Following recent mass shooting events in the twin cities area, some involving assault-style rifles, a renewed call for more gun control measures has emerged.
Governor Walz has declared that he intends to call the Minnesota Legislature back for a special session aimed at banning assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines. This despite not passing into law such legislation during the two years his party (DFL) held a trifecta of power in 2023/24. To date there has been no indication that a special session is imminent.
“If Minnesota lets this moment slide, and we determine that it’s OK for little ones to not be safe in a school environment or a church environment, then shame on us.”
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz
The data
There’s a love hate relationship with data. Sometimes it’s helpful in making a point, other times it’s not. Both advocates and opponents of gun control can use available data to craft an argument for or against their position. Here are some examples.
Firearms in the U.S.
According to a 2021 Forbes article, the number of firearms in the U.S. is estimated to be 434 million, while the number of “assault-style rifles” is estimated to be at least 20 million.
BCA data
The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) collects crime data from local law enforcement throughout Minnesota. The BCA’s Crime Data Explorer is a valuable tool for those interested in analyzing a variety of data. Focusing on the “assault-styled rifle” debate, an analysis of data surrounding murders in Minnesota over the past five years (January – August*) reveals the following:
- There has been an average of 114.4 murders/year*
- There has been an average of 81.8 murders/year* involving all forms of firearms (pistols, shotguns, rifles).
- Just 2.8 murders/year* have involved a rifle. This equates to 2.4% of all murders. (Note: BCA data does not specify “assault-style rifles” however, the rifle category is the most likely category to encompass the style of rifles most commonly referred to as assault-style rifles).
- By comparison, nearly the same percentage of murders have occurred as a result of blunt force trauma each year* (2.2%) as have occurred with a rifle (2.4%).
- There have been nearly six times as many murders carried out with a knife (12.4%) as have been carried out with a rifle (2.4%).
Hamline University Database on Mass Shootings in the US.
Minnesota’s Hamline University has a publicly accessible database as part of its Violence Prevention Project Research Center. The database tracks all the mass shootings that have occurred in the United States between 1965 and 2024. A mass shooting, for purposes of the database, was defined as four or more people shot during an incident not involving gang or other criminal activity.
A summary of the data indicates that there were 193 mass shootings carried out by 197 shooters.
In those 193 mass shootings, 2,177 people were injured and 1,398 people were killed.
The shooters possessed 431 firearms at the scene. Of those 431 firearms, they fired 286 of them during the mass shootings.
114 of the firearms that were fired were considered “assault weapons” – 27% of all firearms possessed by mass shooters at the scene of mass shootings. (Note: an “assault weapon” is a far more expansive term than “assault-style rifle” and includes semi and full auto pistols with high-capacity magazines capable of firing many rounds quickly, without having to re-load. Also note – just 114 “assault weapons” have been used in mass shootings as defined, since 1965. This represents .0006% of the 20 million assault-style rifles, which are only a portion of the broader “assault weapon” pool.
50% of the mass shootings involving an “assault weapon” also involved the use of a high-capacity magazine.
Since 2000, the percentage of legally purchased firearms used in mass shootings has increased over previous periods, however, the number of legally purchased firearms (89) was still eclipsed by the number of illegally obtained firearms, and firearms obtained by unknown means (90).
The percentage of “assault weapons” used in mass shootings has increased from an average of 18% of the mass shootings prior to 2010 to an average of 52% of the mass shootings since 2010.
71 (36%) of the mass shooters intended to die during the mass shooting and 65 (33%) had been suicidal at some point prior to the mass shooting.
59 (30%) of the mass shooters had some level of psychosis that was determined to have played a minor, moderate, or major role in the mass shooting.
Statistica data
According to Statistica, the U.S. averaged 12,000 firearms related homicides per year between 2014 – 2023. According to the Hamline mass shooter database, there were 552 fatalities from mass shootings during this same ten-year period. This equates to 4.6% of all firearms related homicides in the U.S.
Arguments against a “ban”
Banning assault-styled rifles and high-capacity magazines is a reflex reaction to a relatively rare, but admittedly growing number of mass shootings involving these items. When that reflex reaction involves tampering with a constitutionally protected right, we need to make sure we don’t overreact.
Those on both sides of the argument refer to the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment which reads in its entirety:
“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”
Gun control advocates point to the militia reference and argue that our right to bear arms is limited to militia service. However, it has long been understood that the intent of the framers was not simply to arm a militia, but to ensure a well-armed citizenry existed as a check against tyrannical government.
The U.S. Supreme Court further clarified the Second Amendment in the Heller decision. In Heller the court recognized that citizens have the right to possess and carry firearms for the lawful purpose of personal safety, and that the types of firearms citizens can possess are those “in common use at the time.” The court also recognized that the Second Amendment does not give unlimited rights, concluding: “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever, in any manner whatsoever, and for whatever purpose.” And with that, the debate continues over what constitutes an uncommon or unusually dangerous firearm.
Among the most notable Minnesota mass shootings – the murder of Rep. Melissa Hortman, et al, and the mass shooting at Annunciation School – the first was carried out using a handgun, while the second was carried out using an assault-styled semi-automatic rifle.
Among the most notable (and deadly) mass shootings in US history – the Virginia Tech school shooting and the Las Vegas strip mass shooting – the first was carried out using two handguns, while the second was carried our using multiple assault-styled semi-automatic rifles, some with “bump stocks” making them fire “automatically.”
Legal gun owners, and those with permits to carry firearms are very seldom involved in criminal activity, especially in Minnesota. An analysis of BCA data showed that in 2021 just 1% of permit holders had committed a crime, and that just 2% of those crimes involved the use of a firearm. Legal gun owners, by and large, do not represent a gun violence threat.
We also have ample laws that prohibit certain individuals from possessing firearms based on criminal history, age, and mental health status. Our laws also set mandatory minimum sentencing for those who use a gun in commission of a crime. However, an analysis of sentences involving these cases in 2022 showed that in nearly half (48.5%) of cases in which a defendant should have received a mandatory minimum sentence, the judge departed away from the sentence and the legislative intent.
Until we address the far more frequent examples of our criminal justice system failing to incapacitate violent criminals who use guns in commission of their crimes, it is inappropriate to consider restricting the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens who rarely represent a threat to society.
Conclusion
Mass shootings are a scourge in the United States. They are a cause of great concern given the vulnerability of victims, the randomness of the attacks, and the senseless loss of life. However, statistically, they remain a very small percentage of all firearms related homicides in the US.
While a growing number of mass shootings are carried out using legally purchased “assault weapons,” the number remains an extremely small fraction of the firearms related homicides that occur.
“Banning” assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines would have little impact on our firearm homicide rate, while it would represent a significant infringement of a constitutionally protected right. The Second Amendment appears shoulder to shoulder with the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, and the right against self-incrimination. We would never agree to degrade those rights in some theoretical effort to reduce crime, and we should take the same position with the Second Amendment.
Our time and effort would be much better spent identifying and treating the psychological pathology behind mass shooters, hardening potential targets, and reducing the overall number of firearm homicides by properly enforcing existing laws.
