“An assault weapon ban is purely window dressing,” MIT applied economics professor Christopher Knittel asserts at huffingtonpost.com. “An assault weapon is merely a semi-automatic rifle that carries its bullets in a magazine and looks vicious. There is nothing, other than its looks, that necessarily differentiates an assault weapon from a semi-automatic rifle that also carries its bullets in a magazine but has a traditional looking stock and is used for big-game hunting.” Unfortunately, that’s Professor Knittel’s jumping off point for his editorial Time for Real Gun Control, Not Just Window Dressing . . .
The general thrust of the piece is a HuffPo talking point we’ve seen before: the second amendment protects Americans right to hunt and punch paper, rather than keep and bear arms for self-defense and defense against government tyranny.
Knittel wonders “how best to balance the enjoyment citizens get from owning and operating certain types of guns with the obvious real danger such weapons present.” And then answers the question:
Meaningful gun control starts with banning semi-automatic weapons that carry their ammunition in magazines. Such a ban would limit the speed in which prospective mass murderers could kill by: (a) requiring an additional action to be made before he or she shoots again, and (b) increasing the amount of time required to reload his or her killing device.
But, what about the legitimate uses for guns? Such a ban would still allow hunters to use bolt-action rifles and pump-action shotguns for hunting mammals and birds. These are the same weapons I used in the past to hunt deer, pheasants, ducks, doves, and more. A pump-action shotgun or a single-action revolver are also quite effective home-defense weapons.
Perhaps the professor has spent a little too much time on YouTube watching Bob Munden demonstrations. Most people, would prefer other guns for self defense. As a former gun owner (a shotgun, a rifle, and a semi-automatic 9mm pistol), Knittel readily admits that his plan is no fun.
Such a ban, while reducing the ability for people to kill other people, does not come without costs. Millions of law-abiding citizens get more enjoyment out of carrying and shooting semi-automatic weapons than they do from their close cousins. Many also get enjoyment from of carrying vicious looking “assault weapons.” Again, this is the fundamental trade-off: lowering the enjoyment law-abiding citizens get from shooting semi-automatic weapons, while reducing the number of Newtown-like events.
Yada yada yada gun buyback funded by a tax on guns ‘n ammo. Clever readers will see right through the Prof’s polemic. In fact, the tenured killjoy’s rant is nothing more than a job application:
But, what about the semi-automatic weapons that currently exist? I do not, necessarily, propose to make owning such weapons illegal. Instead, I propose we adopt an aggressive buy-back program that is funded through a tax on gun and ammunition sales. While the level of taxes required would need to be worked out, policymakers could phase in such a program to minimize expenditures. For example, the first year of the program could pay $200 for such weapons. The next year could pay $300. And so on. While there is an incentive to wait for the higher levels, those that can use the money will choose to turn in their weapons sooner. I would be happy to volunteer my services to estimate how consumers would respond to such a buy-back program and the exact parameters that would be most cost-effective.
And I would be happy if Professor Knittel would go back to analyzing the risk to advertisers who hire sex-crazed celebrities to endorse their products. [h/t James]
There is more to consider than the absolute number of guns or absolute number of ‘gun crimes.’
My family lives in Australia and violent crime is rampant. Street crime, break-ins, rapes – everything. My family lives in a very nice area – similar to Malibu in California – and endure burglaries every couple of years.
Remove the guns, empower the criminals. Like it or not, without a realistic means of defense, the physically weak are the prey of the criminal.
As we all remember, L. Paul Bremmer, the Viceroy of Iraq (or whatever we called him) made one brilliant decision after another. Hey, “Lets disband the Iraqi Army so that we have all of these military age and trained unemployed men available to do important work to be determined later.”
One of his decisions was that Iraqi’s could have one firearm per adult per household. Since seven minutes after the brilliant decision to disband the Army every household had an AK 47, an RPG, and some RPK’s, folks had a decision to make. Do I keep the hunting rifle, the shot gun, the pistol or the AK? Most chose the AK.
Day after day I watched beautiful guns come into my FOB. Browning Humpbacks (I kept a 16 gauge under my bunk with three boxes of bird shot and would shoot pigeons over the river at dusk), beautiful bolt action hunting rifles, target pistols, 98K Mausers, Webley .455 revolvers, a few Lugers and P38s, No. I Mk III Enfields, I even found a beautiful Pattern 17 Enfield in .30-06 (the “American Enfield”). And yes, one beautiful Drilling. I assume it was German. 12 Gauge over 8mm. The most beautiful furniture I have ever seen on a gun. I wanted the gun so bad I could taste it. I also didn’t want to get Court Martialed.
