. I got this from Tucker Carlson in the past few days, haven't checked it myself, but he said there was a so-called assault weapons ban for 10 years from '94-04 that was studied by the DoJ and it concluded there was no change in gun crime, so that's on example of a common sense gun law reform that had no effect.
That logic is flawed. There have been an increasing number of mass shootings with assault weapons Since the assault ban was lifted. You would have to argue that the increase was not due to lifting the ban.
The logical equivalent to Tucker's argument is that reinstating the assault weapons ban now would not decrease gun crime --because it didn't change anything when was instated from 94-04. However, that's fatalism. It proposes that we must live with the current crime rate. At any rate, there's no way to know the effect reinstating the ban would have. At worst, there would be no change. At best, there would be a reduction --no matter how small.
The other argument implied is that the current gun laws are sufficient. Ok, but does that mean they're successful? Which one of the recent shooters got his weapons illegally?