Skip to main content

Lieutenant Governor Matt Denn favors retaining some larger capacity magazines for home defense

Gun control conversations are ... interesting.

Recently, Libertarian Greg Callaway wrote to Lt. Gov. Matt Denn expressing his opposition to proposed new gun control legislation.  Most of the answer (which you can read here) is fairly typical politico-speak.  But then Denn talks about magazine restrictions, which leads to one oxymoron and one really interesting point.

First, the oxymoron:
There is now strong statistical evidence that responsible regulation of large capacity gun magazines does reduce the number of those magazines used by criminals. A study published this year of Virginia law enforcement data showed that following the implementation of the 1994 federal restrictions on large capacity magazines, the percentage of criminals’ guns confiscated during arrests which had those magazines dropped by half. When the ban expired, the percentage of criminals’ guns with high capacity magazines increased all the way back up to the levels seen before the federal law. 
OK, leaving aside that this was not a formal academic study, but a Washington Post analysis that is not subject to peer review or verification, the study did not show an increase in the use of weapons with large-capacity magazines to commit crimes, only an increase in the number of such magazines seized by police.  This is a fairly critical difference.  There is also no evidence that the statistical methodology used by WaPo reporters took into account changes in the overall numbers of magazines seized, or the number of individuals from which magazines were seized, as opposed to the percentage rates of seizure.  In fact, the study authors admit that their data only covered 75% of the total weapons seized.  So the oxymoron in Denn's response is that while the statistic he quotes is accurate, it is also meaningless.  It could be indicative of the effectiveness of a ban, but there is an equal chance that it's not.

Now for the interesting point:
As the Lieutenant Governor works to draft a bill regarding large capacity magazines, he has made an effort to reach out to gun owners and solicit their opinions about some of the practical issues involved in regulating these devices. The feedback has been very helpful, and in some cases has caused him to change the way the administration’s bill is drafted. For example, the administration had originally planned to draft a bill that would limit the capacity of magazines for handguns to 10 rounds, and magazines for rifles and shotguns to five rounds, based on the fact that many hunting rifles are sold with five round magazines. However, several gun owners have impressed on the Lieutenant Governor the importance of allowing homeowners who may be inexperienced in firing a gun to have a sufficient magazine to defend their homes. So the bill that the administration will propose to the legislature will propose a limit of ten rounds, no matter what type of gun is involved. The Lieutenant Governor is continuing to talk to gun owners as he drafts the administration’s bill, and he has found their input very helpful. [emphasis added] 
This is an important, if very subtle point.  First it points out the the Markell administration was first seeking a limitation on magazine capacity that would have been twice as stringent as the one under the previous Federal ban.  That's food for thought in and of itself.  But it is equally important to note that the Lieutenant Governor claims that his mind was changed by gun owners with regard to home defense.  This is an intriguing point, and raises the question about what would happen if a citizen made a similar argument about personal defense outside the home.  Does someone become inherently more or less capable of using a weapon for defense because s/he is in the home?

(To return to that Virginia "study" for a moment:  contrary to what you would have thought if you listened to most of the rhetoric that passes for gun control discussion today, 87% of the confiscated magazines in Virginia were for pistols, not "assault weapons."  In fact, when you factor out the seized magazines of .22 rifles--not covered in the ban--only 814 of the 14,478 weapons counted in the study were "assault weapons"--a staggering small 5.6%.)

But the Denn response does make it clear that the Markell administration (and particularly the Lieutenant Governor who has his own career plans after 2016) is going to try to position itself as willing to listen and make compromises on the final language of its legislation.  Denn does NOT want to run for Governor in 2016 behind an unpopular piece of legislation.

So let's help him.

Write to Governor Matt Denn at  matthew.denn@state.de.us and tell him (respectfully, please) what you think should be included or excluded in the proposed legislation.

Comments

kavips said…
I used to have magazines all over my house and then, we got curb-side recycling.

(That may not be funny tomorrow, but I'm cracking up right here)... :)

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

The disturbing decline of the Delaware blogosphere: a very unfortunate Around the Horn (even if it's not Friday)

I've noticed a change in my own blog-checking habits over the past several weeks, and I don't know if it's just me or the reality of the last month of a divisive political campaign. I automatically used to check out Delawareliberal first and several times a day, because it was where I could find edgy, thought-provoking, and (dare I say it) funny banter going on. These days visit several other spots first, and my visits to DL are both shorter and less engaged. Why? Because the combination of invading neo-con commenters with the stridency of some of the major contributors has led to such pleasant exchanges as a post dedicated to labeling another blogger racist by donviti, whose own sense of provocative humor is generally so far out there that he makes John Belushi doing Samurai bartender on the SNL look positively pro-Asian. Or I can find Delawaredem and jason periodically spewing the idea that anybody who is not a liberal or progressive Democrat is somehow a non-American,...