By Brian Kelly
New Jersey –-(Ammoland.com)- I may be betraying my age, but the number evokes an image of Bo Derek jogging down a beach or a nearly unattainable score in the Olympics thanks to some bias Russian Judge during the cold war.
What is the significance of the number 10?
Well it is an even number and according to Wikipedia, “Ten is the base of the decimal numeral system, by far the most common system of denoting numbers in both spoken and written language. The reason for the choice of ten is assumed to be that humans have ten fingers”.
In the context of trying to convince the public it will somehow make them safe from gun violence by making that the legal number of rounds a gun owner can have in a weapon, is completely arbitrary.
Here in the People’s Republic of New Jersey, where gun owners are treated like lepers, the anti-liberty crowd is trying to convince the public that somehow reducing magazine capacity from an already arbitrary number like 15 to an equally arbitrary number like 10 will save lives. In reality, this is nothing more than a gimmick to further infringe on the law abiding gun owner under the guise of assuaging stoked up fears of mass shootings.
Let’s put aside the incredibly naïve notion that someone hell bent on carrying a loaded firearm (against the law) into a gun free zone (against the law) to murder multiple people (also very much against the law) would decide to comply with a ridiculous capacity law and only load 10 rounds per magazine. The ability for the deranged lunatic to rapidly change magazines negates the false sense of security created by such an arbitrary ban. Sheriff Ken Campbell conducted a series of demonstrations with both an experienced and novice shooter proving the capacity ban to be useless. Don’t believe me? Google it.
The argument ‘there is no need for more than 10 rounds’ is a false premise since our rights are not predicated on need. You certainly wouldn’t argue a person doesn’t need to vote in certain elections or doesn’t need to criticize the government. Blaming law abiding gun owners for mass shootings would be like blaming Law and Order-Special Victims Unit for Child Pornography and violence against women. The idea that placing a limit on the rounds a citizen can have in their firearm will somehow reduce the number of victims in a mass shooting is tantamount to believing limiting the amount of condoms a citizen can purchase will reduce the spread of STDs.
If you wouldn't tolerate a regulation on your right to speech or the right to vote then you shouldn't tolerate that infringement on the right to protect yourself and your family.
If a fraction of the hassle placed on gun owners in New Jersey was placed on your right to vote you'd be rioting in the street. Just realize that although you may not care about your right to bear arms for protection, it is only a matter of time before the powerful State turns its violent eyes on a right you actually do care about and the true irony will be your lack of interest in firearms rights will leave you powerless to oppose any other form of tyranny benevolently bestowed upon you for the perceived good of the collective.
As George Washington said, “Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.”