|
The topic for this Current Events article is not necessarily a new topic or event, but it is a current Second Amendment issue as there is ongoing litigation and disingenuous talking points being pushed. This article focuses on firearm magazines, more specifically, the ban and limitation of firearm magazines in some areas. As it stands, there are currently 13 states that have some type of firearms magazine ban, limitation, and/or restriction, 14 counting District of Columbia [source 1]. Those states are:
A semi-automatic Glock 17 uses a detachable magazine. Semi-automatic means only one projectile is fired with one press of the trigger. Automatic or “full automatic” means multiple projectiles are fired with one press of the trigger. This will continue until the trigger is released, the ammunition is depleted, or there is a malfunction. Automatic firearms are illegal for a citizen to purchase, own or possess unless certain paperwork is filled out and approved. Remember, automatic firearms are just too dangerous for you to own, unless you pay the government money, then they become less dangerous to own. In order for a Glock pistol (just like the firearms) to fire a projectile (bullet), one single cartridge must be fed or placed into the chamber of the pistol. From there the user would then apply rearward pressure to the trigger until the weapon goes boom due to the firing pine striking the primer located on the bottom of the cartridge or casing. Once that happens, the primer ignites the gun power contained within the casing. Since energy takes the path of least resistance and because the cartridge is securely held in place within the chamber, the energy leak happens where the bullet and casing meet casing the projectile (bullet) to travel down and eventually leave the barrel. After the boom, the pistol slide is forced to the rear and the spent casing is ejected from the pistol. So now that we have a better understanding of ammunition, let's talk about the loading process. Alright, there is really only two ways for a cartridge to enter the chamber. Either by placing it inside the chamber by the operator, which would have to be physically done each time the pistol cycles following the boom and projectile leaving the barrel, or using an ammunition feeding device also known as a magazine. The manufacture issued magazine from Glock for use with their Glock 17 pistol can hold up to 17 cartridges. The magazine is filled 1 cartridge at a time. The purpose of the magazine is to feed a new cartridge into the chamber each time the weapon cycles, which under normal operation is done with each press of the trigger. Assuming there is no blockage, stoppage or other malfunctions, the operator can continue to fire the pistol by pressing the trigger until all ammunition within the magazine and chamber is expended or until they decide to stop pressing the trigger. Most firearm manufactures use a proprietary magazine design for their firearms. That being said, some firearm manufactures will use a certain magazine from another firearm manufacture for their firearm or design a firearm that will use a very common magazine and/or magazine type. For instance, the Palmetto State Armory Dagger pistol (9mm) uses a Glock style 9mm magazine. Another example is the AR15 style rifle platform. There are many firearms manufactures for this weapon system. For the most part, they all use the same style magazine that will function and operate from manufacture to manufacture. There are also non-firearm manufacturer companies that specialize in firearm accessories that design and manufacture their own magazines that will work with specific firearm manufactures and/or certain style firearms. For instance, Magpul Industries manufacture magazines that will work in a Glock or Glock style firearm, along with magazines that will work in an AR15 style firearm. Some firearm manufactures will include a Magpul magazine or magazines with their firearm.
Also, the firearm type can dictate magazine capacity. For instance, a handgun that is designed to be used primarily as a concealed carry handgun typically has a smaller frame for concealment purposes. Because of this, a smaller handgun magazine would be used. Since a smaller magazine is utilized, the cartridge capacity is less than a magazine for a larger frame handgun. An industry standard might influence magazine capacity as well, but it is not because of firearm limitations. For instance, the firearm industry standard for cartridge capacity with an AR15 style firearm is a 30-“round” magazine. Meaning it will hold 30 individual cartridges. There are magazines that can be used in an AR15 style firearm that have a lower capacity than 30 and magazines that have a higher capacity than 30, but the industry standard is 30. The most common type of firearms manufactured and purchased right now are detachable magazine fed firearms. Meaning, the firearm is designed and intended to be used with a detachable magazine. It can operate one cartridge at a time without a magazine, but it was intended to operate with a magazine. The cavoite to this is, some firearm manufactures have what is known as a magazine safety. The firearm, more specifically the firing mechanism will not operate without a magazine, thus converting the firearm into a mean looking paperweight if there is no magazine inside the firearm. Almost all firearm manufactures include a magazine with a firearm. Sometimes they include one magazine, sometimes they include five magazines. Sometimes they include a proprietary magazine, sometimes they include a third-party manufactured magazine. Sometimes they included a magazine or magazines that have a cartridge capacity of seven, sometimes they have a cartridge capacity of 30. Just depends on the firearm and manufacture. Understanding that a firearm magazine, in most cases, is a fundamental part of the firearm, let’s move onto magazine bans. As mentioned earlier, there are 13 states that have a “high-capacity” or “large-capacity” magazine bans in place. The District of Columbia (Washington D.C.) also has a “high-capacity” magazine ban. The term “high-capacity” is a made-up term used by anti-Second Amendment politicians and groups as a way to package their anti-gun bullshit into a more manageable and easier to “sell” box. They would get