An overview of federal and state regulations of waterfowl hunting makes it illegal to “hunt with a shotgun that holds more than three shells, unless you plug it with a one-piece filler, that cannot be removed without disassembling the gun.” That law has been in effect for a very long time.
What is the rationale for that law, one might inquire? A logical answer may be that it protects the birds from being over-harvested. Hmm! We have a law that protects too many birds from being shot? Has there been a hue and a cry from anyone that their Second Amendment rights have been infringed? Not to my knowledge.
Now there’s a proposal being considered to limit the number of shells that can be held in a magazine of a semi-automatic (weapon-style) rifle (designed to shoot humans). That is being challenged, and yes, there is a hue and cry about that. Save the bird population? Well, OK, but do something to save human lives? Well, that’s another matter? Perhaps the “naysayers” will have a retort to that.
The opinions of Mr. Harris of Davenport in the Feb. 18 edition of the Star present some very valid positions. Gun merchants, of course, may disagree.
Vincent J. Brannick