The Los Angeles City Council’s recent passage of a measure banning law-abiding citizens from possessing standard-capacity magazines (often called “high-capacity” by gun-banners) will do nothing to stop crime, but will give criminals the upper hand over those they choose to prey upon.
And don’t be deceived—it is only a ban on law-abiding citizens. As we all know, violent criminals, by definition, don’t obey the law—especially restrictive gun laws. That’s why they’re called “criminals.”
Of course, the members of the L.A. City Council know that quite well. City Councilman Paul Krekorian, who ramrodded the statute, even admitted as much in a statement to the press.
“People who are civilians, people who want to defend their homes, people who want to defend their families don’t need a hundred-round drum magazine and an automatic weapon to do it,” Krekorian said.
It’s easy to see from Krekorian’s own words who he and the others really targeted with the ban—“people who are civilians, people who want to defend their homes, people who want to defend their families.” That’s not just unbelievable, it’s maddening. What kind of public official cheerfully puts political correctness ahead of the lives of his constituents? What kind of city councilor happily subjects his law-abiding constituents to better-armed criminals simply so he can pat himself on the back and brag that he is “doing something” about crime?
Fact is, Krekorian doesn’t care about law-abiding citizens. If he did, he’d promote laws that actually affect criminals instead of hamstringing non-criminals.
Incidentally, Krekorian also has little regard for the truth—another fact evident from his statement above. The argument against “hundred-round drum magazines” is basically a false argument. If that’s what he really wants to restrict, why ban 11-round magazines, or 13-round magazines? I go to the shooting range about once a week, and have only seen a 100-round drum magazine once in the past several years. Fact is, they’re not very common. But even if all lawful gun owners in Los Angeles owned one, what does that have to do with crime? Would owning one suddenly make an otherwise model citizen turn into a mass murderer? Of course not!
Krekorian also lied in citing “automatic weapon(s)” in his statement. This is, in fact, a common gun-hater tactic: Try to convince the uninformed, non-gun owner that automatic firearms are common and easy to obtain. In truth, they have been highly regulated since the 1960s, making it extremely difficult (and expensive) to own one—except, of course, for criminals. I’m sure Krekorian knows that. And I’m equally sure he doesn’t mind misusing the term to garner support for his lame, feel-good efforts.
Criminals in Los Angeles are probably laughing out loud. Not only are they likely emboldened by a new law limiting law-abiding citizens’ ability to fight back, but they now know they have the L.A. City Council on their side. Exactly when some good, lawful L.A. citizen will end up dead at the hands of a better-armed attacker because of this absurd move by Krekorian and the rest of the city council remains to be seen.
The new ordinance gives owners of such magazines 60 days to remove, surrender or legally sell or transfer them. One thing is for sure: You won’t see a long line of criminals outside the nearest police department precinct waiting to turn in their so-called “high-capacity” magazines.