more pushback if they just said magazine ban than when they say “high-capacity magazine” ban. They are counting on the fact that the people who buy into their anti-Second Amendment bullshit do not know the difference between a “regular” magazine and a “high-capacity” magazine. They are also counting on the fact that those same people don’t know much about firearms and/or self-defense situations to begin with. The anti-Second Amendment politicians and groups intentionally use other people’s lack of firearm knowledge and understanding against them and anticipate that those same people will share factually inaccurate anti-Second Amendment talking points because they don’t know any better. They also know there are willfully ignorant people who despise anything to do with the Second Amendment that will gladly share their propaganda without any consideration of facts. When you think about it, to the person that does not know much about firearms, a “high-capacity” magazine ban is an easy sell because in their mind they think there is a difference between a “high-capacity” magazine and a “standard-capacity” magazine. It’s an easy assumption to make because they use the words “high-capacity”, which would lead a reasonable person to assume if something is labeled high-capacity it is because it exceeds the standard capacity. Due to ammunition types and firearm types, along with other variables, there is no “standard-capacity” magazine that applies to every firearm equally, therefore there is no “standard-capacity”, so the term “high-capacity” is irrelevant. This is the disingenuous verbiage and talking points I mentioned earlier that anti-Second Amendment politicians and groups intentionally use to deceive people and why I felt it was important to discuss firearm magazines previously before getting into this information. If you do not understand firearm magazines, you will have a hard time processing this information and understanding how deceptive these anti-Second Amendment politicians and groups are. If these anti-Second Amendment laws were truly about safety as they claim, then they would not have to use deception to justify their need to infringe on the freedoms and rights of people. So, if it is not about safety, what is it about?... Right now, you might be thinking to yourself, “surly they wouldn’t just create a term that is based on a lie. A high-capacity magazine probably holds significantly more cartridges than the magazine provided by the firearm manufacture and because of that, although there is no standard-capacity magazine, they refer to this larger capacity magazine as a high-capacity magazine”. First, your name probably isn’t Shirley and second, that would be a logical assumption and an easy on to make. Since it is a logical assumption and an easy one to make, it is understandable to see how some people could support the idea of a “high-capacity” magazine ban. So, what is the magic number that creates a “high-capacity” magazine? Obviously, it has to be more than 70, 80, 100, 150, 200 cartridges, right? Wrong, it’s 10. The magic number is 10 cartridges! Which is actually less than the capacity of most included magazines from the firearm manufacture. So, if we use a included manufacture magazine for a Glock 17 as an example, and called it a “standard-capacity” magazine as it pertains to that specific firearm, then in this cases a “high-capacity” magazine is capable of holding fewer cartridges than the “standard-capacity” magazine provided by the firearm manufacture. That doesn't make any sense. Exactly, it is not supposed to make sense. Almost all gun laws don’t make sense. It’s not about making sense or making sensible laws or even about safety, it’s about control, which is why they used to call certain legislation gun control. Anyway, there are a few states with “high-capacity” magazine bans that allow more than 10 cartridges [source 2]. Those are:
The other nine states, along with the District of Columbia limit the allowable cartridges per magazine to 10 in all firearms. Hawaii is the expectation out of these states. Although they still have a limit of 10 cartridges per magazine, their “high-capacity” magazine ban only applies to handguns. What is the idea behind “high-capacity” magazine bans? Well, on paper the theory kind of makes sense if you do not understand criminals, crime, and self-defense situations. The intention is to create a law that will limit the number of cartridges a magazine can lawfully hold and/or limit the number of cartridges that the user of the firearm can lawfully place inside the magazine. By doing this, it will cause the user of the firearm to only be able to fire the legal amount of ammunition contained within the magazine before having to reload the firearm with another magazine which obviously is filled with the legal amount of ammunition. In a situation where multiple people might be randomly shot, the “high-capacity” magazine law will prevent the individual doing the shooting from having more than the legal amount of ammunition contained within the magazine. I guess it’s a fail-safe style law. They figure since the shooter completely disregarded the law preventing them from randomly shooting people, this other law will prevent them from shooting more people… In all reality these are do nothing laws macerating as doing something laws. What I mean by that is, the politicians that create and pass these laws tell you this will reduce crime without them reducing crime because criminals disregard them. The only people these laws effectively target are law abiding citizens, not lawless criminals. Law abiding citizens do not want to break the law and therefore comply. In some states with magazine restrictions and/or “high-capacity” magazine bans, the state does not grandfather already existing and owned magazines into their new ban, which then forces citizens to surrender or destroy their once legal property without any compensation because if they continue to possess magazines which are now classified as “high-capacity” magazines, they are breaking the law. So, if these laws are going to specifically target and negatively impact thousands or millions of law-abiding citizens, why do politicians create these laws? Because it’s easy and they are lazy. They can brag to their constituents that they have