“Bad” laws do many things, but perhaps their most egregious offense is their erosion of overall respect for authority. Bad laws prove that a governing body doesn’t know what they’re doing. It proves that they’re inept in their positions and that anything they say, any judgment they make, and any rule they create is suspect.
The Colorado High Capacity Magazine ban is a perfect example of a rule that has eroded the respect for authority to the point that quite literally nobody gives a flying…
Colorado’s Large-Capacity Magazine Ban Is a Colossal Failure – Reason
In 2013, the Colorado legislature passed House Bill 13-1224, which prohibits the “sale, transfer, or possession of an ammunition feeding device that is capable of accepting, or that can be readily converted to accept, more than [15] rounds of ammunition or more than [8] shotgun shells (large-capacity magazine).” This was a year after James Holmes used a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a 100-round drum magazine (among other weapons) to kill 12 people in a movie theater in Aurora, Colo. The bill grandfathered in old large-capacity magazines that gun owners already had in their possession but forbade new sales or transfers. Then-Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) signed the bill into law on July 1. The law was intended to erase the market for new large-capacity magazines.
This caused Magpul to leave their beloved Colorado homes, along with several other firearm related businesses, and has done both ‘jack’ and ‘shit’ for the safety of Colorado regarding the risk of mass killers. Some areas honor the letter of the rule but sell standard capacity magazine “kits” instead of magazines, a magazine like a PMAG is 5 pieces. Others just ignore the feckless rule altogether based on the opinion of their elected Sheriff.
“I’m a little stunned about how open it is and how blatantly they’re saying, ‘You know, this is a stupid law, but this is the way you can get around it,'” state Sen. Rhonda Fields (D–Aurora), one of the bill’s sponsors, told 9News. “The whole goal, when I ran the bill in 2013, was to limit that capacity.”
And you failed, Rhonda. You totally, completely, and utterly failed to heed the reality that magazines are durable goods, like the firearms that use them, and already exist in the hundreds of millions. You failed to exercise good judgement in either crafting the rule effectively (if entirely unconstitutionally) to ban magazines outright (which would still leave the hundreds of millions in circulation and how to remove them) or realizing just what a waste of effort this was. You expected, because “mA AuThOrity!!”, that 2A supporters, who are tired of being the scapegoat for every mentally deranged, unhinged, or distraught individual who uses violence as their outlet, would just take the turd sandwich again and eat it because you claimed it was their responsibility to do so.
The longer preposterous half measures are allowed to stand the further the erosion of legitimate authority will slip. The more these rules pass the more they will be ignored. Bump stocks aren’t gone. High capacity magazines exist in every locale where they are prohibited. The banned features on “assault weapons” are just as likely to be ignored now as the rest of these in regions where they are illegal.
Bad laws, in violation of the second amendment, have gone and irreparably harmed the authority of these legislative and governing bodies. Every rule is under the highest scrutiny because no faith is to be found in them to make well reasoned decisions. Second Amendment supports are rightly well and done with the nonsense. Internationally even, things aren’t looking good. New Zealand is set to illustrate what a ban and heavy handed treatment of firearms ownership looks like. They’re failing. And with tools of communication that is the internet we can watch these failures in real time, we can compile the data, we can cross reference what is said in comparison to plausible reality and find out just how wanting prohibition is as a solution.
Because we didn’t learn that constitutional lesson last time apparently.
