Bans on High Capacity Magazines

The statistically ignorant, Constitutionally bereft MORONS from the left are at it yet again. Google’s at it again, too, skewing results.

Used to be, when I’d search on “do magazine capacity bans actually save lives?” (yes, I’ve entered this fray many times before), Google would provide instant access to the many SOUND statistical analyses proving that such bans do not reduce crime, the presence of such bans increased crime, or both.

Now Google’s results are chock full of “reports” from Giffords Law Center (a very severely statistically skewed source resulting from massive “data stratification” i.e. cherry-picking), as well as ABC/NBC/CBS and other liberal, anti-gun news sources (often quoting one another in circle-jerk fashion).

What Google fails to provide are hits on statistically reputable sources for both violent crime as well as mass shootings.

You know… Like the FBI and the Pew Research Center.

In fact, the FBI’s annual Active Shooter Incidents In The United States reports are written by the FBI’s Office of Partner Engagement in collaboration with the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division, the FBI’s Critical Incident Response Group, and the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training (ALERRT) Center at Texas State University.

Not some journalist who completed their college math requirements without ever taking calculus.

The brunt of the liberal argument says, “If we reduce magazine capacity, we’ll save lives,” but their argument FAILS because the 1.2 million violent crimes each year completely, utterly, and totally dwarfs the 28 mass shootings that occurred in in 16 states in 2019 (27 shootings in 16 states for 2018).

The scope between 28 and 1,200,000 is astounding. 28 is just 0.0023% of 1,200,000. For each mass shooting, there were 42,857 violent crimes.

Are libtardals SERIOUSLY focusing on the ONE mass shooting while ignoring the FORTY-TWO THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND FIFTY-SEVEN violent crimes?

Why, yes… Yes, they are. They actually want to ban larger magazines helping law-abiding citizens deter 42,857 crimes in order to prevent just ONE (1) mass shooting.

Hey, I’m a Star Trek fan, too, but this “needs of the one” applies to close-knit small teams, like the SEALS and the crew of the Starship Enterprise. It does NOT apply to society as a whole. Taken to insane extremes, you’d force all Americans to give up a kidney just to help little Anna, whereas the SANE practice of medicine finds both matches as well as WILLING donors.

The SANE practice of politics doesn’t buy into ear-tickling agendas, either.
If you want to give up your high-capacity magazines, go for it. DO NOT, however, violate the Constitution, “the supreme Law of the Land,” by infringing on all our right to keep and bear arms through magazine capacity restrictions. Not only do the statistics NOT support it, but it’s just STUPID in light of the vast amounts of information we have, not to mention Constitutionally unlawful.

In fact, if citizens weren’t armed at all, estimates on violent crime indicate that 1.2 million number would jump to somewhere between 3.5 million as an absolute minimum to well over 10 million. I seriously doubt, however, Americans would ever tolerate the numbers rising to such heights. They would, without a doubt, vote out the anti-2A idiots and replace them with Constitution-respecting individuals who understand and agree with both the Constitution as well as the Supreme Law of the Land.

Most city police crime statistics labs don’t agree with magazine capacity restrictions.

Most county sheriffs offices don’t agree with magazine capacity restrictions.
Then there’s the Constitution: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”

Magazine capacity restrictions are an INFRINGEMENT.
Not only are we the People are NOT the enemy, but we stop between 650,000 and 800,000 violent crimes each and every year, and we do so with a fairly low rate of carry, somewhere around 5% (1 in 20).

Imagine how many more crimes we’d stop if more of us carried. Imagine how many criminals would choose to avoid being shot by finding a more productive avenue for their talents.

Seattle and Portland are PRIME examples of what happens when criminals no longer fear being stopped.

In comparison, Provo-Orem, UT is by far one of the safest metropolitan areas.

Now just why is that, I wonder?

Thankfully, I am by no means alone in my explorations:

Losing Count: The Empty Case for “High??Capacity” Magazine Restrictions

Leave a Reply