police Issues by Julius (Jay) Wachtel. Does this image stir your memory? It depicts the Uvalde, Texas retailer where eighteen-year old Salvador Ramos bought the AR-15 style rifle he used to murder nineteen students and two teachers at Robb elementary school last year.

     Oasis Outback (it’s still in business) was one of 52,799 licensed firearms dealers in the U.S. in 2020, and one of 10,635 in Texas. Only about one in four have a commercial storefront. Most licensees – estimates peg it at 74 percent – operate from their homes. Either way, the numbers are huge. And to partake of their goodies is ridiculously easy. Other than money, all one needs is to be of age – the Federal minimums for buying from a dealer are eighteen for a long gun and twenty-one for a handgun – and to be free from a felony conviction (18 USC 922[b] and [g]). A handful of states (not including Texas) have raised set the minimum for long-gun purchases at twenty-one. And to assure that criminal record checks are thorough and, ostensibly, to discourage impulsive purchases, several (again, excluding Texas) impose a few days’ wait before guns can be picked up.

     And that’s about it.

Click here for the complete collection of gun control essays

    Considering the quirks of human nature, America’s permissive approach to gun acquisition might seem an exercise in self-annihilation. Guns, though, have been an integral part of the sociocultural (and Constitutional) fabric since our nation’s founding. And thanks to a prolific firearms industry, our land is awash with lethal toys. Just how “awash”? According to ATF (full disclosure: your writer’s one-time employer), gun manufacturers produced 13,804,919 firearms for non-military use in 2021. Of those, 458,684 were exported, leaving 13,346,235 to be distributed domestically. Again – that’s in a single year. Over time, the numbers are truly astounding. During 1986-2021, including imports (and excluding exports) 281,196,579 guns entered the domestic marketplace.

     There is a small hitch. These quantities include guns (mostly, handguns) acquired by police. Large agencies that responded to a 2013 PERF survey reported buying an average of forty-four handguns per officer per year. Extended to all 18,000 state, county and Federal law enforcement agencies in the U.S.,  that’s well under one million. That leaves, um, twelve-million-plus new guns for resale to, well, you and me. Each year.

     Americans readily admit they’re well-armed. Thirty-two percent of adult respondents to a 2020 Gallup poll reported owning a gun, and 44 percent said they lived in a household with a gun. Of course, there are consequences. Simple common sense suggests that more guns = more instances of impulsive  misuse (see, for example, “Fearful Angry. Fuzzy-Headed. And Armed.”) According to a Rand report,  increased gun availability is a likely explanation for the continuing uptick in suicide. A seemingly robust study published by the American Public Health Association noted that increased gun ownership during 1981- 2010 was associated with an increase in gun homicide.

     Using CDC data we brought it together in a single graph:

During 2010-2020, as gun production ramped up and guns piled up, the per/100,000 rates for gun deaths, gun suicides and gun homicides steadily increased. Statistically speaking, the relationship between gun manufacture and the other variables is moderately strong, with r’s (correlation coefficient, range 0-1) of .55 with firearm deaths, .49 with gun suicides, and .57 with gun homicides.

     Of course, factors other than guns contribute to violence. One that we frequently turn to is economic conditions, measured by poverty (see, for example, “Worlds Apart”). Guns, though, are often the means. So how do evildoers get them? In this essay we’ll focus on what happens with guns, such as those acquired by Salvador Ramos, that are sold at retail. Several studies have confirmed that these ostensibly legal transactions can lead to poor endings:

• Our journal article, “Sources of Crimes Guns in Los Angeles, California”, reported that unlicensed “street dealers” and corrupt licensed dealers – particularly, those based at home – were sources of a substantial number of crime guns. Fourteen percent of a set of 1,599 firearms seized by L.A.-area police during 1988-1995 whose retail purchasers’ names were known were in fact recovered from their buyers (pg. 228).
   
• Twenty-seven percent of the inmates who responded to DOJ’s 1991 prisoner survey reported that they bought the gun they got caught with at a store. Ten percent said so on the 2016 survey (pg. 7).
   
• Violence Project’s database of 190 mass shootings between 1966 and 2021 reveals that eighty of 172 shooters (46.5%) legally acquired their guns, and that fifty-five (32%) purchased at least one from a licensed dealer.
   
