For one thing, there are a few different parts of the Constitution that limit gun use for specific …show more content…
Many mass killers have used these high-capacity magazines, capable of allowing gun owners to fire up to 100 rounds. Eichenwald gives an interesting statistic: “Statistics compiled by the Violence Policy Center in Washington, D.C., show that just in the years Barack Obama has been president, there have been 18 mass shootings involving high-capacity magazines, killing 153 people and wounding 137 more.” An entire 153 lives could have been saved if these shooters were not sold these accessories which directly aided them during these mass murders. There are plain facts to back up the idea that if high-capacity magazines weren’t sold, shooters would have a much harder time taking innocent lives. A ban on these accessories would force shooters to reload, giving victims plenty of time to stop the attacker in their tracks. “That’s how the 2011 mass shooting in Tucson, Arizona... was stopped; Once the shooter’s 33-round magazine was empty, he was tackled while reloading,” writes Eichenwald in his article. Without these magazines, other shootings could have been stopped before too many, if any people, had been injured. Outlawing accessories like these isn’t technically barred by the Second Amendment, either. On the contrary, those for gun rights may have some points against this. Eichenwald offers this counter, stating, “Firearms enthusiasts claim these devices are needed because a panicky homeowner, facing armed criminals, would be more likely to miss his target and thus need the extra bullets.” But mass shooters are more likely to miss the target as well, and larger magazines help them shoot just as much as they help homeowners shoot. As you can see, high-capacity magazines are nothing more then an assistant in the murder and injury of many