Hogewash notes that the media, at some level, probably understands how stupid the idea of banning a box with springs in it really is. I’m not sure that’s the case. I think that they believe laws like magazine bans should only apply to the little people, like us, and not to those fit to dwell in ivory towers.
5 thoughts on “David Gregory and the Magazine”
Comments are closed.
I will note, however, that the common objection to magazine size limitations – that they don’t work, because a shooter will simply change magazines quckly and easily – works against us as well. If it simple and easy to change magazines, then it is hardly a significant infringement. And if it saves only one life . . .
The other side has good rhetoric on that which sounds reasonable to the uninitiated. Really, unless you’ve had decent concealed carry training, it’s hard to explain why a magazine limit hobbles a defender more than an attacker.
A spree killer will load a duffle bag with as many rounds as they can carry, whether it be ten thirty round mags, or thirty ten round mags. A CCW holder might carry a spare mag, or just go with what the gun carries. They guy who jumps out of bed wearing only underwear in the middle of the night because he heard his window break is limited to what is in his gun. I’d say it affects the defender more than the pre-meditated killer.
They want to enjoy the pleasure of abusing gun owners, so when one of their people gets caught, their view is that punishing him defeats the purpose of the law, because for them, it does.
There’s a 30-round magazine in my M1 Carbine.