Tim Walz's lies on Gun Control in 2018

Tim Walz in 2018: “I spent 25 years in the Army and I hunt. And I gave the [NRA’s] money back. And I will tell you what I have been doing. I’ve been voting for common sense legislation that protects the Second Amendment, but we can do background checks, we can do CDC research, we can make sure that we don’t reciprocal carry among states. And we can make sure those weapons of war, that I carried in war, is the only place carried are allowed."

In just a few sentences, Walz made false claims about assault weapons, background checks, CDC research, and reciprocal carry.

First, take his claims about "weapons of war." Put aside that Walz never was in war, let alone carried a weapon in war. The term "assault weapon" is nonsensical. Even the Associated Press's highly influential Stylebook, followed by the news media recognizes that fact. As the AP acknowledges, the term conveys "little meaning" and is "highly politicized."

Politicians will continue calling AR-15s "weapons of war" and "assault weapons," as Walz does. But at least some of the media is now recognizing that "AR- or AK-style rifles designed for the civilian market" are fundamentally different than military weapons.

"The preferred term for a rifle that fires one bullet each time the trigger is pulled, and automatically reloads for a subsequent shot, is a semi-automatic rifle," according to the AP Stylebook. "An automatic rifle continuously fires rounds if the trigger is depressed until its ammunition is exhausted. Avoid assault rifle and assault weapon, which are highly politicized terms that generally refer to AR- or AK-style rifles designed for the civilian market, but convey little meaning about the actual functions of the weapon."

AR-15s and AK-47s are frequently called "military-style weapons." But the key is "style"—they are like military guns in how they look, not in how they operate. The guns are not the fully automatic machine guns used by the military, but rather semi-automatic versions of those guns.

For someone who says he is a hunter, Walz surely knows this. The civilian AR-15 uses essentially the same sorts of bullets as small game-hunting rifles. It also fires at the same rate (one bullet per pull of the trigger), the bullet travels at the same speed, and does the same damage. Still, no military anywhere uses the civilian versions of either of these guns.

But hunting isn't the critical issue here. Semi-automatic weapons protect people and save lives. Single-shot rifles require manual reloading after every round, and people may not have the time to reload their gun when they face multiple attackers or fire and miss.

Most mass public shootings don't use any type of rifle. Fifty-three percent involve only handguns, and only 17% solely involve rifles of any variety.

It should be little wonder that banning "assault" rifles did very little. During the 1994-2004 ban, the number of attacks with "assault weapons" didn't fall, and virtually no change in total mass shootings.

The quote also shows Walz lying about Centers for Disease Control and Prevention research. He is referring to the 1996 Dickey Amendment – named after former Rep. Jay Dickey, R-Ark. – that supposedly barred the federal CDC from funding research on gun violence.

But the Dickey Amendment actually stated: "None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control."

The amendment allowed CDC-funded research. but banned CDC advocacy. So, despite what gun-control advocates claim, research continued under the Dickey Amendment.
Despite what Walz and other gun control backers say, neither the total number of papers nor pages devoted to firearms research decreased.

As to Walz advocating for states to stop recognizing concealed handgun permits from other states (reciprocity), permit holders are convicted of firearms-related violations at one-twelfth the rate at which police officers are. And police are convicted at just one-twentieth of the rate for the general population. There is no evidence that any permit holder from another state has committed a gun crime in Minnesota.

As to background checks, the U.S. has required background checks on gun sales by all firearms dealers since 1994. What Walz wants is background checks on any private transfer of guns, even between relatives. It allows the government to put together a national gun registry, and gun control activists push for registration to solve crime. In theory, if criminals leave their registered guns at a crime scene, they can then be traced back to the perpetrator.

But in real life, in states from Hawaii to New York, as well as countries such as Canada, where guns have been registered and licensed, police can't point to any crimes these costly systems have been able to solve. Registration only really assists in confiscating guns.

Walz isn't just making false statements about his military record.