Share “Ban on assault weapons would be draconian”

Ban on assault weapons would be draconian

Published: January 20, 2013

Kathleen Parker (Commentary, Jan. 15) states that a ban on assault weapons or “limit magazines” (Does that mean limit the cartridge capacity of magazines or limit the quantity of magazines a person possesses?) is “hardly draconian.” I disagree. Many people seem to think there's a huge advantage for a murderer with a large-capacity magazine. What they ignore is that if there's such an advantage to having a large-capacity magazine, then a person defending himself would also have that same advantage if he, too, has a large-capacity magazine. Since good people obey laws, if large-capacity magazines are banned, only the evil people will have them.

Also ignored are the defensive capabilities of a semi-automatic rifle such as an AR-15. Knowing beforehand that I likely would be involved in a gunfight, I would choose an AR-15 over a handgun. However, a handgun will work in most cases and it's much easier to have with you wherever you go. I certainly hope I'm never involved in a gunfight, but as a law-abiding citizen I deserve suitable weapons for defense if I choose to have them.

Lawrence Herndon, Duncan


  1. 1
    Kim Davis is a Democrat. Why does that matter?
  2. 2
    Report: Ex-OSU guard Stevie Clark suing Travis Ford, university
  3. 3
    Watch Oklahoma's top mental health officer dress, dance as Michael Jackson
  4. 4
    Tahlequah police tighten patrols in response to high-profile cases of violence toward officers
  5. 5
    I-40 westbound closed in east OKC due to trailer fire
+ show more


× Trending opinion Article