It was pulled and presented. From Grok AI:
Key Instances and Evidence Presented
Pre-Bruen Proceedings (2018–2020): In the initial district court phase and Third Circuit appeal, plaintiffs (including the ANJRPC) submitted expert testimony and data to demonstrate the commonality of LCMs nationwide. For example:
Criminologist Gary Kleck (a frequent expert in Second Amendment cases) testified on the prevalence of LCMs in civilian ownership. His analysis drew from surveys and industry data estimating that tens of millions of LCMs are in circulation across the U.S., where they remain legal in approximately 40 states (with no capacity limits or only higher thresholds like 15–30 rounds).
Kleck referenced studies and datasets (including FBI Uniform Crime Reports and other national crime statistics) showing that states without LCM limits did not exhibit higher homicide rates attributable to magazine capacity. He argued that the vast majority of homicides involve far fewer than 10 rounds fired (typically 2–3 rounds on average), rendering capacity limits irrelevant to most crimes.
He cited comparisons across U.S. states, noting that post-1994 federal Assault Weapons Ban (which included a 10-round LCM limit until its 2004 expiration) showed no measurable decline in homicide rates in restrictive states versus non-restrictive ones. Kleck’s analysis extrapolated that any purported benefits were negligible or non-existent, with homicide rates influenced more by socioeconomic factors than magazine sizes.
Specific data points included estimates that LCMs are involved in less than 1% of homicides nationwide, and that states like Texas or Florida (no LCM bans) had homicide trends comparable to or lower than some restrictive states when controlling for variables like population density.
Firearms expert James Curcuruto, relying on National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) reports, provided statistics indicating that over 100 million magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds are owned by civilians in states without bans. This was framed as evidence that LCMs are not “unusual” but standard for many semi-automatic firearms, with estimates suggesting they comprise a significant portion (often cited as 50–75%) of all detachable magazines in the country.
The district court opinion (2018) acknowledged this testimony but found it “unhelpful” under the pre-Bruen intermediate scrutiny standard, focusing instead on public safety interests. The Third Circuit affirmed, noting the evidence but concluding it did not outweigh the state’s rationale.
NJ’s counter-argument was that the average # of rounds fired in self defense incidents was 2.2 rounds. Remember that?
So, the commonality of “high capacity” magazines nationwide and comparisons of homicide rates of states without “high capacity” magazine bans was presented in the pre-Bruen portion of the case.
What else you got for “novel” strategy that should have been used?
