I’m not generally all that conspiratorially-minded. While I love reading about conspiracy theories, the truth is that I’ve been part of too many groups to believe you can get some of these conspiracies off the ground. People just aren’t wired in such a way that makes them both cooperative and silent for that long. Some are, but too many will either stop going along or start blabbing.

Yet an op-ed in Colorado touched on something that kind of made me think a bit about how some states structure their magazine bans.

Now there is nothing all that special about these pistols. They work and function like most all others. The only difference is that their magazines hold more than 15 rounds of ammunition, a violation of the silly anti-gun law former Gov. John Hickenlooper signed.

We were promised at the time that this magazine limit would never ban guns. I supposed that’s true in the same way banning batteries doesn’t ban your kid’s toy. But without the batteries the toy is only a doorstop.

Same with a pistol without a magazine.

There might be some after-market, 15-round magazines that could fit some of these guns. But a police officer would never trust her life to a cheap magazine that wasn’t made by the manufacturer for her very gun. Neither would I.

Every year, models of regular guns are being introduced that are banned in Colorado.

Makes you think that’s what they had in mind when they passed it. But on the small chance that they meant what they said, now is the time for the Legislature to move the magazine limit from 15 to at least 17.

Now, I’m not agreeing with the policy proposal here – I think a better move would be to move the magazine limit from 15 to no freaking limit, you statist pieces of crap, but that’s just me – but understand where the author may wonder if getting all these guns banned through the backdoor was a feature, not a bug.

See, rather than ban magazines of over X amount, which would let you have any firearm on the market but would restrict your magazine choices, the state of Colorado apparently structured its law, so any gun that comes with a 15-round or larger magazine is forbidden. That restricts a lot of guns from the market.

Yet, it does so in a particularly insidious way. It does it in a manner where the state can plead innocence. “We didn’t ban the guns. It’s not our fault the manufacturers aren’t building guns that comply.”

Was that the goal? Was this considered a feature and not a bug of the law?

The truth is, I doubt it matters all that much. Those who wrote these laws would be fine with a gun ban, even if they weren’t trying to enact one. They don’t think your constitutionally-protected rights matter all that much. Whether it was their goal or an accident, they’re likely fine with the result, and that’s the real problem.