• Twelve percent of the nearly one and one-half million crime guns traced by ATF during 2017-2021 were confiscated from their retail buyer (pg. 26.) This is unavoidably an underestimate, as possessor identities often go unreported to ATF. Even so, each year police are apparently seizing more than thirty-six thousand store-bought guns from their buyers.

     The frightful carnage enabled by store-bought guns didn't end with Salvador Ramos. Here are three more recent examples:

• Louisville, Kentucky, April 10, 2023. Livestreaming his foul deed, 25-year old Connor Sturgeon opened fire with an AR-15 style rifle on his Louisville bank co-workers. By the time police shot him dead he had killed five. He also wounded eight persons, including two of the responding officers. Sturgeon legally purchased the weapon from a local gun dealer six days earlier.
   
• Nashville, Tennessee, March 27, 2023. Audrey Hale, a 28-year old Nashville resident, possessed two assault-style rifles and a handgun during his attack at Covenant Christian School. Unleashing 152 rounds,  he murdered three employees and three nine-year old students. Hale bought these guns and four more at five different gun stores between 2020-2022.
   
• Chesapeake, Virginia, November 22, 2022. Andre Bing, a 31-year old Walmart night shift supervisor, purchased a 9mm. pistol at a gun store in the morning. Some hours later he fatally shot six co-workers, then committed suicide.

     Is there anything that might have prevented these massacres, or at least mitigated their effects?

     According to Giffords, ten states and D.C. ban assault weapons. But none of our three assault-rifle-packing killers – Ramos (weapons on left), Sturgeon and Hale – lived in any of those states. In any event, such “bans” are no solution. As our prior posts (for example, “Ban the Damned Things”) and Washington Post op-ed point out, assault weapons “bans”, including the long-expired Federal ban, fail to address the guns’ most lethal aspect: their fearsome ballistics. Instead, the focus is on extrinsic features such as magazine capacity and hand grips. Even in the most “restrictive” jurisdictions (i.e., California), .223 caliber semi-auto rifles remain legal. And as demonstrated in the deplorable example set by Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, the married couple who murdered fourteen in San Bernardino, Calif., frightfully deadly.

     Our four killers purchased their guns legally. Ergo, none had a criminal record. Salvador Ramos, at eighteen, was just barely old enough to buy a long gun under Federal law. Like most every other state, Texas never raised that bar. A bill to do so for assault weapons, which was inspired by Uvalde, has been introduced in the Texas legislature. It’s deemed to have no chance of being enacted into law.

     Was there anything else about these characters that, had it been acted on, might have prevented them from at least “legally” buying guns?

• Salvador Ramos’ criminal and mental health histories were both supposedly clean. But he was nonetheless “a troubled soul.” News articles and Wikipedia’s account paint a disturbing picture of his angry nature and violent propensities. Ramos was chronically rude to coworkers. And there were those bizarre social media posts, of which the most threatening came shortly before the massacre. Setting those aside – they were probably too late to act on – concerns about personal freedom make it doubtful that a “Red Flag law” could have been successfully applied. In any event, Texas doesn’t have one (ideological quarrels make it unlikely that will soon change.)
  
  
• Connor Sturgeon held a master’s in finance, was a well-regarded bank employee, and had no prior contacts with police. But family members said he struggled with mental problems and was receiving psychiatric treatment for anxiety and depression. Shortly before embarking on the massacre he texted a friend that he was suicidal. But as with Ramos, the warning came too late. Even if Sturgeon’s family knew of his gun purchase, Kentucky lacks a Red Flag law, so their ability to act would have been severely constrained.
  
  
• Audrey Hale was also deeply troubled. Like Sturgeon, Hale was being treated for an “emotional disorder.” Hale’s parents, with whom the transgender person lived, didn’t feel that Hale should have guns, and thought that Hale had sold the one they knew of. They were supposedly unaware of the store-bought guns that Hale had stashed around the house. Nor of the “calculated plan”, including maps, that Hale assembled in preparation for the massacre. Tennessee also lacks a Red Flag law, so Hale’s parents had few options. As with Sturgeon and Ramos, Hale texted his intentions to an acquaintance just before embarking on the lethal rampage.
  
  
• Andre Bing’s coworkers described him as “an aggressive, if not hostile, supervisor” who conceded having “anger issues”. An employee who was present during the massacre accused him of “picking people out” to shoot. Police say that Bing left a note on his phone that complained about being mocked and harassed. It had plentiful clues about his troubled psyche. “Sorry everyone but I did not plan this I promise things just fell in place like I was led by the Satan…I was actually one of the most loving people in the world…I just wanted a wife that was equally yoked as I and obsessed over the thought; however, I didn't deserve a wife.” Virginia has a Red Flag law, but only officials can submit a petition.

