In My Words: To reduce gun violence, focus on function instead of form

"There is no legitimate sporting or self-defense need for someone with proper marksmanship training to possess a 10-plus round magazine for their firearm of choice." - This is simply wrong and quite frankly, it is no one's business how many rounds my firearms can load. Furthermore, it is a subjective argument. Why 10? Why not five? Or one? Proper marksmanship training has nothing to do with it, as most people, who are faced with using their weapon for self-defense, have no idea how they will react. Nor will they know how many people they will face off against, whether that person is on drugs, using body armor, etc... I prefer to keep people guessing as to whether I have 10 rounds or more. Finally, it's important to note, gun control compromises will never end at some happy medium of 10 rounds. If this is agreed to, gun rights advocates will fight for more restrictions until guns are no longer legal in this country. Thanks, but I am happy where they stand (in my state anyway) now. I think the conversation needs to instead focus on what drives people to initiate gun violence and how they are circumventing the established laws vs restricting the right of legal gun owners. Imposing a 10 round limit to firearms isn't going to prevent gun violence and by the author's own words and perspective (which I don't share) even the bad guy could have the proper marksmanship training to overcome the transition to another magazine (assuming they haven't broken the law initially by acquiring a >10 round magazone).

Roger that Brother Rick!

To reduce gun violence focus on criminals.