High-capacity magazine ban would not have stopped 2007 Shooting

The Virginian Tech Review Panel's assessment of the April 16, 2007 shooting in which 32 were killed and 17 and wounded, contains a pertinent piece of information for the gun grabbers who are currently tripping over themselves to blame high capacity magazines for the evil in the world. The panel's assessment found that a high capacity magazine ban would not have stopped Seung-Hui Cho from carrying out his criminal act.

In a very detailed manner, the panel reports how many magazines Cho purchased, and when and from where he purchased them. They also report that some of those magazines held 15 rounds -- which is 5 rounds beyond the maximum capacity allowed by the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban (AWB). 10 rounds was the maximum number of rounds a new magazine could hold when the ban was in effect.

However, because the AWB expired in October 2004, Cho was able to purchase 15 round magazines with no problem in 2007.

But guess what? The panel says that the ban wouldn't have stopped Cho anyway. They said forcing him to use 10 round magazines instead of those that hold 15 rounds "would have not made that much difference in the incident."
Why would it have not made any difference? Because he was shooting at unarmed people, thus he had all the time in the world to reload when necessary.

Ironically, this same report contains testimony from Virginia Tech grads who had concealed carry licenses and had spent their time at Virginia Tech arguing for a change in the school's gun-free policy. According to the report, these concealed carry permit holders "told the panel that they felt it was safer for responsible people to be armed so they could fight back in exactly the type of situation that occurred on April 16, 2007."

Is there any chance Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Joe Manchin (D-WV) are listening?

(thanks http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/29/Virginia-Tech-Review-... )