American Rifleman.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) released the 2020 edition of its Firearm Production Report to members this month, and among its findings is the fact that civilian interest and ownership of modern sporting rifles continues to skyrocket. Since 1990, according to the study, an estimated 19.8 million have been manufactured and put into circulation.
Forty-eight percent of all firearms produced in the United States or imported in 2018 were modern sporting rifles. Despite the manufacturing focus, inventories remained low across the nation, and this year’s firearm sales pace has left many retailers without models to sell.
There are approximately 79.2 million rifle magazines capable of holding 30 or more rounds in circulation—nearly all of them modern sporting rifle versions. The potentially lifesaving advantage of not having to reload during a criminal encounter isn’t overlooked by pistol owners, either. Roughly 71.2 million handgun magazines capable of holding more than 10 cartridges are owned by enthusiasts today.
Lots of luck trying to confiscate all of those guns. That’s an impossible task.
However, there’s something that bears repeating, and it’s a point of second amendment logic brought up by David Codrea a couple of days ago.
And as few “gunpundits” seem to see, no matter how long you give them, “in common use” is not about popularity. It is about “every terrible implement of the soldier,” that is, “ordinary military equipment” capable of enabling citizens to prevail in “common defense” battles. Were it otherwise, withholding new technology from We the People would be all tyrants would need to keep it forever out of “common use.”
Make sure to ponder the point he’s making, and focus on the last sentence of his paragraph. If “common use” had to do with popularity contests, then the whole edifice of the second amendment collapses.
A tyrannical government could (illegally) keep them from being produced for or distributed to the public, and then claim in court (or the court of public opinion) that although our standing army has such weaponry, since they are not in common use among the public (from which the militia comes), the second amendment doesn’t apply to those weapons.
This becomes a “de facto” argument (which is a formal logical fallacy) by themselves nefariously ensuring the preconditions for waiving and cessation of the right.
Never forget what the founders really intended, regardless of the machinations of the lawyers – and ignore the dense gun bloggers who fail to point these things out.