Self-defense shootings demonstrate just how wrong judge was to uphold "large capacity" mag ban

AP Photo/Matt Rourke

According to U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, bans on “large capacity” magazines that can hold more than ten rounds are perfectly compatible with the Second Amendment because (in her view, anyway) they “are not commonly used in self-defense”. The judge’s ruling late on Friday upheld Oregon’s new magazine ban, though a pending state-level challenge will keep her opinion from being enforced for at least a few more months, but in just the past few days we’ve seen at least two defensive gun uses that prove just how wrong (and potentially deadly) Immergut’s decision really is.


Authorities in Coleman, Michigan say a homeowner was able to defend themselves from multiple attackers early Sunday morning, shooting at least one suspect and sending several others fleeing into the pre-dawn darkness.

Around 2:35 a.m. on Sunday, July 16, Midland County Sheriff’s Office deputies responded to a Warren Township residence for an attempted break-in by multiple subjects.

One of the individuals involved was shot by a resident and is in stable condition, according to police. Five other suspects that police believe to have been involved in the break-in were located by police and lodged at the Midland County, pending charges from the prosecutor’s office, police said.

So at least six individuals targeted that home and the occupants inside. Under Immergut’s “logic”, the homeowner had no right to protect themselves with more than ten rounds, at least not without fumbling in the dark trying to swap out their magazine while the intruders still posed a threat to their life and limbs. Thankfully in this case it sounds like most of the burglars took off running when their buddy got shot, but what if they had turned on the homeowner instead?

A similar incident took place in Philadelphia’s Germantown neighborhood on Sunday morning. A woman returning to her home around 1 a.m. discovered four men inside the residence.


A confrontation ensued, and the woman shot two of the four offenders, who all fled the scene.

When officers arrived, they found the woman standing in the street and one of the men laying on the ground suffering from two gunshot wounds.

He was identified by police as 48-year-old Jermaine Parker.

Parker was treated on the scene by medics and transported to Einstein Medical Center.

A short time later, officers located the second man on the unit block of East Seymour Street.

He was suffering a gunshot wound to his back and was also transported to Einstein Medical Center, where he is in stable but critical condition.

Police have identified that suspect as 45-year-old Randy Miller, but the other two suspects are still at large as of Monday morning.

Once again we have multiple attackers squaring off against one armed citizen, and if Immergut had her way the woman who acted in self-defense would have been forced to ration her ammunition while four guys attacked her, quite possibly leaving her out of options while one or more intruders still posed a deadly threat to her life.

Immergut’s wrong about the Second Amendment only protecting those arms that are meant for self-defense, but she’s also entirely off-base in claiming that arbitrarily defined “large capacity” magazines serve no self-defense purpose and are rarely used to save lives. If we’re ever forced to protect ourselves with our firearm, we can’t count on our assailants to make it a fair fight. We could be met with overwhelming numbers as these armed citizens were, and ten rounds may simply not be enough to defend against the danger. Immergut’s decision puts law-abiding citizens at risk while giving violent criminals the upper hand. It fails to comport with both the Constitution and common sense, and will have deadly consequences if her twisted logic isn’t overturned by the courts.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member