Abstract
As of this writing, New York State Assembly bill A-7331 has passed the assembly and is waiting progression through the Senate.This paper will show that these bills are essentially spurious in nature, attempting to ban groups of firearms on the grounds that they are possessing of certain aesthetic features, and not that they are actually more dangerous than any other types of firearms currently available on the civilian market.
However, this paper will not attempt to ascertain whether this deceit is due to malice, conspiracy or simply ignorance. Furthermore, it will not raise the issue of the constitutionality of such bans, but rather will limit the discussion to the "dangerous" features which they propose make these rifles more deadly and therefore are cause for them to be banned.
Background
My Squirrel Gun
The .22 Long Rifle cartridge (often called simply .22LR), is generally regarded as a fine all around plinking and small game hunting round and is one of the most produced cartridges in the world.
The Ruger 10/22 is a .22 Long Rifle caliber semiautomatic rifle which feeds from a 10 round detachable box magazine. My particular one is a stainless model with an 18 inch barrel. When it comes from the factory, it looks like this:
This looks like fairly commonplace, average rifle, doesn't it?
The real "gun" part of the rifle is this part, often referred to as the "barreled action". This is what remains when you remove the stock.
The squarish cutout is where the magazine sits. The magazine looks like this:
The above is a 10 round (shot) magazine. There are higher capacity magazines available, typically in 20, 25, 30 and 50 rounds, but these are banned in New York State, excepting ones manufactured prior to September 14, 1994.
Ergonomics
If one were to take the barreled action, above, and insert it into a different stock, one would be left with something like this:
Now, the question becomes: has the rifle changed substantially? To the astute observer, it as not. We have merely replaced one stock with another, the new stock having slightly different ergonomics than the first. The barrel length, ammunition capacity and method of operation remain unchanged. The gun is just as deadly as it was before. The following two photographs illustrate those ergonomic differences:
Notice a difference? Aside from the angle of my wrist, there isn't one. The gun is still the same, I just hold it a little differently.
The Law and Ergonomics
Now, what does the law have to say about ergonomics?
A-7331 says:
(A) SEMI-AUTOMATIC OR PUMP-ACTION RIFLE THAT HAS THE CAPACITY TO
ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AND HAS ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:
(I) A PISTOL GRIP;
...
Conclusion: Possessing of both a detachable magazine and this ergonomic feature makes this gun illegal. In other words, the rifle without the pistol grip is fine, but once you add the pistol grip, it makes it an illegal "assault weapon".
Convinced that this is legislation which bears further examination? Read on.
Rifles
Here we will discuss the law as pertains it to rifles, and will then discuss each banned feature in turn.The Law
A-7331 states:
(A) SEMI-AUTOMATIC OR PUMP-ACTION RIFLE THAT HAS THE CAPACITY TO
ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AND HAS ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:
(I) A PISTOL GRIP;
(II) A SECOND HANDGRIP OR A PROTRUDING GRIP THAT CAN BE HELD BY THE
NON-TRIGGER HAND;
(III) A FOLDING, TELESCOPING OR THUMBHOLE STOCK;
(IV) A SHROUD ATTACHED TO THE BARREL, OR THAT PARTIALLY OR COMPLETELY
ENCIRCLES THE BARREL, ALLOWING THE BEARER TO HOLD THE FIREARM WITH THE
NON-TRIGGER HAND WITHOUT BEING BURNED, BUT EXCLUDING A SLIDE THAT
ENCLOSES THE BARREL; OR
(V) A MUZZLE BRAKE OR MUZZLE COMPENSATOR;
Pistol Grips
This is effectively covered above.A Second Handgrip
What they mean here is a second pistol grip towards the front of the rifle. Many folks find this a lot more comfortable than having to turn your hand palm up. As such, there is similar advantage to it as there is to the pistol grip. Furthermore, this does not affect the lethality of the rifle in any way.Folding, Telescoping, and Thumbhole stocks
There are a lot of things all grouped together here.- Folding stocks Folding stocks don't really do anything particularly useful, except that the allow those of us with compact cars to fit rifles in the trunk - that way, they're not in the passenger compartment, which is generally frowned upon by agents of the law (though is not illegal as long as they are in a locked case). However, they don't do anything particularly bad either - once again, the rifle is not made more deadly by the fact that it can fold up nicely.
- Telescoping stocks These are also known as "adjustable", or sometimes named for the number of positions to which they can be adjusted ("6 position stocks", "5 position stocks"), etc., and this name more accurately conveys their meaning. The point of these is that they adjust to the right length for the shooter, making it a more comfortable to shoot. This is why they're popular with the military - they can buy one rifle and each soldier can adjust it to the right length for him or her. Still, the rifle is not made more deadly in any way - it is just more comfortable to shoot.
- Thumbhole stocks The thumbhole stock is basically the child of a normal stock and a pistol grip, and as such, I will not go into the benefits of this arrangement, since I cover it pretty in depth with the discussion of pistol grips above.
