Changing Magazines: The Solution To Criminal Gun Violence

How silly we have been.

All this time the solution to criminal gun violence has been the capacity of a gun's magazine. You see, according to legislators, limiting the capacity of a magazine from whatever amount it was to a total of 10, will mean that:

A) Only ten bullets can be fired before the criminal gives up, being that he is a law-abiding criminal and would not want to compromise his beliefs in state or federal doctrine.

Or

B) When the criminal stops shooting to change the empty magazine out for a full one, everyone in the room can bum-rush the criminal and subdue him/her (but not too hard, or he/she might sue you).

Or

C) Magazines are expensive and therefore the criminal only has one.

Take New Jersey as the perfect example of magazine limitation and the true effect it will have on gun-owning citizens. Years ago, the NJ legislature decided that the maximum allowable capacity of ANY firearm magazine was 15 rounds. How many magazines have been sold over the last 15-20 years, do you suppose?  Millions, maybe? And being that no one ever has just one magazine (I average 5-6 for my competition guns), we are talking about significant financial investment on the part of NJ gun owners.

The result here is summed up beautifully by an email that I received from a reader (please send me your name so I can credit you, not just your email address):

 
Now, solely as a result of the emotional upheaval following Newtown and with no logical reason (notwithstanding the incoherent rationale lamely offered by LouGreenwald on the Assembly floor) the Assembly has said -- "sorry, 15 rounds is now a dangerous "large capacity" magazine, and the number must be 10." Greenwald had the nerve to suggest that this will be at most "an inconvenience for gun owners who would need to reload more often at the range." 
 
Really? What about the millions of magazines purchased by NJ gun owners? What do we do with them? These are people who undergone fingerprinting, a visit to the local police department, and multiple criminal and mental health background checks before being able to purchase a gun. Yet Greenwald, and the other Democrats in the assembly think it perfectly ok that 90 days after passage of the bill previously standard capacity but now suddenly "large capacity" magazines will become contraband and subject law abiding gun owners to 7 YEARS IN PRISON if not destroyed or sold out of state. How easy do you think it will be for hundreds of thousands of these magazines to be sold? Is it fair that our property be taken from us? What if we can’t find replacement 10 round magazines, rendering legally purchased firearms useless? Why do retired police officers get a pass? How does that make any sense? 

Even if you don’t own a gun and have no interest in the gun control debate, do you think this is fair? 

This Jew Shoots Guns. Letting drunk drivers blame the hit-and-run on "car violence".

 

Comments

[Sheri]

Thank you for sharing your info. I really appreciate your efforts and I am waiting for your next post thank you once again.

[Brad_in_MA]

Bogie,

You should also note that Eric Harris used (federally limited) 10-round magazines in a Hi-point carbine rifle in Littleton, CO. He got off 96 rounds and had a total of 13 mags. The 10-round limit which was in effect at the time had zero impact on stopping him from killing 12 of his "schoolmates." This is one of those inconvenient truths the anti-2a side doesn't want us to hear. Moreover, NJ's own Corey Booker stated publically that lawful gun owners aren't the problem. If that's the case, then why are lawful owners the target of all these silly laws? Don't answer that last question -- it was rhetorical.

- Brad