     According to ATF, fifty-eight percent of crime guns traced between 2017 and 2021 (866,120 of 1,482,702) were purchased by someone other than their possessor (p. 26). Clearly, what buyers do with their guns (other than pull the trigger) is also important. As it turns out, many resell their weapons. Consider, for example, the August 2021 murder of Chicago police officer Ella French. She was killed and her partner was wounded when brothers Eric and Emonte Morgan opened fire during a traffic stop. Their gun, a Glock .22, was bought for Eric Morgan by a friend because Eric, a convicted felon, couldn’t do so himself. Purchaser Jamel Danzy’s bad deed, which devastated the officers’ families and coworkers, earned him two and one-half years in Federal prison.

Be sure to check out our homepage and sign up for our newsletter

     “Straw purchase” – buying a gun for someone else – is commonplace. Our “Sources” article cites so-called “straw buyers” as one of three major sources of trafficked guns (the other two are corrupt licensed dealers and unlicensed “street” dealers). According to Giffords, straw purchasing “is the most common channel identified in trafficking investigations.” According to a journal article by noted firearms researcher Garen Wintemute, there were more than 30,000 attempted straw purchases in a single year. Indeed, ATF has found straw buying to be such a problem that it partnered with the NSSF in a national campaign entitled “Don’t Lie for the Other Guy”.

     Disaster can strike even when buyers are well intentioned. On January 6, 2023 a six-year old Virginia boy suffering from an “acute” mental disability snuck his mother’s legally purchased pistol into school and shot his teacher during class. Authorities charged the mother with felony child neglect and misdemeanor failure to secure a gun. (The child’s parents normally take turns accompanying the troubled boy to class, but neither did on that day). The teacher was seriously wounded but is recovering.

     Back to human nature. Once firearms come off a dealer’s shelf, they can easily become a source of grief. So if you’re reassured because someone “legally” bought a gun from a dealer, think again!

UPDATES (scroll)

Did you enjoy this post?  Be sure to explore the homepage and topical index!

Home   Top   Permalink     Print/Save     Feedback     

RELATED WEBSITES

Giffords: “Stand Your Ground” States     “Open Carry” States

RELATED ARTICLES

“Want an Assault Weapons Ban That Works? Focus on Ballistics” (Washington Post, Dec. 6, 2019)

“Ex-ATF Agent: America is Only Pretending to Regulate Lethal Firearms” (Washington Post, Dec. 8, 2015)

Sources of Crime Guns in Los Angeles, California (Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 21:2, 220-239, 1998)

RELATED POSTS

Gun massacres special topic

Fearful, Angry, Fuzzy-Headed. And Armed.     Worlds Apart

Cops v. Assault Weapons: A Hopeless Situation     Again, Kids Die. Again, Our “Leaders” Pretend

Ban the Damned Things!     Red Flag at Half-Mast (I)   (II)     Where Do They Come From?

FEARFUL, ANGRY, FUZZY-HEADED.

AND ARMED.

Do “Stand Your Ground” laws needlessly increase gun violence?

     For Police Issues by Julius (Jay) Wachtel. America’s love affair with the gun is certainly having some predictable consequences. Although we usually avoid kicking things off with numbers, excuse us for mentioning that according to the CDC’s Wonder platform, yearly firearm death rates per 100,000 pop. from all causes rose steadily during 2013-2021 (the most recent year of data), going from from 10.3 to 14.7, a twelve-year gain of nearly 43 percent.

     Shocking as these numbers might seem, they haven’t drawn much notice. Instead, what’s really caught the public eye is an aspect of the mayhem that’s usually overlooked. We’re talking about more-or-less “ordinary” citizens who are propelled by “seemingly trivial circumstances” to use firearms as lethal instruments of expression. And as of late, there’s been a surfeit of examples:

Click here for the complete collection of gun control essays

• Antioch, Illinois, April 12: Apparently annoyed by his neighbor’s leaf-blowing, a 79-year old resident with a reputation for quarreling grabbed his handgun and fatally shot the 59-year old man in the head. A murder charge was filed.
   