All those beautiful and in some case historic firearms went to the rear. Where they were cut, crushed, and burned. But that can’t happen here. No way. That would be as crazy as executing American Citizens with drones without trial. Or the Homeland Security Secretary declaring that DHS can confiscate any portable electronic device within one hundred miles of any border without due cause. When that happens I’ll get worried.
Some people are just a lost cause. This guy is a former gun owner who sold us out. Talks about “fun”? What a joke. FOAD.
Wow, not even double-action revolvers are safe from the grabbers.
Here’s a section from a Foreign Policy article about the 10 thing President Obama would say if he were telling the truth in the State of the Union Address.
2. To gun owners: You guys are absolutely right. There’s precious little new regulations are going to do to reduce crime if there are already 300 million guns in circulation. That’s why we have to take those guns out of circulation. We’re probably not going to come into your homes to get them — although we should. So here’s what we’re going to have to do: We’re going to outlaw your carrying them in public, trafficking them, and using them in a crime. Again, we’re not going to do this now. It’ll take a few more horrific tragedies to get there. But rest assured, we’ll get there. Guns really are the problem and getting rid of guns is the only way to solve it.
MIT solution to mass shootings… tire out the shooter with extra reloads and hope he slips in the lake of blood he’s creating while we pretend to be dead and wait for the cops.
hopefully the cops don’t decide to just swiss cheese the building with automatic fire from the outside, like a certain blue toyota
I vote we ban stupid, because that will work… trust me.
So the longer you would wait to sell your gun back to the government, the more it would be worth?
Funny, the same exact thing would be happening on the black market.
Eventually you would have only those who would not ever sell so they could continue terrorizing those of us who sold our guns.
Australian gun control works exactly the way the G wanted it to work. It turned a nation of riflemen into a nation of pansies with floppy hats. Mission accomplished. G’day, mates.
I just looooove it when economists try to opine on anything they have not studied (in the acquiring-foundational-knowledge sense), because, following the adage that “if you’re a hammer, the whole world is a nail”, their ideas apply to everything: from neurophysiology to constitutional law.
Yaaawwwwnnnnn…
If it wasn’t for their academic appointments, they’d be making french fries at a fast food franchise – and pontificating about THAT, too…
Be careful, John Lott s an Economist.
Meh…
500 at the bottom of the ocean….
He can be the exception…..
” I would be happy to volunteer my services to estimate how consumers would respond to such a buy-back program and the exact parameters that would be most cost-effective.”
By “volunteer” I assume he means he’d be willing to accept some sort of grant money to come up with an “estimate” guaranteed to support the anti’s cause.
Sounds like a job solicitation to me….
Since man first hurled a rock, a spear or used an addle-addle, there has been no technological or performance distinction between a hunting and a combat weapon.
We need to drive home the fact that guns are guns, and those bolt actions and double barrel shotguns are are just as vulnerable as the semiautomatic ARs, BARs, AKs, Minis, Henrys, etc.
1. What makes an economics professor such an expert on constitutional law, self-defense and firearms use as to tell me what kind of firearms I need and should be allowed to own?
2. I’m no economics professor, but I can see the problem with a “buy-back program that is funded through a tax on gun and ammunition sales” once semi-automatic weapons are banned. Since no one will be able to buy semi-automatic weapons, gun and ammunition sales will plummet because no one will want to own more than one or two guns. This means there will be very little tax revenue generated. So just how many weapons do they think they can buy back on a few thousand tax dollars per year?
clearly, not having enough money to spend on something hasn’t stopped the govt from spending it anyway, why should this be any different?
Trying to ban technological advancements never works. In the case of semi-autos, that is not recent technology. Semiautomatic firearms have been around since the late 1800’s as I recall. Somehow we’ve managed not to wipe ourselves out with them over a century later.
These arguments don’t hold up under the slightest of scrutiny. I am really tired of intellectual laziness being offered up as “common sense” solutions.
Semiautomatic rifles were introduced to the civilian market in 1903 by the Winchester Repeating Arms Corporation. By 1908 both Remington and Winchester had introducted high power autoloaders aimed at the hunting and law enforment markets. It wasn’t until the 1930’s that the military got around to using the technology in military rifles. So let’s get away from this myth that autoloading rifies are derived from weapons of war. It’s just opposite. The two popular bolt action hunting rifles today are the Winchester model 70 and the Remington 700 both of which are direct descendents of the Mauser Gewher 98 and 1903 Springfield. Unlike an AR patterned autoloader, these hunting rifles are funtionally identical to “weapons of war.”
