The answer to this question is pretty much 1986 (whether that’s a matter of “courage” or not), when automatic weapons — i.e., machineguns — were largely banned. There is an exception for pre-1986 automatic weapons, of which there are relatively few, since they have been heavily taxed since the 1930s. As a result, automatic weapons are very expensive, hard to get legally, and banned outright in many jurisdictions. Those grandfathered weapons are almost never used in violent crime.
So when Sen. Chris Murphy writes the following to Rupert Murdoch, he’s not being quite on the level:
Shortly after the tragedy in Newtown, you called on policymakers and the President to strengthen our gun laws, asking, “when will politicians find courage to ban automatic weapons?” This valid question will be answered when the Senate considers major reforms to our gun laws in early to mid-April. As a senator, I can tell you that many of us possess the courage, and will strongly advocate for sensible gun reforms to take assault weapons and high-capacity magazines off our streets and require all gun purchasers to submit for a background check.
So-called “assault weapons” are not automatic weapons — weapons that very rapidly fire dozens of rounds with one trigger pull, which is what I think people likely understand “automatic weapon” to mean: “a firearm that reloads itself and keeps firing until the trigger is released.” Rather, they are semiautomatic weapons, much like the many semiautomatic handguns and rifles that “assault weapons” bans don’t purport to cover.
Now I realize that “automatic” is sometimes used as a synonym for “semiautomatic” when it comes to handguns, though I don’t think “automatic weapon” is generally used this way. But if that’s so, then that would mean that Mr. Murdoch and, apparently, Sen. Murphy are endorsing for a ban on all semiautomatic weapons, which account for probably about half or more of the guns owned by Americans. Can that be true? And if it isn’t, then this supports my view that such calls either reflect a confusion on the part of those who are making the argument, or a desire to exploit confusing on the part of the audience, and make them think that “assault weapons bans” are attempts to ban machineguns.