In 1994, when Congress was considering a federal ban on the future manufacture and sale of assault weapons, three former presidents sent a letter to the House of Representatives.
“This is a matter of vital importance to the public safety,” they wrote. “While we recognize that assault-weapon legislation will not stop all assault-weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals. We urge you to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of these weapons.”
That message was delivered by Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, and it represents the kind of reasonable, bipartisan approach to reducing gun violence that has been sorely lacking in recent years. Congress passed and President Clinton signed the bill that banned new combat-style weapons. That law was allowed to sunset after 10 years; since 2004, the United States has been hampered by arguments that have prevented further legislation and have contributed to a shameful level of gun violence.
With Congress beholden to gun-rights activists despite strong public support for the banning of assault weapons, it is up to the states to take incremental action. State Attorney General Bob Ferguson has renewed a push for pending bills in the Legislature that would ban the sale of semiautomatic rifles and high-capacity magazines while tightening rules for the sale of ammunition.
In announcing the efforts, Ferguson noted that an assault-weapons ban “will be a challenging bill.” But Washington residents have indicated a desire to address the scourge of gun violence.
Last year, 59 percent of voters approved Initiative 1639, which instituted a variety of gun-control measures. Opponents have filed legal challenges, which are pending in court. Any initiative passed by voters is subject to questions of legality, and I-1639 warrants scrutiny. But until the courts weigh in, it is the law of the state.
Most important is the public’s appetite for common-sense gun legislation. The United States has, by far, the highest rate of gun homicide among developed nations, a fact that belies the notion of a well-regulated militia as spelled out in the Second Amendment. There is nothing well-regulated about a situation that annually leads to nearly 40,000 gun deaths.
Most disturbing is the philosophy that nothing can be done about it. When this nation decided that traffic fatalities were too high, it responded with laws regulating vehicle safety, seat-belt use and impaired driving; fatalities per mile driven now are about one-third the 1980 rate.
Similar measures can be taken to limit gun violence and, in particular, mass shootings, while protecting the rights of gun owners and defending the Second Amendment. Assault rifles have become the weapon of choice for mass shooters, and Gov. Jay Inslee said: “This is the time to take action on common sense measures that will save lives. We should be making it harder for those who want to inflict mass violence and destruction upon innocent people. By limiting magazine capacity and banning assault weapons, we can work toward a day where no one in Washington state loses a friend or family members to senseless gun violence.”
Such bans will not provide a panacea for ending gun violence, but they will be a step in the right direction. As presidents Ford, Carter and Reagan understood a quarter-century ago, the United States needs reasonable measures to reduce gun violence.
