Stanford Law Professor: 'Restriction Has to Be at the Core' of Gun Rights

Stanford Law Professor: 'Restriction Has to Be at the Core' of Gun Rights

During a January 15th debate, “Guns in America: A Year After Sandy Hook,” Stanford law professor, John J. Donohue, said he supports “the right to self-defense … but restriction has to be at the core of this right.”

According to The Stanford Review, Donohue believes restrictions at this time should be focused on magazine capacity. During the debate, he said, “Making the criminal reload more often is a beneficial thing. Without question, lives are saved by the fact that they have to reload.”

Donohue gave examples of how “11 children were able to run out of the school room” at Sandy Hook Elementary while Adam Lanza reloaded, and he pointed out that witnesses were able to tackle Tucson gunman Jared Loughner while he reloaded. 

Although Donohue said he supported the right to self-defense, he criticized the growing emphasis on placing a good guy with a gun in places where bad guys with guns frequently attack. 

In December 2012, Breitbart News reported that a review panel investigating the heinous 2007 Virginia Tech attack determined that a “high capacity” magazine ban “would not have made that much difference in the incident.” The report also referenced Virginia Tech students with concealed carry permits who were pushing to have school policy changed so that permit holders would be the good guys who could fight back in an incident like the 2007 attack. 

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.