Silly idea: what if we shouldn’t be limiting gun type and magazine size because it limits homeowners from being able to participate in our defense if we’re attacked on our land.
What if someone like China invades us in 30 years, and everyone only has two round clips in the name of public safety. Wouldn’t we have a higher chance of getting trounced? And wouldn’t that be a direct result of going against the second amendment?
I’m not saying there aren’t reasons to control guns, I think that is equally obvious, but shouldn’t we be weighing national defense in the other side of the balance–especially since that was kind of the purpose of putting it in there in the first place?