• Liberty, Missouri, April 13: It was ten at night when a sixteen-year old Black youth on an errand to fetch his brothers rang the wrong doorbell. That got an 84-year old White man out of bed. Revolver in hand, he supposedly saw the youth pulling on the storm door (that’s contested). So he fired, twice. One bullet struck the teen in the head. Miraculously, he survived. According to the prosecutor, the case has a “racial component.” First-degree assault charges have been filed.
   
• Davie, Florida, April 15: A couple making a late-evening Instacart delivery drove up the wrong driveway and was shooed away by the homeowner’s son. But after turning around, the vehicle ran over some rocks on the road. That supposedly frightened the homeowner. He opened fire, striking the vehicle’s bumper and flattening a tire. No charges were filed, and police returned the shooter’s handgun. But the local D.A. ordered an inquiry.
   
• Hebron, New York, April 15: On the same day, a like set of circumstances had a far poorer ending. Realizing that they were in the wrong driveway, a group of friends in two cars and a motorcycle turned around and were on their way out. That’s when the 65-year old landowner, who was reportedly upset by like incidents in the past, opened fire. One of his bullets struck and killed Kaylin Gillis, a 20-year old budding marine biologist. A murder charge was filed.
   
• Gastonia, North Carolina, April 18: Soon after moving into a quiet neighborhood, a 24-year old man developed a “rep” for yelling at the kids next door. And when they ran into his yard to fetch an errant basketball he came out shooting. Bullets grazed a child and her mother and seriously wounded the dad. Unlike our other examples, the shooter had a recent criminal history and was pending trial for a recent assault-with-a-hammer.

And just as we were trying to put the wraps on this essay came a real stunner:

• Cleveland, Texas, April 28: Five persons ages 8 to 40 were shot dead in rural Texas by their next-door neighbor after asking that he stop firing his AR-15 style rifle in the yard. Deputies had previously confronted Francisco Oropeza, 38, about that, but let him keep the gun. Oropeza fled towards a forest some miles away. And at this writing, he’s still on the lam.

     As gun killings increase (again, glance at our introductory graph) episodes where guns are “expressively” misused have captured public and media attention. Inevitably, the blame game is on. When, as in Missouri, the tragedies involve White shooters and Black victims, racial animus inevitably becomes the prime suspect. And it may well be a factor. But how to explain the many episodes where shooters and victims are of the same (usually, White) race? Could it be that White folks have gotten, well, crazier?

     COVID’s become a popular explanation (excuse?) for misbehavior. A 2020 APA survey concluded that thanks to the pandemic’s deleterious effects on social interaction and such, “we are facing a national mental health crisis that could yield serious health and social consequences for years to come”.

     A key shift in the law has also caught blame. Citizens were once required to, whenever possible, “safely step away” from threatening situations. That began to change in 1994, when Utah passed the nation’s first stand-your-ground (SYG) law. By the end of the last decade, SYG laws graced the codes of thirty states. Could it be, as the AP recently conjectured, that the loosening led to needless violence?

     Academic studies suggest the answer is most likely “yes”:

• In 2012 eighteen states had SYG laws. Georgia State University scholars Chandler McClellan and Erdal Tekinan examined their effects. They concluded that “extending the right to self-defense with no duty to retreat to any place a person has a legal right to be” led to a statistically significant increase in death by homicide among White male residents of SYG states. Numbers-wise, it amounted to “an additional 4.59 homicides per 100,000 residents per month per state.” No effects were found on Black persons, or on suicides.
   
• Last year JAMA Open published a study comparing twenty-three states that enacted SYG laws between 1999 and 2017 with eighteen states without SYG. Three scholars from the UK and a University of Pennsylvania biostatician concluded, among (many) other things, that SYG laws were “associated” with an increase in firearms homicide of 8 percent nationally, and 10.8 percent in SYG states. But there were marked differences within. Five SYG states – Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Missouri – demonstrated pronounced increases, while seven SYG states – Arizona, Indiana, Michigan, Nevada, Oklahoma, Texas, and West Virginia – seemed unaffected.
   
• A recent RAND review of twelve studies concluded that “there is supportive evidence that stand-your-ground laws may increase firearm homicides”. But it tempered its findings by noting that seven concluded SYG’s effects were “uncertain.” That uncertainty was evident in the JAMA Open piece, which cautioned that factors including “economic shifts”, local cultures, existing laws and gun availability could affect the interpretation of outcomes.