Barrel Shrouds
The description of a barrel shroud in the legislation is very clear, but notice the key phrase here - ALLOWING THE BEARER TO HOLD THE FIREARM WITH THE NON-TRIGGER HAND WITHOUT BEING BURNED. This is a safety feature. Allow me to illustrate what the barrel shroud is:
The left picture is the barrel shroud next to the barrel, which is legal under this proposed legislation. The one on the right is the barrel shroud attached to the barrel, which would make this a banned rifle under A 7331. As mentioned before, all this does is let me hold the rifle without running the risk of burning myself on a hot barrel.
Muzzle Brakes/Compensators
Muzzle Brakes, also known as Recoil Compensators do exactly that - they channel the exhaust gasses and use them to compensate for recoil. The gun wants to move backward, the compensator pulls it forward. The gun wants to move up, the compensator pushed it down.This is another of my rifles:
The astute observer will notice that this is the same basic rifle as the first, except that it has a different barrel, stock, and adds a scope. The barrel has this at the end:
As such, this rifle would be classified as an "assault weapon" A 7331. Now, unlike the rest of the items discussed, this may very well affect the lethality of the rifle. Since this feature essentially consists of drilling holes or cutting slots in an otherwise solid barrel, redirecting some of the propellant gasses out of barrel and therefore they would not be pushing the bullet. Depending on the length of barrel and amount of porting, this can serve to reduce the velocity of the projectile, making the gun less lethal. In no way does it increase the velocity of the projectile.
Pistols
Here we will discuss the law as it pertains to pistols, and will then discuss each banned feature in turn.The Law
A 7331 states:
(C) SEMI-AUTOMATIC PISTOL THAT HAS THE CAPACITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE
MAGAZINE AND HAS ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:
(I) A SECOND HANDGRIP OR A PROTRUDING GRIP THAT CAN BE HELD BY THE
NON-TRIGGER HAND;
(II) A FOLDING, TELESCOPING OR THUMBHOLE STOCK;
(III) A SHROUD ATTACHED TO THE BARREL, OR THAT PARTIALLY OR COMPLETELY
ENCIRCLES THE BARREL, ALLOWING THE BEARER TO HOLD THE FIREARM WITH THE
NON-TRIGGER HAND WITHOUT BEING BURNED, BUT EXCLUDING A SLIDE THAT
ENCLOSES THE BARREL;
(IV) A MUZZLE BRAKE OR MUZZLE COMPENSATOR; OR
(V) THE CAPACITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AT ANY LOCATION
OUTSIDE OF THE PISTOL GRIP;
A Second Pistol Grip
This is similar to the "forward grip" section for rifles, and basically bans a second grip, which allows one to better keep the pistol on target. It does not affect the velocity of the bullets fired in any way.A Folding, Telescoping or Thumbhole Stock
This is silly. As a general rule, pistols don't legally have stocks. Attaching one converts it to a rifle or carbine, and therefore it is bound by those rules regarding barrel length and so forth. This provision is redundant.A Barrel Shroud
This is just like the "barrel shroud" section for rifles - they are banning a safety feature which prevents one from being burned.A Muzzle Brake Or Compensator
These work just like the ones on rifles. They are often used in large caliber hunting handguns and high end pistol competition guns. Just like the compensators on rifles, they generally reduce the velocity of the bullet by redirecting some of the propellant gasses.The Capacity to Accept a Magazine at a Location Outside of the Pistol Grip
As a general case, most handguns have a magazine well built into the pistol grip. Some other, more exotic designs have the magazine well forward of the pistol grip. The question is: what is the difference? What does it matter where the magazine is inserted into the gun? It performs the same function (feeding ammunition into the gun) and does not affect the bullets in any way. As such, it is, once again, a cosmetic and economic feature.Shotguns
Here we will discuss the law as it pertains to shotguns, and will then discuss each banned feature in turn.The Law
(D) SEMI-AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN THAT HAS ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:
(I) A PISTOL GRIP OR A VERTICAL HANDGRIP;
(II) A FOLDING, TELESCOPING OR THUMBHOLE STOCK;
(III) A FIXED MAGAZINE CAPACITY IN EXCESS OF FIVE ROUNDS; OR
(IV) AN ABILITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE;
A Pistol Grip
This is interesting because pistol grips have started to gain popularity with Turkey hunters and Trap shooters because it is a more comfortable way to hold the shotgun. However, this doesn't seem to matter to the backers of this bill. Still, it is irrelevant - just like the rifles, it does not affect the velocity of the slugs fired from the shotgun in any way.A Folding, Telescoping or Thumbhole Stock
This is just like the "Folding, Telescoping or Thumbhole Stock" section for rifles and similarly, does not affect the lethality of the shotguns in any way.The Ability to Hold More than Five Rounds
This is a simple ammunition limit. Some shotguns designed for home defense and for shooting clay pigeons are designed to hold more than five rounds so that you don't have to stop and reload. This does not make them more deadly - they just hold more shots.The Ability To Accept a Detachable Magazine
I do not know why this is in the bill. If magazine-fed rifles and pistols are acceptable, why not magazine-fed shotguns? All a magazine-fed shotgun does is allow for faster and more convenient reloads; a useful thing when trap shooting, where you spend much of your time reloading. It does not make the shells fired any more deadly.Motivations
A 7331 goes into detail as to the motivation behind the law, and I quote:
Section 1. The New York state legislature finds that semi-automatic
assault weapons are military-style guns designed to allow rapid and
accurate spray firing for the quick and efficient killing of humans. The
shooter can simply point - as opposed to carefully aim - the weapon to
quickly spray a wide area with a hail of bullets. Gun manufacturers have
for many years made, marketed and sold to civilians semi-automatic
versions of military assault weapons designed with features specifically
intended to increase lethality for military applications. As a result,
approximately 2,000,000 assault weapons are currently in circulation in
the United States. These weapons have been the weapon of choice in the
most notorious mass shootings of innocent civilians in the United
States, including the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School (TEC-DC9
assault pistol and Hi-Point Carbine) and the 2002 Washington, D.C.-area
sniper shootings (Bushmaster XM15 assault rifle). According to FBI data,
between 1998 and 2001, one in five law enforcement officers slain in the
line of duty was killed with an assault weapon. In 2003, New York lost
two of its finest when undercover officers in the elite Firearms Inves-
tigation Unit of the NYPD Organized Crime Control Bureau were brutally
murdered while attempting to purchase an illegal TEC-9 semi-automatic
assault weapon. The availability of military-style assault weapons poses
a serious threat to the public health and safety. Most citizens, includ-
ing most gun owners, believe that assault weapons should not be avail-
able for civilian use.
