PREFER TO WATCH THE VIDEO?

Does magazine capacity really make a difference?

Of course it does.

Notice, I didn’t say “limited” capacity.

I’m going to do my best to keep politics out of it, but if I rant just a little, please bear with me.

If you follow firearm related news, you know that the topic of magazine capacity is one of the hot ones.

There are those who are hell-bent on either restricting magazine capacity and those who will go to war to keep it as is.

They’re not interested in talking about it or changing their mind. So, trying to educate them is futile.

This video is designed for those of you who want to understand the argument on both sides and make an informed decision that suits your particular situation.

Most states don’t restrict magazine capacity.

Those who do claim that restricting magazine capacity will make it more difficult for mass shooters to inflict mass casualties because there are fewer bullets in a magazine.

Now, most mass shootings are committed with a handgun, but the ones that are committed with an AR-15 get most of the publicity.

You know, those scary black “assault” rifles that weigh as much as 10 large boxes and have a “large capacity” magazine of 30 rounds designed to inflict maximum damage. Blah, blah, blah.

These states, like CA and MA, for example, restrict handgun magazines to 10 rounds, believing it will prevent mass casualties as opposed to magazines that have higher capacity.

Is that true?

Let’s dig deeper. Now, I’ve done some extensive research on the subject, and it will take too long to share it all. So, I’ll just use 2 examples for now.

Remember the VA Tech mass shooting on April 16, 2007?

The shooter used a .22 caliber pistol with a 10-round magazine and a 9mm Glock 19 pistol with a 15-round magazine. And he brought a whole bunch of loaded magazines with him.

What they don’t tell you is that the 15 round magazines were only loaded with 10 rounds. Of course they don’t. It hurts their argument.

The shooter killed 2 people in the dormitory earlier in the morning, and while the police was busy dealing with that homicide, the shooter, about 2 hours later, entered a campus building and began the main event.

He had no resistance for 9 minutes and reloaded his pistol with fresh magazines multiple times before it was over.

Reloading a magazine takes 2–3 seconds on either a pistol or a rifle. So, whether you have 10, 15, or 30 round magazines, as long as you’re adequately stocked, the capacity will do nothing to minimize the damage. especially when you have no resistance.

He still managed to shoot 47 people and kill 32. May they rest in peace, and may their families find strength to continue.

If you analyze all mass shootings from Columbine till now, you’ll find a similar pattern in how the shooters loaded their magazines, the rate of fire used, and other factors that nullify the argument on both the “assault” nature of the firearms used, and the impact of the magazine capacity.

More recently, in Wisconsin, a man filling his car up at a gas station at 2 in the morning was approached by 5 armed men trying to rob him and steal his car.

He was carrying his firearm and returned fire. The 5 dingbats got into their car and fled the scene.

Why he was at a gas station at 2am is beside the point, but if these 5 attackers continued to fight, a 10-round magazine, or even 2, may not have been enough against 5 armed shooters. Even if they each had one 10 round magazine, and the victim had 2, it still would be 50 rounds vs. 20.

Where is the sense in restricting law-abiding would-be victims from having the adequate capacity to defend themselves. In this case, he was outnumbered, outgunned, and outammo’d (Is that a word?).

Not to mention they could surround him and have the tactical advantage. Thankfully, the vast majority of criminals, even when armed, are cowards and have a brain the size of an insect.

And even if they had the brain power to read and understand the law, they wouldn’t abide by it anyway. But we would have to.

Thankfully, Wisconsin doesn’t have a magazine capacity restriction. I don’t know if the victim had enough rounds to carry on a gun battle if it occurred. He would have been outnumbered, outgunned, and outammo’d anyway, and it would come down to his training ultimately.

Fortunately, for him, that didn’t happen.

There are endless scenarios every single day of incidents that, when analyzed, reveal the senseless argument that restricted capacity magazines reduce violence with a gun or the lethality of an incident.

The Supreme Court ruled that commonly used firearms are constitutional, and the factory issued magazines that come with them are Standard Capacity magazines. Not high-capacity magazines, and therefore cannot be banned.

The states that do ban magazines beyond a certain capacity somehow get away with it for certain firearms.

They can claim all they want that it helps curb gun violence and death. The stats overwhelmingly prove otherwise.

Law-abiding citizens care and fight back in the courts to protect their rights. They are not the threat no matter how many rounds they carry.

Violent criminals who are a threat don’t care about the laws and restrictions and carry as much firepower as possible.

I would like to see our leadership care more about a law-abiding citizen’s ability to defend him or herself, than using the heinous actions of a few mentally ill shooters and parasitic violent criminals to do the very opposite.

Instead of asking, “How many more victims have to die before we ban “assault weapons and high-capacity magazines”?

They should be asking, “How many more women have to be beaten and raped, police officers shot at, and mall or movie goers executed before every state makes it quick and easy for law-abiding citizens to get a carry permit, get trained, and have nationwide reciprocity so we can protect ourselves wherever we go?

It is often said that firearms are the great equalizer, and that may be true. However, how much of an equalizer can it be in the hands of an average citizen who’s outnumbered, outgunned, and outammo’d, even when well trained, if his or her attackers are determined enough?

The bottom line is that there are many more pros to having standard capacity magazines, and only one con. And that is, it might be a little heavier to carry.

I can live with that. Can you?