1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

*** 10-round magazine limit argument ***

Discussion in 'Legal' started by husbandofaromanian, Dec 19, 2012.

  1. husbandofaromanian

    husbandofaromanian Well-Known Member

    What is it with this magic number???

    A Romak-3, Romanian psl clone, in 7.62x54r with a 10-round magazine is not too dangerous.

    A 22lr Pistol with a 15-round magazine is too dangerous.
  2. jon_in_wv

    jon_in_wv Well-Known Member

    The ten round magazine limit is a lie on its face. The only goal of it is that once they get it, then can then show that it isn't the capacity but the ability to quickly reload it that is dangerous so they can go after the really scary semi automatic weapons with detachable mags. The idea they care whether or not high capacity magazines are dangerous, or they care about stopping crime, of making anyone safer is giving them too much credit. The only have a childish fear of guns and want to get rid of them. The magazine limits are a means to an end, thats all.
  3. smalls

    smalls Well-Known Member

    There's really no basis, to anti's it's just that; a magic number that stops people from killing.
  4. Hacker15E

    Hacker15E Well-Known Member

    Arbitrary number that someone picked. Has no basis in anything, other than being a limitation that can be imposed.
  5. Gregg28

    Gregg28 Member

    I think that you are looking at this backwards. 10 round magazines, flash hiders, collapsible stocks, these all make little to no difference to the functionality/lethality of a firearm, and the politicians know that. But they have to be seen as doing something. So these bans go into place. whether they are effective in stopping the tragic deaths of innocents or not, the politicians have done their part to get re-elected.
  6. Hacker15E

    Hacker15E Well-Known Member

    I don't think that's true at all. I think many politicians who are calling for an AWB really have no idea about any of those details, nor care.

    Need we re-post Carolyn McCarthy's "barrel shroud" video clip?
  7. leadaddict

    leadaddict Well-Known Member

  8. bikemutt

    bikemutt Well-Known Member

    Seems to me it doesn't matter what number is chosen the question of "why 10?", "why 25?", or "why 8?" will still come up. Point being is they aren't likely to waist time arguing over "why 10?" because they know that no matter what number they choose, it will be called into question. So, like the tired parent says it's "because I say so".
  9. Gregg28

    Gregg28 Member

    Precisely my point. They are not really interested in the effectiveness of the regulation, but rather the perception that they are doing something.
  10. Hollowdweller

    Hollowdweller Well-Known Member

    Not meaning to be the devils advocate here, but if I was somewhere there was a shooter, and I got to choose whether he had a 50 round magazine or a 10 round one, I'd choose the 10 round one because somebody might be able to get him while he changed mags.

    Also I've heard many people argue FOR big magazines so they aren't outgunned by somebody with a bigger magazine here in the gun community.

    So I'm not sure that arguing about whether the 10 round limit being bandied about is arbitrary or not is really a good one.

    I don't have any military knock offs. And I only have 2 guns that can hold over 10 rounds and I don't use either for home defense.

    I know most people feel either an AWB or a clip limit is onerous, and I'm not convinced that either could pass congress anyway.

    But if people had a choice of either would they rather see the militaristic knock offs be banned or limited, or big clips?
  11. Neo-Luddite

    Neo-Luddite Well-Known Member

    The 10 round nonsense came from the lips of that fool Bill Ruger that was part of mthe deal he cut with the devil to keep the Mini off the naughty list. He's dead now, and his company now sells standard 20 and 30 rounders for the mini. But THAT is where that crap came from. The 1994 so-called ban.

    Plus, we have a 'base ten' number system, and so on and so on. It's all lies and crap.
  12. leadaddict

    leadaddict Well-Known Member

    I'd rather he be armed with nothing more dangerous than a wet noodle, but prohibitions don't work (see war on drugs and alcohol for details), and even if they did work the sacrifice of freedom, in the case of firearms, is not worth the benefit. Certain lives may be saved in some instances if prohibition was acheaved, but when we give up the ability to defend ourselves we become subjects at the mercy of the governement.
  13. razorback2003

    razorback2003 Well-Known Member

    It will be cut down to six because "WEll revolvers only hold six, why do semi autos need to hold more?". Then it will be three because "Well duck hunters can only use three in their shotguns?". See where this is going. So called compromising is what hurt Australian and UK shooters.
  14. Orlin

    Orlin New Member

    My apologies if this has been discussed before, but what is to stop a criminal from making their ''high capacity clip" by cutting the top and bottom off two magazines and attaching them together or hammering out and indentations in a reduced capacity magazine?
  15. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Well-Known Member

    The Virginia Tech shooter, Cho, used only 10 round magazines. He reloaded 18 times. He murdered more human beings than Adam Lanza did.
    The 10 round limit is political BS.
    Soon they will be after all detachable mags, then all rifles that can hold a number of rounds....
  16. shooter_from_show-me

    shooter_from_show-me Well-Known Member

    And the buck stops there my friend, I will NOT give up the ability to defend my family and property. Cause as my pastor has said in the past "criminals will always have their's and he being a former KCPD Swat member(battering ram/breaching) also said you can't depend on your local LEO to get there in time to apprehend or dispatch the intruder to save yours or your loved ones lives.
  17. bikemutt

    bikemutt Well-Known Member

    This will not be sold as a prohibition to the public, it's a limit. 60 MPH comes to mind.
  18. razorback2003

    razorback2003 Well-Known Member

    I will use what is best to protect myself. If i feel that is a 17rd handgun, that is what i will use or a 30rd AR.
  19. beatledog7

    beatledog7 Well-Known Member

    Agreed, the number 10 is a meaningless and arbitrary swag at achieving an unachievable goal.

    The anti's don't like "10" any more than we do. They'd like "zero" but are using 10 as an interim step, like slowly building a fence around the spot where you feed the wild pigs.
  20. mavracer

    mavracer Well-Known Member

    Fine but lowering the speed limit from 60 to 50 won't stop people that drive 90.

Share This Page