Second Amendment Under Attack In Congress

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Penguin

Demand and supply definitely also works the other way around - yes, in its boundaries, everybody needs to drink, but the advertisement of a special beverage creates demand for this.

Demand in economics is defined as the desire for a product, the willingness to purchase a product, and the ability to pay for it. Advertising in and of itself does doesn't create "demand" in the economic sense that wasn't already there - it raises awareness. The only people who are going to purchase your product after seeing your ad are the ones who would have already been willing to purchase such a product in the first place. Think about how many new foods and drinks that marketers come up with that fail - colored ketchup, spaghetti and pizza at McDonalds, the Ford Edsel. Despite all the advertising that these companies did for these products, they couldn't get over the fact that there was no organic demand for them. Look at ads for drugs for diabetes, or dry eyes, or arthritis, or whatever. Nobody who doesn't already suffer from one of those ailments is going to purchase your drug no matter how much advertising you do, i.e. they don't have a built in demand for it. Advertising only creates awareness, not organic demand.

Originally Posted by Penguin

An on-topic question:
What is the supposed sense of banning "high capacity" magazines? All I know is that CA and NY already have the 10 bullet cutoff. Afaik it was also the law when "assault weapons" were banned, though old magazines were still legal to posess, unlike the proposal now.
I don't really see any convincing argument for this. Do people think that somebody who goes on a killing spree would stop and think it all over when changing a magazine?

It supposedly limits the lethality of a weapon. If I had a 20 round magazine, I may carry one or two extras. If I had a 8 round magazine, I may carry that same one or two extra. Lower capacity, fewer bullets.