I said in the post immediately below, “Gun Nonsense From The White House,” that “[t]he only thing that can be said in favor of the White House proposal [to ban “assault weapons” and high capacity magazines] is that it’s not as crazy as what New York just passed, about which I will have something up somewhere soon.”
Soon is now, the “somewhere” is National Review Online (thanks to the good offices of John Fund, NRO columnist extraordinaire), and the “something” is “New York’s Magazine Ban: Unconstitutional?”
UPDATE
For more on the flaws in the New York law, see Hans Bader’s excellent article.
John, just to clarify things the law effectively outlaws most newer i.e. 80s and later handguns. Many older ones such as the Colt 1911 hold 7 rounds. Glock even makes one — the model 36, that holds six. Seven or 8 rounds was pretty much the standard in the pre-Glock days, except for the Browning Hi-Power. Some newer revolvers i.e. Taurus 608, will also hold more than seven rounds (the 608 holds 8 rounds of .357, some .22 revolvers will hold nine rounds). So I guess it’s back to the good old days in NY!
I’m aware of the 1911 and many other.45 caliber guns, including the Glock 36, which often have 7 round magazines. My point was that the law in effect outlaws all 9mm pistols except for a relative small number of small guns designed for pocket or deep concealed carry, as well as most .40 caliber guns as well.
Magazine for Pistol, M1911, Cal .45 is 7 round capacity. This was the standard US military pistol over 80 years.
Again, yes, I know that for years the standard magazine for the M1911 was 7 rounds, just as many .45’s today still use 7 round magazines. My point is that the NY law would make inoperative the vast majority of 9mm pistols that people own today, as well as many, probably most. .40 cal pistols. In fact, as I’ve noted before, the limiting magazines to 10 rounds, and especially 7 as in New York, would almost certainly increase the popularity of the .45, a generally more lethal round than the smaller 9mm and .40. It would probably also increase the use of shotguns for home defense, far more lethal than any pistol. Thus the magazine limitation would probably cost more lives than it would save.