All that education and dumb as a brick. What a waste.
Yep, he is obviously educated way beyond his intelligence.
Instead, I propose we adopt an aggressive buy-back program that is funded through a tax on gun and ammunition sales.
I would like to see some brave legislator(s) somewhere across our fruited plain file & pursue legislation that would eliminate (yes, eliminate!) sales tax on all firearms and ammo sales. Instead of letting liberals propose tax hikes, go on the offensive and propose laws that’ll preserve our 2A rights.
I don’t hunt. It’s just not my thing – though I am happy to help my father in law consume the results of his moose hunting (after a minimum 2 day marinade). I own AR-pattern rifles because that’s what I used in the military. I use them for target shooting and plinking, and I hope that I will never have to use them for self defense.
Ir my ARs are banned, I’m not going to renew my NRA membership. I’m pretty much out of the gun game and I won’t be there to support Fud-boy when they come for his Rem 700 or whatever, since he wasn’t there for me and since I’ll have better things to do with my time than support a passtime which I was barred from enjoying.
Guy looks like a younger, even dumber Bill Maeher (sp). Man, Mass. has really given us lots of brilliance since the Ted Kennedy school of driving. Wish he lived in L.A., we’d borrow him a Nissan Titan or Toyota.
Two points. First, I did NOT say I was in favor of an assault weapons ban. I specifically said “we cant even agree on how to define an assault weapon”. Second, your new friend still waits for the answer though. Name one initiative proposed by the POTUS that infringes upon your 2nd ammenment rights?
And in other news N Korea just detonated a believed 5 MT miniaturized (for them) nuclear devise. But, let’s be sure to concentrate on semi automatic rifles.
You know, I’m as anti-war as anyone here, probably more so, but if it was moi in the White House, and they aimed a nuclear missile test in our direction, I’d have every bomber wing (however few remain) in the air in fifteen minutes, and get on the phone (if they have any) to that venal dwarf and tell him he had ONE HOUR to surrender, UNCONDITIONALLY. And then put it administratively under South Korea. That’s a nasty government, too, but joy would reign in Pyongyang that very day.
This is no time for tinhorns.
Ban liberals from owning guns.
Hm what reflex sight does he have on his rifle?
Ban Christopher Knittel.
I’m all for old-fashioned guns, but does this guy work for the Massachusetts Institute for the Amish?
…”obvious real danger that guns present….” The fact that guns are dangerous is why they are in high demand, and why they perform their task so well. Feature. Not bug.
10
Joe Biden is one scary human being. And he wants desperately to be President. Can you f^cking imagine? Compared to Obama, Biden is a Denebian slime devil.
“There is nothing so stupid as an educated man, if you get him off the thing he was educated in.” – Will Rogers
Hey, Professor Knitwit, how’s about I teach your economics class for ya? ‘Cause I know more about economics than you do about the Second Amendment.
Excellent point Tim. Thanks.
Maybe he could volunteer his services to figure out the following if a full on AWB was put in play at a federal level:
1) Job losses and gun/accessory manufacturers shutting down
2) Increase of poverty and welfare in areas gun/accessory manufacturers once were
3) Increase in taxes to support 2
4) Increase in crime as a result of 1 and 2
5) The difference between the jobs Obama promised and the jobs he took
I know many of you say that the grabbers are not as stupid as they make themselves appear but this guy? An MIT economics proffessor? I would think he would see the big picture
In a battle with Nick Leghorn for the “Worst Handwriting” lifetime achievement award.
Got a garand you are willing to sell? I’ve got a bunch of 3006 but not one of my rilfes shoot that caliber…
Heller case. Knittel needs to read Supreme Court decision.
maybe we need to make weapons education a mandatory part of the curriculum for grade school and colleges. The firearms connoisseur in me wants to raise hell over the gibberish these anti gunners lets fall from their faces but the sensible part of me remember when i was ignorant to pretty much everything about firearms.
90% of the guns traced came from the US. Bet on it.
he looks like Doogie Howser. . . . . or howdy doodie
Knittel’s motivation for this blather is transparent, isn’t it? Some colleague from the Cambridge Stasi found out Knittel had actually owned a Wonder Nine pistol. Facing possible exile, instant shunning, and a certain declaration of anathema, Knittel is spewing this kind of BS to try and earn his PC credential back. “Good luck with that one, you gun freak. We know your true stripes. No PC credential for YOU!” Signed, Cambridge, MA.
