NPR recently contacted TTAG and asked us to find them a gun owner who supported New York Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy’s high-capacity magazine banning bill (10 years for 11 cartridges in the same magazine). I thought they’d have easier time finding an African American liberal commentator on Fox News. Oh wait. Anyway, the How Much Firepower is Too Much? segment is about air. The On Point web page welcomes Tracee Larson: “gun rights advocate,” blogger and former vice chair of the gun owners caucus of the Democratic Party of Texas (“Amendment II Democrats is locked and loaded.”) Oh and Carrie Bradshaw wannbe. Is Ms. Larson “the one”? A quick look at her blog reveals a feminist firearms slant. And then . . .
Some within the right-wing media use the First Amendment as a crutch to defend their hateful speech, but with such speech spawning acts of violence across the nation, there is a correlation to someone yelling “fire” in a crowded theater which leads to people being trampled to death, or even closer, those within the Aryan nations using hateful racist speech to cause their members to commit violence against their targets.
How non-ironic that On Point turned to Tracee after Tom Holbrook’s apoplectic attack on the right’s “violent” rhetoric. No kindler gentler guest for them, then.
OK, so we know which side of the political spectrum she’s one. But what of high-capacity magazines? Nothing. Which is no surprise; this Texas “gun blogger” has blogged exactly twice. As in two posts. A brace. A duo, Two.
Not to cock our own semi, but TTAG started in February 2010. This is post number 3254. So who’s the representative gun blogger now, boys? Sorry, ladies and gentlemen?
Never mind. Unlike On Point, TTAG stays on point until the job is done. You want a two-legged mag-cap-banning ballistic treasure for your radio show? We found a better one, via starexponent.com: Larry Miller [not shown]. Take it away Larry . . .
I don’t really need a 30-shot magazine for my gun. If I’m shooting targets and have to stop after 10 shots to reload, what’s the harm? Are the targets going somewhere? Do they have dinner plans?
If I’m after game, what could I be hunting that requires 30 shots? A herd of buffalo? If I’m such a bad shot that it takes 30 bullets to bring something down, shouldn’t I leave hunting to those who can shoot straight?
After yet another tragedy in which innocent people were killed or injured by a gunman utilizing a high-capacity magazine, isn’t banning such magazines, which have little legitimate use outside law enforcement, the least we can do?
I know the argument: Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. First of all, that’s a bumper sticker, not a cogent argument. But can’t we agree that gun-wielding people can hurt many more people than, say, knife-wielding ones? When’s the last time you heard of a drive-by knifing? What if we applied the same, so-called, logic to other means of dispatching one’s fellow human beings? Anthrax doesn’t kill people, people kill people. So, shouldn’t everyone be allowed to keep a vial around for their own private use?
I’m not advocating that everyone should turn in their guns, but can’t we take one small step to slow down the carnage? Whatever marginal inconvenience gun-owners might have to endure because of a 10-shot limit, how many lives is that worth? If it were your child they just buried, how would you want America to answer that question?