Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ
I'm ok with some laws too, but there is a slippery slope. I don't want my neighbor to own a rocket launcher because well, there's simply too many idiots around who might do something stupid, albeit without malice, with something like this. That being said, I think high capacity magazines bear no affect on whether the community at large is safer or not. Crazy people are going to do crazy things regardless, and the same with the criminals.
This is the basic situation:
Emotionally bothered people (Fields) and some of her latte-sipping Boulderite hippy friends have gotten together to dictate to people in a state with a very wide-ranging way of living that their view of what is good for them is good for everyone.
That someone sipping latte on University Hill in Boulder feels that a smaller-round magazine is adequate never bothered asking someone living out on the high plains guarding their large ranch with hundreds of animals against predators and livestock thieves. Nor did they ask anyone that lives in the mountains near bear and mountain lions. Then you have the problem of multiple-attacker home invasions, and anyone with rifle experience knows that "assault rifles" have less recoil than shotguns which means that the former are easier for women and older people to defend with than the latter.
But leave it to the liberals, they're always trying to apply their one-size-fits-all internet cafe think tank solutions.
This law isn't about what is reasonably needed, it's about what makes the promoters of the legislation feel good. I would strongly suggest to these people that they find a high elsewhere - after all, we have legal pot here now.
If one person were ever a justification to ban anything, then let's ban alcohol since it kills far more people.