Life is too precious to run out of bullets!
by Rabbi Dovid Bendory
(Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership) – Minutes before lunatic Jared Loughner began his mayhem in Arizona, the issue of a Federal high capacity ammunition magazine ban was a complete political non-starter. Obama didn’t go near it when he had Democratic majorities and he certainly wouldn’t have tried it after the election rout of 2010. High cap bans were simply not possible. Add to this the pro-self defense victories in the U.S. Supreme Court’s Heller and McDonald decisions, and the door to magazine bans seemed both locked and barred … perhaps even welded shut for good.
And then came Jared Loughner. And the gun grabbing vultures circled and landed. We now face a replay of the hysteria that brought us the so-called “Assault Weapons” Ban (and the included magazine bans) of the Clinton years. The act of a single madman has struck a blow against the Second Amendment that all the gun grabbers combined have been unable to strike. Please think long and hard on this irrational state of affairs.
Today, the most common plaintive question you hear from the victim disarmament crowd is: “Why would anyone need a high capacity ammunition magazine?” Note that the emphasis is always on the word “need”.
So-called “gun control” has always used semantic deception. What the gun confiscators want to do is apply “needs” to situations that more accurately require “wants”.
No one “needs” a seat belt. After all, 99.999 percent of your driving time you don’t “need” a seatbelt. You only “need” a seat belt during an automobile crash. Do you want a seatbelt? Of course! No one would even debate this issue.
To a greater or lesser degree, the same goes for property insurance, fire extinguishers, spare tires, life jackets, and first aid kits, to name just a few things.
So with this in mind, here are five good reasons that you should WANT a high capacity magazine.
1. Multiple assailants. Whether on the street or during a home invasion, violent criminals often move in pairs or packs. Realize that you will never shoot as well as your score at the range when you are under the unbelievable stress of a life-or-death encounter. Which would you prefer to have in your magazine in such an event? Ten rounds? Or fifteen or seventeen?
2. Private citizens always face the threat before the police arrive. Private citizens were on the front line at Tucson, Columbine, and Virginia Tech. Why limit our effectiveness?
You should logically want whatever cops choose to carry. How many cops choose a ten round magazine? If politicians want to hinder us “little people” with a ten round limit, they should also hamper the police with the same limit. Let’s see how far that flies.
3. Civil disturbances. Watch the Reginald Denny beating video some time. Review the looting insanity of Hurricane Katrina. You’ve got a crazed mob of ten, twenty, or fifty people headed in your direction. Are ten rounds enough? Might you want fifteen, or seventeen, or even thirty?
Oh, and while you’re at it, perhaps bring from memory those Los Angeles Korean store owners standing guard on the roofs of their businesses with semi-auto AKs during the Rodney King riots. No one messed with those stores, did they?
4. Because it is your most fundamental right as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, and, more importantly, as given by God Almighty: the right to the righteous defense of yourself and the innocent. “Shall not be infringed” simply means what it says. When politicians infringe on magazine capacity, they infringe on the Second Amendment. You should want a high cap mag because you can have one!
5. Your assailants may well be armed with high cap magazines themselves. No ban will affect these criminals; it will actually encourage them. Do you really think the gang-bangers care about federal laws? Again, ask the local cop why he or she won’t “downgrade” to a ten round mag to go along with this feel-good idiocy. Ask the pols why they don’t think the cops should do so.
These are just a few of the reasons for WANTING (not “needing”) a high cap magazine. In the spirit of JPFO’s recently launched “High Cap Freedom” campaign, go out and buy one or more high capacity mags for your pistol or rifle today.
Get your high cap magazines before any ban can take place.
“Because your life is too precious to risk running out of bullets.”
So far as “needs” go, what exactly do we need in terms of rights and freedom? North Korea allows certain objects and activities based on “need”, but they don’t allow much of anything. No freedom of speech, no freedom to travel, exercise religion, etc. When needs become a part of the equation then government can pretty much restrict anything and everything. Here in America certain rights are based on desire rather than need. No person truly “needs” freedom of speech, assembly, religion, etc; but Americans can exercise these rights whenever they have the desire to do so. Those who have no desire to own a firearm don’t have to buy one, but those who do can have one despite having no immediate need for it. A person may not ever need for a full capacity magazine, but need shouldn’t be part of the equation, only desire.
No, sirmatthew, seems you didn’t understand the article at all.
The “need” is to be free to be self owners, self responsible, and prepared to defend ourselves, our families, our communities and our principles.
sirmatthew, you are a typical clueless liberal. It is NOT a desire to make sure you are ready for anything, it is common sense. As a CCW holder for a long time, it is a responsibility for a gun owner to be properly armed and supplied when you carry conceal/open in public.
BTW, when YOU argue from ignorance, its a losing stance. Grow up.
I don’t think that sirmatthew was against the high cap mags, merely arguing that the libtard question of need shouldn’t even be asked. Infringement is infringement.
In Kalifornia, the libtards even want to limit the capacity of pepper spray. I can only buy a 2.5 ounce container.
The only thing which libtards create is victims. Then they prey on the victims they have made.
I posit that we “need” to free of the concept of “concealed carry licenses/permits”. Let me explain:
Being that We, the People, are “endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable Rights”, why should we be forced to subject ourselves to having to ask “state permission” to exercise that most important Right, that of Self-Preservation, by being compelled to require a license or permit to claim that which is rightfully, unquestionably, irrevocably, individually, Constitutionally, and naturally our?
“Government” did not invent, convey, grant or otherwise allow for our Right to Self Defense. It has existed for eternity, and shall continue to do so.
It is past time to revoke, repeal, and repudiate the concept of “concealed carry licenses/permits”. Then we shall have true Freedom.
Oh, and by the way, they are not “high capacity” magazines. They are NORMAL CAPACITY magazines. The firearms they are used in were designed to have such capabilities.
Sorry for the typos. Long day.
Great post.
Both it and sirmatthew are right on target. We don’t need freedom, millions of people in N. Korea survive w/o it. We have a right to it. That’s different, we should should emphasize it and demand it, and those who don’t like it be damned.
I believe that the Korean store owners primarily used Colt AR-15 rifles during the Los Angeles riots, not AKs – feel free to hunt up some of the pictures of the time.
Not only exercising their right to defend themselves but using American weapons to boot.