The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003 Author(s): Christopher S. Koper Document No.: 204431 Date Received: July 2004 Award Number: 98-IJ-CX-0039 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003 Report to the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice By Christopher S. Koper (Principal Investigator) With Daniel J. Woods and Jeffrey A. Roth June 2004 Jerry Lee Center of Criminology University of Pennsylvania 3814 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface i Acknowledgments ii 1. Impacts of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, 1994-2003: Key Findings and Conclusions 1 2. Provisions of the Assault Weapons Ban 4 2.1. Assault Weapons 4 2.2. Large Capacity Magazines 6 2.3. Foreign Rifles Capable of Accepting Large Capacity Magazines for Military Rifles 8 2.4. Ban Exemptions 10 2.5. Summary 11 3. Criminal Use of Assault Weapons and Large Capacity Magazines Before the Ban 14 3.1. Criminal Use of Assault Weapons 15 3.2. Criminal Use of Large Capacity Magazines 18 3.3. Summary 19 4. Overview of Study Design, Hypotheses, and Prior Findings 20 4.1. Logical Framework for Research on the Ban 20 4.2. Hypothesized Market Effects 21 4.3. Prior Research on the Ban’s Effects 23 5. Market Indicators for Assault Weapons: Prices and Production 25 5.1. Price Trends for Assault Weapons and Other Firearms 25 5.2. Production Trends for Assault Weapons and Other Firearms 33 5.3. Summary and Interpretations 36 6. Criminal Use of Assault Weapons After the Ban 39 6.1. Measuring Criminal Use of Assault Weapons: A Methodological Note 39 6.2. National Analysis of Guns Reported By Police to the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms 40 6.3. Local Analyses of Guns Recovered By Police 46 6.4. Summary 51 7. Market Indicators for Large Capacity Magazines: Prices and Importation 61 7.1. Price Trends for Large Capacity Magazines 61 7.2. Post-Ban Importation of Large Capacity Magazines 65 7.3. Summary and Interpretations 65 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) 8. Criminal Use of Large Capacity Magazines After the Ban 68 8.1. Baltimore 69 8.2. Anchorage 73 8.3. Milwaukee 75 8.4. Louisville 77 8.5. Summary 78 9. The Consequences of Crimes With Assault Weapons and Large Capacity Magazines 80 9.1. The Spread of Semiautomatic Weaponry and Trends in Lethal and Injurious Gun Violence Prior to the Ban 81 9.2. Shots Fired in Gun Attacks and the Effects of Weaponry on Attack Outcomes 83 9.3. Post-Ban Trends in Lethal and Injurious Gun Violence 91 9.4. Summary 96 10. Looking to the Future: Research Recommendations and Speculation About the Possible Consequences of Reauthorizing, Modifying, or Lifting the Assault Weapons Ban 98 10.1. Research Recommendations and Data Requirements 98 10.2. Potential Consequences of Reauthorizing, Modifying, or Lifting the Assault Weapons Ban 100 References 102 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. PREFACE Gun violence continues to be one of America’s most serious crime problems. In 2000, over 10,000 persons were murdered with firearms and almost 49,000 more were shot in the course of over 340,000 assaults and robberies with guns (see the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s annual Uniform Crime Reports and Simon et al., 2002). The total costs of gun violence in the United States – including medical, criminal justice, and other government and private costs – are on the order of at least $6 to $12 billion per year and, by more controversial estimates, could be as high as $80 billion per year (Cook and Ludwig, 2000). However, there has been good news in recent years. Police statistics and national victimization surveys show that since the early 1990s, gun crime has plummeted to some of the lowest levels in decades (see the Uniform Crime Reports and Rennison, 2001). Have gun controls contributed to this decline, and, if so, which ones? During the last decade, the federal government has undertaken a number of initiatives to suppress gun crime. These include, among others, the establishment of a national background check system for gun buyers (through the Brady Act), reforms of the licensing system for firearms dealers, a ban on juvenile handgun possession, and Project Safe Neighborhoods, a collaborative effort between U.S. Attorneys and local authorities to attack local gun crime problems and enhance punishment for gun offenders. Perhaps the most controversial of these federal initiatives was the ban on semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines enacted as Title XI, Subtitle A of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. This law prohibits a relatively small group of weapons considered by ban advocates to be particularly dangerous and attractive for criminal purposes. In this report, we investigate the ban’s impacts on gun crime through the late 1990s and beyond. This study updates a prior report on the short-term effects of the ban (1994-1996) that members of this research team prepared for the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Congress (Roth and Koper, 1997; 1999). This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was supported by National Institute of Justice (U.S. Department of Justice) grants 2003-IJ-CX-1029 to the University of Pennsylvania and 98-IJ-CX-0039 to the Urban Institute. The Jerry Lee Center of Criminology, University of Pennsylvania provided additional support. The views expressed are those of the author. They do not reflect official positions of the United States Department of Justice and should not be attributed to the trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, the Urban Institute, or any of the other persons or organizations listed below. The author wishes to thank several people and organizations that assisted this effort in numerous ways. Daniel Woods assisted with data analysis. Jeffrey Roth, who directed our first study of the assault weapons ban, provided advice and editorial input. Additional research assistance was provided by the following former employees of the Urban Institute: Gretchen Moore, David Huffer, Erica Dinger, Darin Reedy, Kate Bunting, Katie Gorie, and Michele Waul. The following persons and organizations provided databases, information, or other resources utilized for this report: Glenn Pierce (Northeastern University), Pamela Shaw and Edward Koch (Baltimore Police Department), Robert Shem (Alaska State Police), Bill McGill and Mallory O’Brien (currently or formerly of the Firearm Injury Center, Medical College of Wisconsin), Rick Ruddell (California State University, Chico), Scott Doyle (Kentucky State Police), Terrence Austin and Joe Vince (currently or formerly of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives), Carlos Alvarez and Alan Lynn (Metro-Dade Police Department), Charles Branas (Firearm and Injury Center, University of Pennsylvania), Caroline Harlow (Bureau of Justice Statistics), and Rebecca Knox (Brady Center to Prevent Handgun Violence). Robert Burrows (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) and Wain Roberts (Wain Roberts Firearms) shared technical expertise on firearms. Anonymous reviewers for the National Institute of Justice provided thorough and helpful comments on earlier versions of this report, as did Terrence Austin and Robert Burrows of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Finally, I thank Lois Mock, our National Institute of Justice grant monitor, for her advice and encouragement throughout all of the research that my colleagues and I have conducted on the assault weapons ban. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. ii 1. IMPACTS OF THE FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, 1994-2003: KEY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS This overview presents key findings and conclusions from a study sponsored by the National Institute of Justice to investigate the effects of the federal assault weapons ban.