FBI Director Says ‘Assault Weapon Ban’ Could ‘Prevent Future Attacks’ in Some Instances, Declines to Endorse Legislation

The top of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) instructed Congress on Tuesday that he believes a so-called assault weapons ban might stop some high-profile shootings.

FBI Director Kash Patel expressed his view to the Senate Judiciary Committee throughout a wide-ranging oversight listening to. In an change with Senator Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.), Patel agreed that an “assault weapon ban,” which generally targets common firearms just like the AR-15, might cease some killings. Nonetheless, he stopped in need of endorsing any particular legislative proposals.

“I believe there are situations on this laws that might stop future assaults, however I’m not going to weigh into the creation of laws,” Patel mentioned.

The feedback come after Division of Justice (DOJ) officers mentioned the Trump Administration is exploring plans to blanket strip trans individuals of their gun rights, and the administration emphasised gun seizures throughout its takeover of Capitol policing–each of which have drawn backlash from gun-rights teams. If the administration continues to flirt with imposing broad new gun restrictions, it dangers alienating a key voting bloc that has typically been pleased with the opposite actions it has taken on weapons up to now. Conversely, if Patel affords concrete assist to an assault weapons ban, it might sign a coming shift within the dynamics of gun politics on Capitol Hill and increase gun-control activists’ longstanding efforts to resurrect the prohibition.

Senator Klobuchar introduced up the Annunciation Faculty capturing and the Charlie Kirk assassination throughout her questioning of Patel. She advocated for both an outright ban on assault weapons, which she didn’t outline however often contains AR-15s and different firearms, or elevating the age of gun possession as excessive as 25 so as to stop comparable assaults sooner or later. Patel responded that he’s open to discussing any concept that might save even a single life.

“Senator, if I could, I need to reply the query, however thanks in your remarks, particularly because it pertains to my buddy Charlie, and I share and relay my remarks, my sentiments to you,” he mentioned. “Minnesota has suffered untold tragedy in these previous few months, and no matter creativity we are able to use to remove even only one capturing, one horrific loss of life, I’m in favor of partaking with Congress absolutely to do. I don’t have the solutions. I don’t know what’s going to remove it in its entirety, however I’m keen to interact and discover new methods with you, senator.”

When Klobachar once more requested Patel immediately about his view on the effectiveness of a possible “assault weapon ban,” that’s when he conceded it might work however he didn’t need to weigh in on laws.

Patel didn’t elaborate on how he plans to work with Congress on potential gun restrictions in the course of the change. The FBI didn’t reply to a request from The Reload for extra data on Patel’s views on assault weapons bans or different new gun restrictions.

In distinction, the DOJ has come out in opposition to assault weapon bans. It filed a quick in a Seventh Circuit case opposing Illinois’ ban, and is even scheduled to take part in oral arguments later this month.

“As a result of the Act is a complete ban on a class of firearms which can be in widespread use by law-abiding residents for lawful causes, it’s flatly unconstitutional,” the DOJ wrote in its amicus temporary in Barnett v. Raoul. “This Court docket ought to affirm the district courtroom’s injunction.”

Nonetheless, Patel shouldn’t be the one one within the Trump Administration who has expressed some openness to a ban. The truth is, President Donald Trump has backed the thought on at the least two events. Earlier than he ran for workplace, he wrote a ebook endorsing an assault weapon ban revival.

“I typically oppose gun management, however I assist the ban on assault weapons and I additionally assist a barely longer ready interval to buy a gun,” he wrote in “The America We Deserve” again in 2000.

Equally, the New York Occasions reported that he thought-about supporting a ban on AR-15s and different firearms within the wake of the 2019 El Paso capturing. “What are we going to do about assault rifles?” Trump requested an advisor, in response to the paper.

Nonetheless, the NRA and his advisors dissuaded him from pursuing a ban, and he hasn’t publicly backed one since working for workplace. As an alternative, he has actively courted gun-rights teams, just like the Nationwide Rifle Affiliation, and loved a largely constructive relationship with them by his time in workplace.

Patel, who was additionally very briefly the performing head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) earlier this yr, has additionally sought out and loved assist from some outstanding gun-rights teams. Most of that assist is derived from a 2024 speech he gave to a Gun Homeowners of America convention.

In that speech, he described his “mission set” as “destroying the deep state.” He attacked former ATF Director Stephen Dettelbach, who was appointed by Joe Biden, for backing the bumpstock ban, despite the fact that President Trump is the one who instituted the ban earlier than the Supreme Court docket subsequently struck it down as unconstitutional.

“The director of the ATF mainly got here out the opposite day and mentioned he’s all for a bumpstock ban,” Patel mentioned. “It is a political appointee in Washington, DC, who’s presupposed to be accountable for our constitutional rights. This man needs to take it away.”

He additionally claimed there’s a “enormous, huge group” whose pursuits “will not be in alignment with ours,” and “they’ll come for you it doesn’t matter what you do.”

“The counter mandate we’ve is the drive of Founding Fathers and the Second Modification,” Patel mentioned. “That’s extra highly effective than any regulation these entities can give you, however in case you allow them to proceed to chip away at it, they’ll take it away from you perpetually.”

He argued that campaigning and voting for Donald Trump was the suitable option to oppose that group.

“If you would like your rights protected and if you wish to wipe out the deep state in a single fell swoop, you, the gun house owners of America, have that distinctive alternative,” Patel mentioned.

Later, Patel gave some additional perception into his pondering on gun rights. Throughout his FBI affirmation listening to, California Democrat Alex Padilla pressed Patel for his place on the constitutionality of background checks on gun gross sales and the federal machinegun ban. He mentioned he’d defer to the federal courts.

“Regardless of the courts rule regarding the Second Modification is protected by the Second Modification,” he instructed the senator.