Previous Post
Next Post

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 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?

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Wasn’t there a mass knifing in Japan in the last few years. Whole bunch of people died?

    “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?”

    The type of shooting I do requires more than 30 rounds. I like to move with my rifle. What about those guys who shoot practical rifle courses and competitions, carbine courses, 3-gun? I find bench rest shooting to be absolutely boring.

    Oh, and Mr. Miller, your “hunters don’t need hi-cap mags” is valid. But most gun owners in modern America are no longer hunters. It’s the sad fact. Look at the best selling rifle by far for the past few years. AR15s.

    Mr. Miller, your comments show your true colors. The 2nd doesn’t guarantee your non-existent right to hunt. You’re not concerned with the 2nd Ammendment, you are a hunter. The 2nd was a focus on defense and military power in the hands of the people. As a guardsman I am given 30 round AR mags and 15 round M9 mags. My neighbor has the same rights to those items as I do. Just because you don’t use them doesn’t mean there isn’t a need for them. I personally don’t need a .45-70 (Ie: military grade anti-material sniper rifle)

  2. @TCBA_Joe Fully agree with you points!!! I am just getting into steel, and multi gun, and got my @$$ handed to me yesterday, because I had 10rd mags, while others in the same class were shooting with 20+ in their glocks.

    Besides, a good shooter can swap and be shooting again in about 2 seconds…

    And for examples of mass knifings, just look south of the border, or Africa where horrific slaughters, of not 5 or even 10 people, but 50 people at a time are hacked to death!!! It happens all the time, and I would venture to say that, if you total in all the deaths in the world related to stabbings and hacking to death, you would find that it is higher than shootings.

    I know the numbers for the US show that you are more likely to die in a car accident in the US, than in a shooting.

  3. Banning guns is not something that can be accomplished in one fell swoop. It has to be done incrementally. One day they come for the “high cap clips.” Then they come for the scary-looking rifles. A snip here and a snip there. That’s the way it’s done. And it won’t stop until their jackboots are on our throats.

  4. why 10, why not 5 or even 1 round… What makes 10 the magic number, as it seems that you could kill a lot of people with one ore more 10 round magazine. This is just a step in the direction of eliminating our 2nd amendment rights. Every time I hear people make this ten round argument I take them down the road of reduced capacity, and soon I discover that they don’t want guns around at all.

  5. That is his opinion and he is welcome to it. I like smaller mags because there is never any trouble with them, but telling people they can’t have them is just limiting thier rights. The bad guys might use them, they are available everywhere. Even after 50 years, there will be 10s if not 100s of thousands of these still around, even if they were outlawed this year.
    I don’t particularly like full auto either, but that is me. If it floats your boat, fine. It is too expensive.
    Dropping a 10 round mag 3x for every 30 rd mag, can, with practice, be almost as fast as using 30rd mags. Yes, they can be handy, and that is fine with me, I don’t see any reason except for control over the populace for these restrictions.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here