*California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey or New York restrict or prohibit ownership of “high capacity” ammunition magazines. If you’re a terrorist living in Somalia, no problem. You can own as many ammunition magazines of whatever type you like. As they say, whatever you can get. Like a MagPul EMAG (fits an HK416) and a standard issues magazine for an MP7. And where did the terrorist group Shabab get these examples? From . . .
a more than reasonably successful pre-dawn SEAL raid. The good guys got bad guy and left the mags, GPS device, cartridges and other stuff behind.
Now you could say that SpecOps forces need these “high capacity” mags a lot more than you do. And you’d be right. But you could also say that our enemies—terrorists and criminals—have these relatively low-tech ammunition storage devices for their guns so why shouldn’t we, the people, have them too?
The only sensible answer: because some people don’t want Americans to defend themselves. They believe the “professionals” should do it. Period. De-magging those who aren’t professionals reduces the population of “high capacity” (i.e., standard capacity) magazines available to the bad guys.
Only that’s not how it works in the real world is it?
In the real world, criminals and madmen are clever, determined and focused people. One way or another, they get access to all the equipment they want or need to achieve their goals. In the real world, the armed professionals only arrive after the party starts, after the blood is shed. In the real world, we the people have to look out for ourselves.
Speaking of which . . .
Did you hear there were SIX undercover cops amongst the bikers that attacked and nearly killed an SUV driver in New York? I’m not saying the driver should have had an AR with a “high capacity” magazine on board when the S hit the F. But I am saying that the Constitution protects his right to keep and bear arms and the bits that make them work. In theory.