Just as Stephen Hunter said in an op-ed in the Washington Post, defenders needed standard (or large) capacity magazines.
For them, the Glock with a 33-round magazine is the weapon of maximum utility. You can load it on Sunday and shoot it all month. (Nobody wants to reload a gun while being shot at.) It’s light and easy to control. You don’t have to carry it or conceal it; it’s under the bed or in the drawer until needed. When the question arises of who needs an extended magazine, the answer is: the most defenseless of the defenseless.
Those who would ban extended magazines, will say that although hundreds of thousands are in circulation and thousands more will surely be sold before a ban is enacted, it will be worth it if it saves just one life. But the other half of that question must be asked, too: Is it worth it if it costs just one life?
As one would expect, the comments are full of derision for Hunter and his stance. From reading them, you would think all anti-gunners had the shooting skills of Annie Oakley and thus didn’t need more than one or two rounds.
To confirm the need for protection against home invaders comes this video from WSAZ in southern Ohio. The area has seen a large increase in home invasions and residents are stepping up to protect themselves. When even the former Sheriff has to fight off home invaders, you know the thugs don’t care who they attack.
H/T Buckeye Firearms Assoc.