Bonnie and Clyde’s favorite weapon was the Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR). But the gun was too heavy and quite long for the petite Bonnie Parker, who was 4’11” and weighed only 90 lbs. So Clyde Barrow shortened both the barrel and the stock to accommodate her frame. In the 3 years of their crime there is no evidence that she killed anyone, but she undeniably used the BAR on occasion and witnesses reported that the powerful 30-06 from the short barrel was so terrifyingly loud that when she fired, everyone took cover, possibly saving many lives. The resulting legislation (National Firearms Act of 1934) against the short-barreled rifles and shotguns, however, is still harming lives to this day.
I have been unable to find any account of the ban on short-barreled rifles (RCW 9.41.190) preventing any deaths. However, the ban lead to a tragic shootout with Randy Weavers family at Ruby Ridge, resulting in death of 3 humans and a good dog. Ruby ridge was a major contributor, along with the Waco incident, that resulted in the Oklahoma City bombing and 173 deaths. Another example of a side effect of the ban is possession of the Thompson Contender and similar guns with interchangeable barrels and stock can lead to felony charges with huge fines and imprisonment for accidentally combining the shoulder stock with too short of a barrel. The ban makes illegal the .357 magnum ALFA revolver carbine, an excellent home defense weapon for anyone who is uncomfortable with the recoil of the .357. The Marble Game Getter and the AR-7 survival rifle would both be much more practical if shorter barrels were an option.
Along with shotguns and short-barreled rifles, handguns with detachable or even fixed shoulder stocks were included in the ban. A shoulder stock makes it much easier for a small, weak, elderly, or handicapped person to fire a large caliber handgun accurately. One would think that accuracy in self-defense situations would be a good thing, but the current ban gives stronger people a huge firepower advantage to compliment their physical advantage, which in most cases belongs to the perpetrator.
Someone please explain to me how banning a gun that is less concealable than a handgun, more accurate, and also much easier to control with powerful handgun cartridges benefits anyone but criminals, and attorneys.