The kind of magazine a criminal uses often has little impact on his criminal actions. That’s because most bad guys don’t need a million rounds. They can hold you up with an empty weapon and can kill people with just a few rounds.
However, some people spend a lot of time freaking out about the magazines criminals use.
Take the case of the murder of an NYPD officer last week. It seems the magazine got some attention, and some of the “experts” had some rather bizarre things to say about it.
The high-capacity ammunition magazine a crazed gunman used to kill a rookie NYPD cop and injure another in Harlem turns the weapon into something that might be found in war-torn Afghanistan, experts said on Saturday.
The so-called “drum” magazine allows the Glock to hold an additional 40 rounds to the firearm’s usual 10.
New York prohibits the use of magazines holding more than 10 rounds unless you are active law enforcement or military, according to state law and an online site that hawks the magazines for $89.95.
“Now you can load up on Tuesday and shoot to Wednesday with this 50 round 9mm magazine for your Glock. It will fit and function in all Glock 9mm handguns (except the Glock 43),” the site, Glockstore, touts, noting state restrictions apply.
Ex-NYPD cop and private eye Bo Dietl likened the ammo magazine to “something our troops saw in Afghanistan.”
Of course, what’s missing completely from this is that a magazine like this for the Glock isn’t used by any military on the planet.
In fact, one place you’re unlikely to find this magazine is any war-torn area like Afghanistan.
And this is what “experts” like Dietl are telling the media? No wonder reporters sound like complete idiots when they talk about firearms.
Meanwhile, there’s not enough attention being paid to the fact that New York’s magazine capacity restrictions meant precisely jack to the alleged killer. This magazine is illegal in the state, and yet, here we are, talking about it because of a murder in New York City, the most gun-controlled city in the nation.
The truth of this magazine is that it’s a novelty. It’s something a handful of people have because it amuses them, but is rarely used in crime. That’s because these things are big and bulky. If you’re trying to hide a gun, this isn’t exactly what one might term “helpful” to that.
But Dietl–who is not a firearms expert so far as I’ve been able to determine, though he’s credited as one by this particular reporter–seems to think this is something else.
Why would anyone actually make this claim?
Well, there are two reasons I can think of. One is that they’re too stupid to know any better, but since everyone has seen footage from Afghanistan over the last 20 years, I find that difficult. The other is that someone wants to get some publicity, so they’ll say stupid stuff like this knowing the media will jump all over it.
I can forgive stupidity. Making up crap, however, I can’t.