"Army Lawyer on use of shotguns in combat"
Rich Griffiths sent me the following note:
The October 1997 issue of the Army Lawyer has an interesting legal review of the use of shotguns by the US military. Especially germane to civilian firearm laws is the discussion of the effectiveness of shotguns versus assault firearms and submachine guns at close quarters.
http://jagcnet.army.mil/JAGCNETINTERNET/HOMEPAGES/AC/ARMYLAWYER.NSF/c82df279f9445da185256e5b005244ee/6ae1de28fab6310685256e5b0054ec6b/$FILE/Article%202.pdf
Page 20:
"...British examination of its malaya experience determined that, to a range of thirty yards (27.4 meters), the probability of hitting a man-sized target with a shotgun was superior to that of all other weapons. The probability of hitting the intended target with an assault rifle was one in eleven. It was one in eight with a submachine gun firing a five-round burst. Shotguns had a hit probability ratio twice as good as rifles..."
It seems to me that many assault weapon and handgun bans, and other firearm laws are based on implicit theories of lethality derived from the media rather than actual empirical evidence of lethality and effectiviness of firearms in combat.
http://jagcnet.army.mil/JAGCNETINTERNET/HOMEPAGES/AC/ARMYLAWYER.NSF/c82df279f9445da185256e5b005244ee/6ae1de28fab6310685256e5b0054ec6b/$FILE/Article%202.pdf
Page 20:
"...British examination of its malaya experience determined that, to a range of thirty yards (27.4 meters), the probability of hitting a man-sized target with a shotgun was superior to that of all other weapons. The probability of hitting the intended target with an assault rifle was one in eleven. It was one in eight with a submachine gun firing a five-round burst. Shotguns had a hit probability ratio twice as good as rifles..."
It seems to me that many assault weapon and handgun bans, and other firearm laws are based on implicit theories of lethality derived from the media rather than actual empirical evidence of lethality and effectiviness of firearms in combat.
posted by John Lott at 3:21 PM
1 Comments:
"It seems to me that many assault weapon and handgun bans, and other firearm laws are based on implicit theories of lethality derived from the media ..." (Lott)
I agree too. But I also think much of the media knowledge on guns comes from police who are opposed to citizen gun possession. IMO one of the worst bans are the sawed-off shotgun ban. This ban was to protect police from the lethality of short shotguns. But it was self-defeating.
Most gun attacks on police are from handguns. And short shotguns are an ideal weapon for home protection because most shotgun projectiles do not penetrate walls and doors, and this is good for neighbors, and in urban settings, making a short shotgun a safer alternative than a high powered handgun, which can have a distant maximum range. But these weapons are banned. As usual the best weapons for personal protection are banned because of police influence on the newsmedia.
Gun bans are self defeating and don't make sense. Guns are typically banned in places where liquor are sold, but this is where armed citizens can protect others. Guns are typically banned in schools (including colleges) but this is where teachers (and parents) should be armed.
The only place guns should be banned are in court rooms where disputes are settled (except for judges and courtroom police) and in legislatures where laws are created. The worst place to ban guns are in schools.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home