Editorial in 01Aug2000 WSJ

Gun Control: Strictly Symbolism
By JOHN R. Lott JR.
Who could possibly oppose laws against “plastic” guns or “cop-killer”
bullets? Dick Cheney, for one. According to the Gore campaign, only someone
“far outside the mainstream” could vote “no.” Yet, despite broad support
from both the National Rifle Association and gun-control groups, both were
bad laws. They provided placebo cures for imaginary ills.
The hysteria over “plastic guns” arose in the mid-1980s when the Austrian
company Glock began exporting pistols to the U.S. They were labeled
“terrorist specials” by the press, and fear spread that their plastic frame
and grip would make them invisible to metal detectors. Nobody mentioned
that there was over one pound of metal in them. Try going through an
airport detector with that. In fact, no guns have ever been produced
without at least some metal, nor is there any evidence that such guns can
be made.
So what did this supposedly crucial law do? The minimum metal requirement
was set at 3.2 ounces, less than a fifth of the metal contained in the
Glocks and significantly less than any other gun. The standard was picked
because it did not affect anything. No gun maker was hurt, while
politicians were able to pretend they were “doing something.” The reliable
and lightweight Glocks are now one of the favorite pistols of American
police officers.
The debate over “cop-killer” bullets in 1986 was just as misleading. The
bullet was invented by police officers in the ‘fiOs to fire at suspects
hiding behind objects or wearing bullet-resistant vests. These specialty
bullets, usually made out of tungsten, were only sold to police and were
not available in stores anywhere in the U.S.
Despite the “cop-killer” description, only police used these bullets, and
even then extremely rarely. No officer has eve?”~ been shot at, let alone
killed, with such a bullet. Nor did the law even deal with bullets that
might actually be used to penetrate bullet-resistant vests. Most rifle
ammunition will do this, though to have banned rifle bullets would have
effectively outlawed most hunting.
As police know, there is still another irony: “Cop-killer” bullets have
less stopping power than hollow-point bullets since they pass more easily
through their victim. They are more likely than other bullets to wound, not
kill.
Just like the law against “plastic” guns, this law changed nothing.
Companies continued selling these specialty bullets only to police.
As Mr. Cheney said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” he takes seriously the
Constitutional provision that “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.” Apparently, he felt these laws offered little reason to
infringe on that right. But no matter one’s views on the Second Amendment,
the laws were only the politicians’ attempt “do something” in response to
groundless hysteria. Mr. Cheney displayed rare courage in going against the
tide.

Mr. Lott is a senior research scholar at Yale Law School. A second edition
of his book “More Guns, Less Crime” was published last month by the
University of Chicago Press.