“My Garand does my talking”
Academic smarts and intelligence are mutually exclusive: Thinking inside the box vs thinking outside the box.
HOLD THE PHONE! So this means we can all go full-auto?
If not, DEMAND A BODYGUARD!
I had a ’42 Garand. A March ’42… I got it because I wanted an M1 built the same month my Dad was born. The muzzle wear and throat erosion weren’t that great but the rifle still shot the lights out. Garands rock… nothing says “RELOAD!” better than the PING after the eight shot. Thanks for the memories.
“Publish or Perish” doesn’t apply to opinion pieces.
I wish I could remember the source, but I read just recently that Aussies have rearmed themselves with legally imported arms to the same levels as before the buyback. If true, MEGAfail.
I would LOVE to own a Garand, I wish the CMP had a club around i could join to Purchase one.
Have you used this?
http://ct.thecmp.org/app/v1/index.php?do=clubSearch
“the greatest battle implement ever devised” Excellent weapon…:)
Well, it looks like at least SOMEbody looked at those clever Mini-14 comparisons…
I’m hoping we hear a lot more of this kind of crap. At least it’s honest. And the last few dozen hunters in this country who think they’re somehow exempt from all this will have no choice but to throw in with the rest of us evil scary black gun owners.
Strange he says make them illegal but in every poll well over 50% of gun owners will not turn them in. And that bans in England show it didn’t work. Another dumb Fascist from Kalifornia!
I guess we are not lagitement like he said yesterday only fascist like him are. Well we still have a IQ 1000000000000% higher than you Biden…… SO does a rock.
PS Net flicks tonight more Bull crap coming from the Commie and Chief cant stand to see such sewage coming in my house…. Agree Dan?
“Yeah, cause they got to charge him withsomething, right?”
I would say so. They were called to a “man with a gun” and he obviously did have one. Whether it was in the yard or not is irrelivant until they see otherwise. MWAG call and on arrival they cant see one hand when ordered to show them?
If Michelle Obama was a decent person, she should have been at Chris Kyle’s funeral. But knowing what we know, it was better she stayed away.
His commander in chief could have had the decency to mention him.
Really? I call BS, Mr. West Virginia is flip-flopping on this so much he belongs in a Harlem Shake video…..
Man’s a turd and I am glad I did not vote for him.
Don’t forget Obama in his speech wants to cut our USAF and USN Nuclear arms by 1/3 so the US cant be armed citizens? with guns no military? no. But Islamic scum and Commies all over the planet Obama wants to arm.
The second someone says that I know they are completely ignorant. The EPA and AIEA have a few things to say about this before even the Feds get involved so it is simply a tactic to put you on the defensive from the beginning, even those these folks have no idea about gun operation, or what does what. All they know is guns equals bad..
Why are they going to risk additional lives taking this guy down? Either isolate and wait him out or just fall back and hit the cabin with an AT4 or two…
I’m not sure how it squares with the history around the second amendment, but for a practical limit, I like this one…
Citizens should be entitled to whatever equipment and arms are used by police departments. In the event citizens ever took action against their government, they are much more likely to skirmish with local law enforcement than the regular military or the national guard. After all, there really aren’t enough people in the army to secure an entire nation the size of the US, or even a significant part of it, and in the event of that situation, a large part of the military and national guard would probably end up on the other side. The same could probably also be said of local law enforcement.
Yeah, I’m going to turn in my Colt SOCOM for $200. How about this: MOLON LABE. Further proof that the “elite” are out of touch with reality.
Unfortunately one of the Officers that was shot today. Has Died in Loma Linda. RIP
Curious if these debunking posts are showing up as pingbacks on the Walker post….
This does help to bring attention and put pressure on the Anti-gunners and if every firearm manufacturer would do it that would be great, but I think what would put most pressure on them is if ammo manufacturers refused to sell the NYPD and govt ammunition. Just food for thought.
CNN: charred remains found
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/02/12/police-checking-reports-that-ex-lapd-officer-dorner-sighted/?hpt=hp_t1
They might have de-energized the magnet but that would suck for the facility because it would probably be down for a few days. I have had pliers stuck to the side of one before. And this is not the first cop to have his gun removed by a MRI. And not the first person to bring something into the room that should not have been there.