- Advertisement -

- Advertisement -


We need ‘high capacity’ magazines

Unintended consequences are often delicious. Among the provisions of the 1994 Clinton “assault weapon” ban was limiting magazines to 10 rounds. That provision was no more effective than the rest of the ban, which was allowed to sunset after ten years because it had no effect whatever in reducing crime, but did have a significant effect in reducing the number of legislative Democrats, which was one of perhaps two positive things it accomplished.

Graphic: Glock 26. Author.

The second was the invention of the Glock 26, which not coincidentally, had a 10-round, double stack—staggered—magazine. Glock essentially downsized its enormously popular Glock 19, which ultimately led to all the small, concealable handguns Glock and other manufacturers currently provide, all with at least ten round capacity, guns like the Glock 43X and Sig P365. I carried a G26 for many years until the invention of the slimmer and more easily concealed G43X, both with ten round capacity.

Joe Biden—actually, his handlers—have long advocated “assault weapons” and “high-capacity magazine” bans, claiming they’re essential to combatting “gun violence.” As with virtually everything his handlers have Biden badly read, they’re lying and/or misinforming the public. Democrats/socialists/communists (D/s/cs) are masters at warping the English language to their political ends.

There is no such thing as an “assault weapon.” Indeed, D/s/cs have invented that term and used it in proposed and passed legislation, but it appears nowhere in firearm nomenclature. There is a class of arms known as “assault rifles,” the first example of which was the WWII era German StG44. In order to qualify for membership in this class the candidate must be a shoulder fired rifle of intermediate caliber, box magazine fed, and capable of semi and fully automatic fire. The gun anti-liberty/gun cracktivists most want to ban, the AR-15, is a civilian-legal, semiautomatic only version of the military M4. In other words, not an assault rifle, and certainly not an assault weapon.

“Gun violence” is equally deceptive. Only human beings are capable of violence, not inanimate objects. But by D/s/c logic, we ought to be banning fist violence, foot violence, baseball bat violence, knife violence and all manner of similar violence, because all of those types of “violence” account for far more damage than “gun violence” as represented by AR-15-like firearms, or any sort of rifle for that matter. Long guns account for only a tiny portion of yearly crimes committed with the use of guns, and AR-15 type rifles, a tiny portion of that tiny portion. Handguns, unsurprisingly, are the criminal firearm of choice.

Which brings us to “high-capacity magazines.” D/s/cs have hit on ten rounds as their ban cutoff, but why 10? Most likely their secret polling has indicated at least modest support for that arbitrary number, and indicated going lower causes support to dramatically weaken, as well it should. Are we to believe 10 round magazines are not evil and destructive, but 11 rounds are?  Remember, the Clinton Gun Ban was allowed to sunset because its provisions, including a ban on magazines over 10 rounds, produced no measurable drop in crime, though it did produce a measurable drop in D/s/cs.

As with the AR-15, anti-liberty/cracktivists want to ban its ubiquitous 30-round magazines. During the Vietnam era, when the M-16—then the fully automatic version of the AR-15—came into general military issue, 20-round magazines were initially issued. They were soon replaced with 30-round magazines, which since that time have become the standard magazine for that family of rifles.

L to R: G43X/10 rounds, G17/17 rounds, AR-15/30 rounds. Graphic: author

The Supreme Court has ruled that weapons, and surely their magazines ,in common, usual use for lawful purposes are protected by the Second Amendment. But are 30-round AR-15 magazines, and others of more than ten round capacity, common and usual? The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) recently discovered the truth:

…a recently released report from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) revealed how widespread such magazines truly are. And according to that report, magazines that hold 11 rounds or more are the “national standard.”

According to the report, which surveyed over 30 years of detachable magazine production and distribution, revealed that of the conservatively 963,772,000 detachable magazines supplied from a firearm manufacturer and in the aftermarket, at least 717,900,000 have a capacity exceeding 10 rounds.

In other words, the national standard of magazines—about a billion of them–overwhelmingly have greater than 10-round capacity. About 46% of those are rifle magazines holding 30 or more rounds. These are the magazines Biden’s handlers want to ban.

But no one needs a high-capacity magazine. The D/s/c inspired and supported crime wave has taught Americans attacks by criminal gangs mean such magazines can be the difference between life and death. Another, related, lesson is more important: whatever D/s/cs don’t want us to have, we need.

Mike McDaniel is a USAF veteran, classically trained musician, Japanese and European fencer, life-long athlete, firearm instructor, retired police officer and high school and college English teacher. He is a published author and blogger. His home blog is Stately McDaniel Manor. 

Read More: We need ‘high capacity’ magazines

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy

Get more stuff like this
in your inbox

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.