Gun control advocates don't compare apples to apples on the assault weapons ban

The lack of logic in the gun control debate. Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig have this claim in a piece at CNN. I am not going to go through their whole piece, but here is one part that they claim to use my research to support their position.

Author John Lott, an economist who supports gun carrying, says that in the vast majority of cases in which a private citizen uses a gun in self-defense, the gun is only brandished and not actually fired at the assailant. Banning high-capacity magazines will have a negligible effect on the ability of citizens to use guns to protect home and hearth. For hunters, a ban on high-capacity magazines would be largely irrelevant. . . .

These two guys just can't seem to compare apples to apples.

1) Victims rarely have to actually fire their guns. Criminals rarely have to fire their guns.

2) In some extremely rare cases criminals fire more than a few shots. In some extremely rare cases victims might want to fire more than a few shots.

Whatever the benefits for having a larger magazine, there are also similar benefits for victims