Weapons ban expires

The 10-year national assault weapon ban expired Monday, making more than a dozen formerly illegal assault rifles once again accessible to the public.\nThe ban, which was introduced in 1994 in response to assault weapons-related shootings, led to sweeping nationwide legislation that restricted the distribution of specific models of military-style assault weapons and weapons with certain combinations of features specifically designed for military use.\nOpponents of the ban argue it is ineffective. Advocates maintain the ban keeps military weapons out of the wrong hands. \n"I think guns will go up in the selling and distribution," said Patty Williams, a registered nurse from Muncie and a leader of Gun Responsibility In Every Family In Indiana. "I don't think it will cause a rise in crime, but it will lead to more deaths because now (criminals) have more deadly weapons accessible to them. An assault weapon that is accessible now makes it easier to mow down people really quick. What do you need these guns for? We're not a military."\nWilliams' son Ryan was accidentally killed while he was visiting a friend's house May 28, 1994. Ryan's friend was playing with a gun when it mistakenly went off. Her organization advocates safe storage of handguns and being responsible with firearms in households. \nWilliams and her husband, Tim, have attempted to introduce legislation into the Indiana General Assembly restricting the accessibility of weapons since their son's death but have been turned down six years in a row.\nTim Williams, also a member of GRIEF, said in a dominant Republican state like Indiana, it's hard to get legislation passed for their cause.\n"They don't look at owners to keep their firearms stored safely. We tried for five to six years and got exhausted by being scoffed at," Tim Williams said. "The first year we were heard in the Senate, then the (National Rifle Association) spoke and coerced them for funding, (and) everyone jumped off the bandwagon."\nPatty Williams noted the uphill battle GRIEF faces.\n"It's hard to try and pass gun legislation when several legislators are gun owners and some of them used to bring them into the Statehouse and put them in their desks," Patty Williams said.\nNot all feel that crime will increase or adverse affects will result without a ban.\nAngel Rivera, chairman of the IU College Republicans, said the ban will have no impact on weapons or safety.\n"I'm glad that our Second Amendment rights are protected -- the ban in no way will make Americans safer, and its listing will have no effect on criminals or safety," Rivera said. "The weapons that the ban restricts could be easily replaced with almost identical weapons. The ban is pretty useless."\nRivera said guns aren't as bad as they are portrayed, but he fears the ban could be renewed.\n"In any way, (having a gun) makes you safer. I'm a gun owner, and I'll do whatever it takes to keep intruders out," Rivera said. "I believe that, unfortunately, liberals might get their way and restrict our right to own guns, which our founding fathers sought as our right to bear arms." \nMatt Brunner, political vice president of the IU College Democrats, said he opposes the end of the ban and feels it should be renewed. He said he is indecisive of what kind of effect it will have.\n"Well I don't know what effect (the ban's expiration) will have on Indiana," Brunner said. "I think the ban should've been renewed and not (been made) easier to obtain assault rifles."\nBrunner also said without the ban in place, he feels crime rates will only rise. \nTim Williams said the lifting of the ban will only help to spur juvenile violence in the future.\n"I can't help but think it will have an effect on juvenile violence," he said. "We've heard the horrible stories of the people who are killed with inaccessible weapons numbers at one time, and now we're going to legalize it, and now it's going to do nothing but increase the deaths."\n-- Contact senior writer Lindsay Jancek at lmjancek@indiana.edu .