     Most of these studies generated output that ordinary earthlings might find perplexing. We wanted something simpler. Excluding D.C. and foreign possessions, there are presently thirty SYG states and twenty non-SYG. We used a statistics package to randomly select five from each group. CDC death rate data (click here and here) was then used to generate a graph that tracks firearms death rates per 100,000 population in ten-year increments between 1980 and 2000 (SYG states on the left, non-SYG on the right):

     There are two %CHG columns: the one on the left lists percentage change in gun deaths between 1980 and 2010, and the second between 2010 and 2020, the period when most SYG laws came into effect. What’s apparent is that as the periods transitioned, gun death rates in both SYG and non-SYG states, which had been falling across the board, abruptly shifted direction. Of course, given the national uptick in violence that accompanied the pandemic (see that introductory graph) that was to be expected. But the SYG states’ increase seems especially pronounced. CDC data also reports gun homicides. Here are those rates:

     What we’ve seen so far is consistent with concerns that SYG laws, which were mostly enacted after 2010, may have provoked gunplay. Still, non-SYG Delaware, Maryland and Wisconsin also exhibited substantial upticks. Although their rate increases aren’t as drastic, something was driving things. And it wasn’t SYG laws!

     What else could it be? We’ve frequently harped about poverty’s strong association with violence (check out that lead table in “Woke up, America!”). Here’s a graph that compares SYG and non-SYG states poverty-wise:

Clearly, there’s a big difference. SYG states have been economically beset for a very long time. In comparison, their non-SYG brethren have basked in affluence. And while that gap lessened over time, it remains observably pronounced.

     Political beliefs and gun availability could also be important. This graph uses data from RAND’s estimate of household gun ownership during 1980-2016 by state and the results of Gallup’s 2017 poll of party affiliation:

Bottom line: residents of SYG States are considerably more likely to be ideologically conservative and to have (at least one) gun at home.

Be sure to check out our homepage and sign up for our newsletter

     So what’s the upshot? Self-help is consistent with conservative political doctrine, which is prominent in SYG states. Residents of SYG states are also more affected by gun violence. And more likely to be dissatisfied with their economic conditions. So it would make perfect sense for them to oppose Government meddling and, as personal safety goes, demand a permissive approach to self-defense. Of course, human nature is fickle. People are fallible, and increased gun availability can greatly worsen the effects of bad decisions. So that same set of circumstances that led thirty states to enact SYG laws may have brought on a lot more than what their boosters intended.

     But we haven’t even touched on the consequences of encouraging citizens to use guns on the civil servants who must respond to all shootings, SYG or otherwise. Given the risks of working those unpredictable streets, has it made them more likely to needlessly use lethal force? Check out what happened to that well-intentioned armed citizen in Hemet, Calif. when a cop mistook him for being a bad guy. Police officers, too, are fallible humans. But that’s something for another essay.

UPDATES (scroll)

Did you enjoy this post?  Be sure to explore the homepage and topical index!

Home   Top   Permalink     Print/Save     Feedback     

RELATED WEBSITES

Giffords: “Stand Your Ground” States     “Open Carry” States

RELATED POSTS

Gun Massacres special topic

Is Diversion the Answer?     “Legal” Gun Buyers Can be a Problem     When Worlds Collide

What’s Up? Violence. Where? Where Else?     Worlds Apart - Not!     “Woke” up, America!

ARE WE HELPLESS TO PREVENT MASSACRES?

A murderous rampage in Nashville suggests that lawmaking is not a solution

     For Police Issues by Julius (Jay) Wachtel.  When 28-year old Audrey Hale fired through a glass door and barged into Covenant Christian School on March 27, the Nashville resident carried three weapons: a Lead Star Arms “Grunt” AR-15 .223 caliber rifle (left), a Kel-Tec SUB2000 9mm. carbine (right),

and a Smith & Wesson 9mm. pistol. Once inside, Hale roamed the first and second floors of the school, killing three nine-year old students and three adults whom he came across in the hallways. Alerted by the gunfire, teachers promptly locked down their classrooms. Hale fired more rounds – some apparently pierced doors – but he didn’t crash into any rooms and no one else was hurt.

     Officers soon arrived and shot Hale dead.

     Was Hale legally entitled to have guns? Tennessee does not require background checks for gun purchases. But Federal law prohibits felons and persons who were ever adjudicated mentally defective or committed to a mental institution from acquiring guns. As best we know, none of these categories applied to Hale. So as an adult, Hale could legally purchase guns from Federally-licensed gun stores to their twisted heart’s delight. And Hale did, buying seven guns, including the three used in the massacre, from local sources.

