November 4, 2013
Friday’s attack at Los Angeles International Airport, by a shooter apparently armed with an AR-15 rifle, has, predictably, already been cited as justification for banning such firearms, despite the fact that AR-15s are already banned, in nearly every configuration, in California–and certainly in California airports–and despite the fact that banning them will do nothing about the ease with which they can be built (even in California), rather than bought. Writing for Take Part, Peter Zachariadis posits that such a ban might have made the difference:
Whether the man had a permit [and predictably, he is clearly in favor of requiring a "permit" for exercise of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms] for the assault weapon has not been determined, but a ban on such weapons may have prevented the attack.
Zachariadis also laments the continued legality of “high capacity”(gun prohibitionist-speak for standard capacity) magazines.