This wasn't supposed to happen. When the federal assault weapons ban ended on Sept. 13, 2004, gun crimes and police killings were predicted to surge. Instead, they have declined....

Gun controllers' fears that the end of the assault weapons ban would mean the sky would fall were simply not true. How much longer can the media take such hysteria seriously when it is so at odds with the facts?

I certainly would not argue that repeal of the assault weapon ban caused the decline in murder rates, and Lott isn't arguing that either.

There are three other possibilities worth considering:

1. Assault weapons being available again had no effect on murder rates--because they were always statistical noise, anyway, and easily replaced with other weapons. (This is true.)

2. The assault weapon ban--for which the Democrats fell on their sword in the 1994 elections--was so full of loopholes that it did nothing at all. (This is also probably true.)

3. The expiration of the assault weapon ban increased murder rates--but the increase was so tiny that it was overwhelmed by other factors. I doubt that this is true, but even it is--perhaps the energy and political capital spent on the assault weapon ban might have been better spent on those "other factors."