This is fraught with contradictions and misdirection. Specifically:
semi-automatic assault weapons are military-style guns designed to allow rapid and accurate spray firing for the quick and efficient killing of humans.
- The use of the term military-style guns is designed to confuse the issue. Military-style things are not bad. Hummers are military-style vehicles. Cargo pants are military-style clothing. Furthermore, most bolt action rifles derive from a military design by the Mauser company, as do most handguns.
- The use of the phrase rapid and accurate spray firing is simply contradictory. You can have rapid, accurate fire, or you can have rapid spray firing. However, the use of "accurate" and "spray" in combination is an oxymoron.
- The use of the phrase quick and efficient killing of humans is also a misdirection. First, you want to kill things quickly - it's the humane way to harvest animals when you hunt. Many people use the rifles for hunting for just that reason. However, the corollary to being able to cleanly dispatch deer is the ability to quickly dispatch people as well - they are similarly sized mammals and are vulnerable to the same laws of physics. Finally, killing humans is not necessarily a bad thing - shooting someone who poses an imminent, mortal danger to another person is legal under NY State Law.
The shooter can simply point - as opposed to carefully aim - the weapon to quickly spray a wide area with a hail of bullets.
- First, this contradicts the accurate spray fire bit above. If you are spraying an area, you are not firing accurately. Second, it is true, but misleading. One can indeed "point and spray", but it would be sheer luck if you were to hit anything. Furthermore, you can do this with any semiautomatic firearm, and with certain types of bolt action firearms as well. Therefore, this has nothing to do with the features outlined in the bill, and is merely a misdirection.
with features specifically intended to increase lethality for military applications.
- As I have shown in this paper this is also quite demonstrably false. None of these features increase lethality at all.
These weapons have been the weapon of choice in the most notorious mass shootings of innocent civilians in the United States, including the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School (TEC-DC9 assault pistol and Hi-Point Carbine)
- Once again, this is a brilliant use of misdirection. The only thing which makes the TEC-DC9 an "assault pistol" is the placement of the feed magazine. The Hi-Point carbine is even more foolish, as the only thing which would make it fall under this bill is the fact that it is a rifle with a pistol grip.
and the 2002 Washington, D.C.-area sniper shootings (Bushmaster XM15 assault rifle).
- This sniper could easily have used any variety of hunting rifle for these killings.
According to FBI data, between 1998 and 2001, one in five law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty was killed with an assault weapon.
- While sad and tragic, the only reason that these numbers are so high is because of the definition of "assault weapon" in this bill. These numbers would be much lower when using the definition of "assault weapon" contained in the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.
In 2003, New York lost two of its finest when undercover officers in the elite Firearms Investigation Unit of the NYPD Organized Crime Control Bureau were brutally murdered while attempting to purchase an illegal TEC-9 semi-automatic assault weapon.
- This defies logic. In 2003, the TEC-9 pistol was already illegal under the current Assault Weapons Ban. Somehow, the murder of police officers who were trying to buy a gun which was already illegal justifies making more guns which were not even related to the murders illegal?
The availability of military-style assault weapons poses a serious threat to the public health and safety.
- This is false. The federal ban had little to no effect on crime. The New York State ban has had little to no effect on crime. The solution to laws having no effect is not to make more laws which will have a similar lack of effect.
Most citizens, includ-ing most gun owners, believe that assault weapons should not be avail-able for civilian use.
- The use of "most" in the above is not backed up by any type of real evidence. I could see the use of "many" here, but "most" is simply inaccurate. Additionally, I think it fair to state that many gun owners in New York believe that this bill, the current bill, and many other aspects of firearms legislation are unconstitutional.