Click here for the complete collection of gun control essays

     Could Hale’s parents have done anything? It turns out that Hale was receiving medical care for an emotional condition. His need seems obvious. According to a former classmate, Hale had shared “suicidal thoughts” with her and other acquaintances and “was posting a lot about depression” during the weeks preceding the massacre. Incredibly, Hale messaged her on Instagram moments before it began. “I’m planning to die today...You’ll probably hear about me on the news.” She promptly called a suicide prevention number, then the Sheriff’s Dept. But by that time the slaughter was underway.

     Hale’s parents clearly knew that something was seriously amiss. They told police that they did not want Hale to have guns and thought that their child had disposed of the one gun they knew of. In fact, Hale had been training at local gun ranges and kept his seven store-bought weapons, plus two shotguns (one was “sawed-off”), plus lots of ammunition, plus detailed plans for the massacre, at the home. Everything was supposedly well hidden, so it’s possible that the parents were unaware that their adult “child” had an arsenal.

     And even had they been inclined to act, there was another obstacle. Nineteen States plus the District of Columbia have so-called “Red Flag” laws that enable judges, based on affidavits from family members or police, to order that guns be seized from possibly dangerous persons. Tennessee does not. So taking Hale’s guns would have required a highly intrusive and time-consuming commitment process. Even in the supposedly “Bluest” of places, liberty interests and due process concerns make preventive gun seizures an intensive, resource-consuming process with an uncertain conclusion. Considering the parents’ apparent “see nothing, hear nothing, know nothing” attitude, that was clearly never in the cards.

     Might society have pre-empted the massacre? Over the decades, America’s experimented with various approaches to deal with troubled citizens. California recently enacted the “Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment Court Program”. Known as CARE, it allows family members, first responders and health workers to seek the detention of troubled persons. If a judge finds cause, individuals can be ordered to participate in a twelve-month plan, renewable once. To help implement the program, Governor Kevin Newsom called for a bond measure that would direct billions to create treatment facilities and long-term supportive housing for the mentally ill.

     Many progressively-minded politicians are delighted. Among them is L.A. Mayor Karen Bass, who recently met with the dispirited residents of tent camps that occupy her city’s central core. But not everyone is pleased. Civil liberties groups are concerned that CARE’s coercive underpinnings – after all, we are talking judicial mandates – would reverse decades of reforms that led America to abandon its long-standing practice of institutionalizing the mentally ill. This overhaul began in 1963 with passage of Public Law 88-164, which appropriated $26 million to create facilities that would find the causes of mental disorders and devise practices to ameliorate their effects. According to then-President Kennedy, “new medical, scientific and social tools and insights” would allow mental hospital populations to be slashed in half.

     And so they were. Mental institutions across the U.S. emptied. But as rampant homelessness and poor behavior became the “new normal,” critics of deinstitutionalization called the purportedly benevolent approach an appealing fiction. Even reformists were forced to concede that the transition wasn’t producing its intended effects. In their view, while the plan was eminently workable, society had failed to allocate sufficient funds and human resources to carry it through.

     What about stricter gun laws? Hale used an AR-15 style .223 caliber rifle and two weapons that fire the 9mm. projectile; one is an assault-style carbine, and the other’s a 9 mm. pistol. Notably, although police responded promptly, all six victims died from their wounds. That’s not surprising. Nine-millimeter rounds are standard police issue and can easily kill. And the .223 cartridge is notoriously lethal. As we pointed out in “Ban the Damned Things” and our Washington Post op-ed, its extreme velocity creates “temporary wound cavities” more than a dozen times the bullet diameter, shattering nearby organs and causing devastating internal damage. (For a graphic depiction of “how bullets from an AR-15 blow the body apart”, click here.)

     Recognizing that there is a problem, some progressively-minded places turned to – what else? – lawmaking. To date, nine States and the District of Columbia have enacted assault weapons “bans”, and nineteen States and D.C. have “Red Flag” laws that authorize police to seize guns from allegedly dangerous persons. Such measures have reportedly helped. But loopholes are rampant, and guns that are shorn of doo-dads but fire the same lethal cartridge as the AR-15 are available even in so-called “strong-law” States.

