This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
With the battle lines drawn between gun advocates and those on the other side who want sensible gun restrictions, we as a nation have been at an impasse far too long.
Now is the time to have something pass, and one thing which can possibly pass is restriction on magazines (bullet clip sizes). There is nowhere in the Second Amendment that states that magazine clips are protected.
I know this has been brought up in Congress in the past and defeated, for reasons I still don't understand. Why can't we go back to the days when these types of magazines were only used for the military?
I say if you can't kill a deer, or elk, or god knows whatever you are killing within the first five or six shots, then you have no business hunting in the first place. And if you need a clip that holds more than ten shots, you have no interest in hunting, only in one thing: killing people.
And those clips are only used for military and only military, just as military style weapons were designed for the military, not for civilian use.
So I think a good first step is to return to the days when magazine clips are no more than 10-bullet clips, not 30, 50 or 100 clips.
Charles Glaser
West Valley City