Joan Peterson the Brady Campaign:
"The Second Amendment says nothing about the right to large capacity magazines for the purpose of killing as many people as possible without reloading."
Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign:
"...it was a clearly dangerous man who had way too easy access to a gun with a high-capacity ammunition magazine -- good only for killing many people quickly. "
Baldr Odionson of Ceasefire Oregon:
"OTC medication and high performance cars are not *intended* for killing large numbers of people, unlike those weapons and extended magazine clips."
That's just a few examples, but it's easy to see where this is heading. The post-Tuscon gun-banner agenda is now to push forward the belief that a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition is a magic talisman of evil. That one can have no other reason for owning one than to kill large numbers of people.
So what is the antidote for this poison? It's very simple: There are millions of 30+ round capacity magazines in circulation and the vast majority are used for lawful purposes. Magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition are simply not a problem. The fact that it took such an extraordinary event to even start talk of a magazine ban is telling.