     Audrey Hale is the most recent in a long line of deranged shooters whom even the most restrictive laws couldn’t touch. Some, like Frank R. James, who opened fire in the New York City subways last year, had undergone mental treatment. What’s more, he also had a long criminal record. But James had never been  “committed” to a mental institution, adjudged mentally defective, or convicted of a felony. As far as the law was concerned, he was free to acquire guns to his heart’s delight. And that’s in a State with gun laws that are supposedly far more restrictive than Tennessee’s. Meanwhile, Federal firearms laws are under severe threat. In its 2020 Bruen decision, the Supreme Court held that “to justify a firearm regulation the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” Its ruling, which nullified a New York law requiring that persons who wished to carry a gun justify their reason, was later used by an Indiana-based Federal judge to throw out the conviction of a gun buyer who falsely asserted that he wasn’t facing felony charges. After all, ex-con with a gun laws aren’t “historical,” right?

     But forget the Feds. Consider, say, what the highly-respected Giffords website thinks about California’s gun laws:

Overall, California has the strongest gun safety laws in the nation and has been a trailblazer for gun safety reform for the past 30 years.

Impressed? California law bans “assault weapons.” Its definition, though, is quite complex. Here’s an extract:

30515. (a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, “assault weapon” also means any of the following: (1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following: (A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon. (B) A thumbhole stock. (C) A folding or telescoping stock. (D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher. (E) A flash suppressor. (F) A forward pistol grip. (2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. (3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.

Nothing whatsoever is said about caliber (everything below .50 is OK). Now grab a look at “Our Never-Ending American Tragedy.” Here are the “California legal” versions of the rifles Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik used to murder fifteen in the 2015 San Bernardino massacre (DPMS Panther Arms on the left, Smith & Wesson M&P15 on the right):

And yes, both chamber that insufferably lethal .223 caliber round. Ditto the “Grunt” assault rifle that Hale carried. Is it “California compliant?” Check out Lead Star Arm’s “California Compliant” page.

     Our nation’s historically welcoming attitude towards firearms (we’re parodying the Supremes) has enfeebled even the most half-hearted attempts to constrain gun lethality. Guns that mimic Vietnam-era AR-15 assault rifles have long been a major source of profit for the gun industry. Natch, many wound up in the hands of troubled souls. “Gun massacre” became part of the everyday lexicon.

     Preventives have proven an appealing fiction. So we must look elsewhere. Meaning, after the fact. And what else is there “after” but the cops? Nashville P.D.’s response has been widely praised. Officers quickly entered the school and gunned down the attacker. Bodycam video indicates that three officers clad in tactical vests and armed with long guns – what appears to be a tactical team – spotted Hale on the second floor. Their quarry ran off, firing “wildly.” But Hale was soon cornered. That encounter, which only consumed a few minutes, has been called far superior to what happened at Robb Elementary in Uvalde, where it took police and hour to confront the shooter.

Be sure to check out our homepage and sign up for our newsletter

     There’s no question but that Nashville cops did an outstanding job. But the comparison with Uvalde isn’t apt. Its cops didn’t have a tactical team on the ready. And the need was obvious, as two of Uvalde’s patrol officers who entered Robb Elementary were quickly wounded (fortunately, only slightly) by .223 caliber rounds that Salvador Ramos fired through a door. Ramos holed up in a room full of students, next to other rooms filled with students. So Uvalde’s cops had to be careful about rushing in with guns. Hale, though, didn’t barge into any occupied classrooms. Indeed, Nashville officer bodycam video depicts a chase through empty rooms and hallways.

     Bottom line: in these days, when every evildoer has access to an assault weapon, all police departments, no matter how “small”, must have a trained, long-gun equipped tactical team on the ready, twenty-four seven. There really is no third choice.

UPDATES (scroll)

Did you enjoy this post?  Be sure to explore the homepage and topical index!

Home   Top   Permalink     Print/Save     Feedback     

RELATED ARTICLES AND OP-EDS

Washington Post feature series on the AR-15

Author’s op-eds: “Want an assault weapons ban that works? Focus on ballistics”

“America is only pretending to regulate lethal firearms”

RELATED POSTS

Gun Massacres special topic     Police and the Mentally Ill special topic

Is Diversion the Answer?     Cops v. Assault Weapons     When a “Dope” Can’t be “Roped”

Loopholes are (Still) Lethal     Good Law/Bad Law     Our Never-Ending American Tragedy

Ban the Damned Things!