Bob Owens

The saddest truth in politics is that people get the leaders they deserve

1994 “Assault Weapon Ban” wouldn’t have stopped Aurora shooter

Written By: Bob - Jul• 23•12

Two things I’ve read repeatedly in the mainstream media about the Aurora Colorado shooting were that the shooter was wearing “body armor” and that the firearms and magazines he used would have been outlawed under the 1994 Crime Bill.

Neither statement is true.

The “body armor” the suspect war wasn’t body armor at all, and wouldn’t have stopped the wind, much less a bullet. He was wearing a “tactical vest”, which is nothing more or less than a vest with a bunch of external pockets sown into it. I could forgive the media if they were simply relying upon the police for that claim, but it has now been widely reported that the suspect had only purchased a Blackhawk brand tactical vest. They continue to call it body armor only to sell fear, and support the illusion he couldn’t have been stopped by mere civilians.

Likewise, the media likes to claim that the AR-15 style rifle the shooter used, and the 100-round magazine used at some point in his rampage, were both banned under the “assault weapons ban” of the 1994 Crime bill. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The poorly-conceived  1994 law outlawed 19 guns by name, along with a combination of 2 or more cosmetic features that congressional dunces found scary. None of these cosmetic features affected the firearm’s range, rate of fire or accuracy. The result? The same firearms were manufactured after the ban  began with the very minor cosmetic changes made. If the law was still in effect today, the shooter could have still walked into any gun store, passed his background check, and walked out with a rifle just like that he used.

Likewise, the 100-round magazine he used for part of the attack (interestingly enough, the recovered weapon appears to have had a standard-capacity 30-round magazine in place when he dropped it outside the theater) wouldn’t have been illegal to buy, sell, possess or use. Only the new manufacture of magazine bodies was illegal under the ban, and so manufacturers cranked out tens of millions of magazine bodies before the “ban” went into effect, and sold them during the entire ban without a significant dent in supply.

The media doesn’t know what they are talking about. Again.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.


  1. The media doesn’t know what they are talking about. Again.

    I take it you’re not surprised …

  2. Stretch says:

    “The media doesn’t know what they are talking about. Again.”
    While the firearms ignorance of the Fourth Estate (and Fifth Column) is boundless the misstatements and and outright lies are intentional. They are desperate to renew and enlarge the ’94 AWB.

  3. Joel C says:

    I agree with Stretch. After seeing the media get the same things wrong over and over again for a decade (’bout as long as I’ve been paying attention, so probably much longer)I can’t believe it’s ignorance any more.

    The only alternative is deceit.

  4. Paul says:

    “The media doesn’t know what they are talking about. Again.”

    I think they do know, they’re just hoping we don’t.

    “… They continue to call it body armor only to sell fear…”

  5. Brad says:

    Let it also be said that even if the killer had used a weapon which complied with the Feinstein AW ban, the outcome would not have changed. The proof of this is the 1999 Columbine massacre, where the primary murder weapon was a Hi-Point 9mm carbine using a supply of loaded 10 round magazines.

    Armed people vs unarmed people are what enables massacres. Not flash-suppressors or 20-round magazines. The Hi-Point 9mm carbine was designed to comply with the Federal AW ban. I don’t think a magazine greater than 10 rounds capacity even exists for the weapon. Yet it is perfectly suitable for slaughtering unarmed victims.

  6. captainfish says:

    I think it is time we start asking from where this “100-round magazine” or the “100-round drum” came from. Did he buy one? If so, that doesn’t mean he had it on him that night.

    I see the photo of the rifle lying near the exit door and you are right, it appears to be an extended-hold magazine but not 100 round.

    One thing I have not heard talked about (in relation to the photo on the right side of his white Hyundai) is the passenger window looks busted out. There also appears to be several evidence markers on the car. Did he really give up without a struggle?

    Did he really interact with the police crew once they arrived on scene? And he only gave up once he was “found out”? How did the SWAT get their so fast? Or is that another media mistake to confuse local cops with the SWAT team that came later?