+1 to geekw/45 on page one of thread
And as others have said, some of the ones sticking out in my mind...
* Why should I be allowed to own any gun? The same reasons apply to those that have a "high capacity magazine"
* Criminals are one primary reason to allow free citizens to be armed in general, as well as w/ hi-cap mags. As w/ weapons in general, criminals can get guns, they can get guns w/ high-cap mags, criminals travel in packs, I'm one person, potentially trying to protect multiple people (family), I need every advantage I can get, if it comes to that.
*Advantage to criminal, or free law abiding citizen, who should be allowed the advantage? Criminals often have the advantage of a planned attack, you (in a SD scenario) are more likely going to be at a disadvantage from the start, if there are multiple attackers, even 2 or more is ten times more difficult than a single attacker IMO, let alone several threats.
* You may have to cover fire while you and/or your family flees the situation...
* Maybe that guy should put himself in a mock SD scenario, and see how many bullets he needs before asking such questions? I shoot IDPA practices, maybe he should go to a competitive shooting practice, particularly something like IDPA, and deal w/ multiple targets at varying distances, some moving, some behind cover, sometimes you have to move and shoot, sometimes you have to shoot from akward angles or positions, compensate for potential body armor on the attacker, or the fact he's oblivious to pain as a result of narcotics or adrenaline, etc.
He might find out how fast you can go through a magazine of 15 bullets, let alone 10, or 8, or 6, and wished he had more w/out having to reload while imagining taking fire, or having multiple armed targets charging you.
What does he think, it's like hollywood? Where the bad guys can't shoot for chit but the hero LEO type shoots everything he hits w/ one arm tied behind his back, over his shoulder, while intentionally flipping a car at 70 mph so he can hit his multiple assailants that have surrounded his vehicle and proceed to land wheels down w/ no damage to his vehicle?
We did a stage tonight, 3 attackers, 2 to the body of the target, and one to the head of the target, starting w/ 11 rounds in the gun. Well, 3 bullets x 3 targets = 9 spent rounds, one reshoot to compensate for a single miss, left me w/ one bullet in the gun. This on stationary targets, w/ me stationary. Pretty much ideal shooting scenario. Add in moving targets, taking cover, shooting at you, possibly wearing body armor or being jacked up on meth, or God knows what else, and you'll start thinking about how quick 15 rounds could go in a gun fight.
And when you're out you're out. So, you better have a reload. So, if there's no limit to the amound of reloads I can have to defend myself, all you're doing in limiting my magazine capacity is giving the advantage to the criminal who shouldn't have a gun in the first place, let alone be committing the crime on me, legally speaking, so the law won't matter to him, it will only prevent me from defending myself.
As for the lone gunmen psycho killer argument, no matter what he had (speaking of that Cho loser), again, he's a criminal, he's going to have the advantage no matter what you do. He had an extra gun to fire if someone approached him during a reload of the primary weapon. And if he wasn't able to legally obtain a hi cap mag, I'm sure he would have done so illegally, if he chose to. And he chose victims that were likely helplessly disarmed as a result of the establishment's policy. He could have gone in there w/ a slingshot and some sharp stones and probably took some casualties, or any number of other combustable projectiles he could have fabricated in his dorm.
If I were confronted by someone like that, aside from all the hunting, sporting, 2a reasons, which are all also valid, and if he admitted it was one's right to defend themselves w/ a firearm (if not that would be a different argument), then I would propose we go see how well he would do in a mock SD scenario, and see if his opinion changes. If he was unwilling to do so, that would probably be the end of that conversation, shortly after I summarized why he was an idiot.
my .02
karz