Sheriff Demonstrates How Magazine Limits Don’t Stop Mass Shooters

After every mass shooting, the leftists often make the same appeal. They start proposing a number of new firearm restrictions, and one of the most common is a large magazine capacity ban. They believe that if a gun can’t hold as many rounds, then killers can’t hurt as many people. And if they try to reload their firearms during a massacre, it will give their unarmed victims the opportunity to either flee or attack the shooter.

A number of jurisdictions have such bans in place, including California, Connecticut, Maryland, Hawaii, and Washington DC, where magazines that carry more than 10 rounds are restricted. After these bans take place there is often a reduced number of large capacity magazines found in crime scenes. But do these magazine bans really reduce the capabilities of criminals? And more importantly, do they really inhibit the killing potential of a mass shooter?

Back in 2013 an Indiana Sheriff put this notion to the test by running a competitive shooter and an amateur shooter through a wide variety of scenarios. They involved several different guns and magazines with varying carrying capacities. He timed the shooters to see if these magazine limits would make a difference. Spoiler, they don’t help at all.