done something to help protect people because, even though they have done nothing, and their new law negatively impacts more people than it “protects”. Also, the majority of these politicians are not subject matter experts on firearms, so they really have no idea what they are doing or talking about. Oregon Ballot Measure 114 [source 5]. This was a piece of legislation that introduced, among other things, a ban on the manufacture, purchase or sale of magazines capable of holding more than 10 cartridges. This was recently challenged in Federal Court and unfortunately, upheld as constitutional in July of 2023 [source 6]. According to Federal Judge Immergut “large-capacity” magazines are not commonly used for self-defense and are therefore not protected but the Second Amendment. Because of this, the state of Oregon can set cartridge capacity limits on firearms magazines. Q: Are magazines commonly used for self-defense? A: Yes, because most common use firearms that are currently manufactured, sold, and possessed require the use of a detachable magazine. Q: Because of this, are magazines then protected by the Second Amendment? A: Yes, because they are a fundamental part of that firearm. My conclusion for those questions, the Judge was wrong on this ruling, and I believe it will be challenged. I know sometimes Judges do not want to be the first to do something, especially when their ruling can go against the government or set a precedent, so sometimes it’s just easier for them to side with the government and let another judge deal with it if the ruling is appealed. In my opinion the Judge here either capitulated and sided with the government or the Judge does not fully understand firearms, their operation and function, along with self-defense situations. I think the second option is the most realist option as the Judge included the term “high-capacity” magazines when relating to self-defense situations. As I have already talked about, the term “high-capacity” magazine is a generic term and does not apply to all firearm magazines equally, therefore, it cannot be applied to all firearm, firearm magazines, and self-defense situations equally. You must break it down even further. Either the Second Amendment protects firearm magazines, or it doesn’t. The capacity of the magazine is irrelevant. The Judge failed to do that. All of that was said to say this, the politicians that put forth anti-Second Amendment legislation and the judges that rule in favor of it say or think they are “protecting” people, but in all reality, they are putting people in an even worse situation when they are faced with a life-or-death threat and they only protection they have is themselves. Getting the exact number of defensive gun use or self-defense satiations when a gun is used and/or present for protection is difficult because a situation might not always be reported to law enforcement or it might not be tracked if it is reported. Typically, if a gun is fired in self-defense, it is report. If a gun is just present or shown in a self-defense situation it might not be reported. Depending on what statistics you look at, research you study, or articles you read, self-defense situations involving a firearm can happen anywhere between 70,000 – 1.5 million times a year [source 7]. I know that is a large gap, but in my opinion, I believe defensive gun use situations/uses are on the higher end of this range. Most politicians and media outlets are quick to talk about how bad guns are and how we need more gun laws because the hundreds of already existing gun laws are not working, but a new one will solve the problem. Sure... Although there are evil people out there that do horrible things using guns, there are even more people out there that rely on a firearm for self-defense. Those are the people that are intentionally left out by most politicians and media because they don’t want people understand there is a legitimist use for firearms. These are also the same people that gun laws specifically target and negatively effect. Since the government cannot 100% guarantee your safety 100% of the time, self-defense is a personal responsibility. The most effective means of self-defense is a firearm. Seeing as how certain firearms require the use of a detachable magazine in order to operate and properly function; when an individual who decides to exercise their Second Amendment Right chooses a magazine fed firearm as their means of effective protection, firearm magazines then become a necessary and fundamental part of that firearm. Since millions of individuals own magazine fed firearms, magazines therefore become commonly used for self-defense and protected by the Second Amendment. Also, since there is no definitive answer on how many bullets are always necessary to always stop a threat and/or threats in every self-defense situation, the Government cannot dictate the reasonable, appropriate, and/or maximum/minimum amount of bullets needed for a self-defense situation, therefore, the Government should not enforce magazine capacity limitations. Because of this, any and all firearm magazine bans and/or limitations are a direct infringement on the Second Amendment Right of citizens. My ConclusionIn my opinion, I believe the Government intentionally infringes on the freedoms and rights of the people, and although they say the justification is safety, their motivation is for other reasons. Don’t fall victim to their deception or subtilty go along with their verbiage. If you give them an inch, they will take a mile. Also, take into consideration that a lot of politicians are either ignorant or willfully ignorant on a lot of topics, so be cautious on what they are saying because they are probably an idiot. I wish the Government and its representatives worked as hard to protect the freedoms and rights of people as they do to limit them.  Video Version of This ArticleThank you for reading this article. We hope it was informative. If so, please share it with others and don't forget to leave a comment below!
- Intuitive Defense -
"TRAIN. ACT. LIVE." Related Articles
Sources
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
ArticlesOur goal is to provided accurate, informative content on current events, guns, training, and other topics. Categories
All
Archives
August 2024
|
RSS Feed
