I believe what he is saying is that legally, an assault rifle can not have high capacity, so why out law them. They have no more destructive power, under the law, then any other gun. Those who ignore the high capacity magazines are not likely to obey the ban. The argument makes sense, except that just as easily it can be stated that one you have the gun you can easily exchange chambers. Someone could more easily hide the magazine and legally possess and transport the high capacity gun, switching out the magazine at the last moment. I am not arguing a side, just noting that if you want to restrict the ability to have a high capacity option, the ban on guns may make be a logically move. Personally I think that with millions of the so called assault rifles out in the public, moves making things illegal will have little effect. People just want to do something, even if it makes no difference. Much like the legislator who wants to up the penalty for people who commit mass shootings. Really, like the fact that most are suicidal and the penalty is almost always going to be life with no parole or the death penalty?