Subscribe for 33¢ / day

One aspect of the current discussion about mass shootings in the United States is the availability of large-capacity magazines that allow quick shooting of a large number of bullets before reloading.

Currently, these large-sized magazines are unrestricted. I did a little research and found that federal hunting rules specify that for all migratory gamebirds, hunters may not hunt with a shotgun that can hold more than three shells, unless you plug the shotgun magazine with a filler that cannot easily be removed. From online comments by hunters, it seems that this rule is strictly enforced. (I've only ever hunted deer and non-migratory birds, so I've never paid much attention to the rule.)

This rule reflects a longstanding value in the American hunting community that a hunter should be responsible for accurate shooting, and that it is not "sporting" to have unlimited rounds to continue to blast away at flying birds. This also is related to the idea that unlimited shooting is likely to result in many wounded birds and few "clean kills."

Because the federal government already intervenes in the use of guns to ensure a sporting chance for flying birds, is it too much to ask government to intervene on the issue of large capacity magazines? This would at least give a "sporting" chance to fleeing people, in the case of an attempted mass shooting. Personally, I would definitely support legislation to that end.

Jon Nicholson, Dakota, Minn