So, one of the popular arguments by the "common sense gun control" crowd is to reduce the capacity of magazines. Most recently, Biden argued to reduce the legal capacity to eight.
This doesn't, as of right now, affect me because my carry gun only holds six bullets. Still, I have a dog in this fight.
I honestly don't hate to harp on the Eli Dicken story. The young man is a fucking hero. The maniac that he took out before the bad guy could kill as many people as he wanted had two rifles and several magazines and a couple hundred bullets. Dicken had a handgun with one mag. Dicken fired ten shots and hit the bad guy eight times. We don't know if eight would have been enough for Dicken to stop the shooter. What we know for sure is that Biden's law would have taken two bullets out of Dicken's gun.
Still, it goes deeper than this. Just look up the prices of magazines.
The Virgina Tech shooter and the Columbine shooters used magazines with limited capacities. They just brought a bunch of mags with them.
Guns and ammo are expensive. Mags aren't.
Now, let's try to use logic for a second. Who is more likely to be hindered by laws restricting magazine capacities: the person who carries a gun just in case he or she needs it, or a would-be mass murderer?
The mass shooters already have the advantage of choosing the location and time of their attacks. If they wanna pack a bag full of rifles, bullets, and mags on one day for one specific reason, it's not that hard. For me or anyone else who carries for self-defense, it would be absurd to carry around bags of ammo. Some people carry a couple extra mags; but, most people I know don't. I usually don't carry an extra speed loader.
If shit hits the fan in front of me, I've got six shots.