With all the talk about the "Assault Weapons Ban" being up for renewal next year, I wanted to take a look at the other side of the argument. The web site for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Ownership has an FAQ, where they attempt to answer questions concerning the gun ban. Not surprisingly, the FAQ is filled with half truths and outright lies, meant to bolster their position in favor of the ban.

The wording of the ban tries to create a category of firearms known as "assault weapons", and gun banners try very hard to create a perception that they are some how more lethal than a standard hunting rifle. At one point, the Brady Campaign bolsters that premise by trying to answer the question: "What is the difference between semi-automatic hunting rifles and semi-automatic assault weapons?"

Sporting rifles and assault weapons are two distinct classes of firearms. While semi-automatic hunting rifles are designed to be fired from the shoulder and depend upon the accuracy of a precisely aimed projectile, semi-automatic assault weapons are designed to maximize lethal effects through a rapid rate of fire. Assault weapons are designed to be spray-fired from the hip, and because of their design, a shooter can maintain control of the weapon even while firing many rounds in rapid succession.

This is an outright lie. So called "Assault Weapons" are all semi-automatic. Just like a hunting rifle, you fire one shot with one trigger pull. ALL semi-automatic rifles can only be fired as quickly as you can pull the trigger.

Opponents of the ban argue that such weapons only "look scary." However, because they were designed for military purposes, assault weapons are equipped with combat hardware, such as silencers, folding stocks and bayonets, which are not found on sporting guns. Assault weapons are also designed for rapid-fire and many come equipped with large ammunition magazines allowing 50 more bullets to be fired without reloading. So there is a good reason why these features on high-powered weapons should frighten the public.

Do you notice how they try to prey on people's fear? First of all, the military rarely uses firearms with folding stocks. They could make a greater argument by saying the folding stocks allowed the rifle to be easily concealed, rather than trying to convey the firearm with some sort of "evil" military characteristic. The military also doesn't fire "from the hip", like in some John Wayne showdown at high noon.

Second, I don't know that the military even uses suppressors (there is no such thing as a 'silencer'), except for during covert operations. For private collectors, suppressors are already heavily regulated by the BATF as a class III device. Someone wanting to buy a 'silencer' must go through the same process used for buying a machine gun, and submit registration paperwork to the BATF. Suppressors also cost about $800 bucks, and typically only suppress subsonic rounds. The alleged "high powered weapons" are unable to be 'silenced', because the rounds are supersonic and create a small sonic boom.

Third, what is so scary about bayonet lugs, or even bayonets? If a person points a gun at you, are you going to be more frightened because there is a bayonet on the front? Bayonets went out with World War II. As for the high capacity magazines, they are still only one shot per trigger pull. The idea that making people reload every 10 rounds is going to save lives is a straw argument at best.

They go on to say that "assault weapons" commonly feature a mix of the following "combat features".

A large-capacity ammunition magazine, enabling the shooter to continuously fire dozens of rounds without reloading. Standard hunting rifles are usually equipped with no more than 3 or 4-shot magazines.

Again with the 'continuous fire'. It's no wonder the average person has no concept of the difference between fully and semi-automatic. One shot, one pull dammit.

A folding stock on a rifle or shotgun, which sacrifices accuracy for concealability and for mobility in close combat.

I knew they'd get around to concealability. I do agree that a folding stock does make a person more mobile and a gun easier to conceal. (Although I wouldn't think that combat infantrymen are in the habit of hiding their guns under their fatigues.) So what? Those characteristics don't necessitate a crime anymore than owning a Ferarri necessitates speeding.

A pistol grip on a rifle or shotgun, which facilitates firing from the hip, allowing the shooter to spray-fire the weapon. A pistol grip also helps the shooter stabilize the firearm during rapid fire and makes it easier to shoot assault rifles one-handed.

[Waiting for the laughter to subside]
Again with the 'spray-fire' and 'rapid fire'. They are beating a dead horse with that one.

And who shoots a "high powered" rifle one handed?? They've been watching too many Arnold Schwarzenegger movies. You'd be hard pressed to not drop the damn thing, much less be able to actually control where the rounds are going. These people obviously know nothing about firearms.

A barrel shroud, which is designed to cool the barrel so the firearm can shoot many rounds in rapid succession without overheating. It also allows the shooter to grasp the barrel area to stabilize the weapon, without incurring serious burns, during rapid fire.

[Trying to keep a straight face]
What happened to the one handed shooting? They make a heat shield sound like an oven mit. For Christ sakes, why would anyone grab hold of the barrel, when you've got a perfectly good forend right there. (Forend = the front grippy part of the stock)

Even with a heat shield, the barrel is going to get a little too warm for comfort. And as a target shooter, I can see there being a perfectly good reason for wanting to keep your barrel cool. When you are paying for lane time at the range, you don't want to have to wait 10 minutes between volleys for your guns to cool down.

A threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor, which serves no useful sporting purpose. The flash suppressor allows the shooter to remain concealed when shooting at night, an advantage in combat but unnecessary for hunting or sporting purposes. In addition, the flash suppressor is useful for providing stability during rapid fire, helping the shooter maintain control of the firearm.

This is an outright lie. Flash suppressors will not conceal a muzzle flash for shooting at night, and add very little to the stability and accuracy of a firearm. These people should be in marketing at Springfield Arms.

A threaded barrel designed to accommodate a silencer, which is useful to assassins but clearly has no purpose for sportsmen. Silencers are illegal so there is no legitimate purpose for making it possible to put a silencer on a weapon.

Suppressors are not illegal. They are regulated by the BATF, and 'pre-ban' class III suppressors are widely available and legal to own.

A barrel mount designed to accommodate a bayonet, which obviously serves no sporting purpose.

I would argue that a bayonet serves more of a sporting purpose than an 'assault' purpose. After all, you could corner a racoon or squirrel and stab the little bastard, while screaming "DIE, DIE, DIE"

Seriously though, bayonets are pretty much obsolete. They rank just above a knife and hand to hand combat as a last resort for soldiers in combat. Is there really a lot of "bayonet crime" out there? You hardly ever hear of a convenience store being robbed with a bayonet, and I cannot imagine gangs fighting epic battles with them in the streets of Compton.

In summary, it should be no surprise that an extremist anti-freedom organization like the Brady Campaign would resort to lies and misinformation to further their agenda. Fisking their material almost seems pointless, especially when you read their blatantly biased definition of semi-automatic firearms. "Semi-automatic firearms fire as rapidly as you can twitch your finger. This means that a semi-automatic fires a little more slowly than an automatic, but not much more slowly." [Rolling my eyes] I could devote my entire life to correcting their lies and half truths.

Still, I sometimes feel it is necessary to do what I can, to try to dispel the myths flying around out there. If just one person learns something, I think it's worth it.