10 round ban justification

[Yohan]

Got into an argument with my gun hating cousin the other day- what are some justifications for being able to carry a 10 + round cliiii.. magazine?

 

[Standing Wolf]

The more rounds you have at your disposal, the likelier you are to defend your life and property successfully.

Small wonder leftists are in favor of ten-round firearm limitations.

 

[spacemanspiff]

last summer one of my nieces asked how many bullets my gun holds. i take them out hiking at least once a week, and there is always the risk of running into a bear or moose or whatever. when i told her "ten", she said:
"WHAT?! thats not enough....what if theres a bear, a moose, another bear....?"

i say "and a bad guy who wants to hurt you?"

"YEAH! what if you have to protect us from all that?"

i started laughing, while a tear or two of pride slipped from my eyes, "You just displayed more logic than a thousand antis combined".

she didnt understand what i was saying, but if an 8 yr old can see the folly of only having ten rounds available at a time, any person who thinks for themself should be able to as well.

my answer to my niece though, was "i have three spare mags on my belt and in pockets, two more are in my backpack along with another box of ammo. that made her feel a little better.

this summer i'll just have to convince her that carrying a 1911 .45acp with 7+1 is better than a M40 10+1. i'll still have the same number of spare mags on hand though. hehe

 

[Hkmp5sd]

If there were no need for magazines greater than 10 rounds, why are the police and military firearms designed to use magazines greater than 10 rounds? If a police officer carries a handgun with a magazine greater than 10 rounds, don't I deserve the same ability to defend myself that he does?

 

[CZ-75]

Keeps the serfs in their place by ensuring they know they are a distinct and separate class, with fewer privileges than the King's men.

That their self-defense rights are curtailed sends a nice message that their lives aren't as valuable and they should be compliant to the better armed G-men. Most feudal societies did the same thing to establish hierarchy and minimize the potential for armed dissent.

 

[Bonker]

The point is that no free man should ever be able to force another free man to decide how to best protect hismself and his family.
I prefer my 6-shot revolver but I'd never use the power of a political office to tell you that you can't use a 100rd AK if that's what you think is best.
Our country's greatest strength lies in our willingness to allow each person to live his live the way he sees best as long as he doesn't deny others of their life, liberty, and property.



"Most feudal societies did the same thing to establish hierarchy and minimize the potential for armed dissent."

I believe the reason that martial artists use so many strange weapons is because the government banned swords in private hands. History does repeat itself.

 

[CZ-75]

I believe the reason that martial artists use so many strange weapons is because the government banned swords in private hands. History does repeat itself.

Another valuable take-home lesson from this is that most of these weapons had an origin in agriculture, proving that, no matter what the prohibition, people will find a way to make weapons (or anything else, for that matter).

 

[Glock Glockler]

what are some justifications for being able to carry a 10 + round cliiii.. magazine?

Forgive me, man, but why are you trying to do the justifying? When you play only on the defensive, you're going to loose ground. Make him justify why we should be limited to the arbitrary number of 10.

"So 10 rounds is fine, no problem there, but if I have 11 then I'ma a homicidal maniac?"

Never play the defensive with anti-freedom people, make them take the defensive position. Also, relate this issue to one that is near and dear to them, like:

Should ythe govt limit you to having sex 10 times a year?

Should the govt imited you to being able to voice 10 political opinions per year?

Should the govt limit us to 10 religions to choose from?

At the end of the day, it's a behavior that harms no one (my possession of a full-capacity magazine) so why should I not be allowed to partake of it?

 

[mercedesrules]

what are some justifications for being able to carry a 10 + round cliiii.. magazine?

There might be more than one attacker.
The victim will be taken by surprise.
The victim will be alarmed and might miss a few shots.
We give government their rights; not the other way 'round.
The larger magazines are the original ones; the 10-rounders are not what the gun was designed for.
Ever tried to load a magazine under fire?
If I buy something, it is my property.
When I am attacked, I am the only person there to initiate a defense.
10 is an arbitrary number. What if they later make it 5, 3, 1, or none?
MR

 

[Darrin]

What if you can't get 10 mags? My 1989ish Astra 9mm has two 15 rounds mags. (17 available for more $$) When I bought the second mag, I asked the guy about 10 rounds mags and I was informed the 15 is the smallest I can get.

Does this mean I can't carry my 9mm, or am I suppose to only load 10 rounds in it?

 

[MeekandMild]

Tell him that clips, er, magazines are traditionally underloaded so as to not create too much spring tension. A thirteen round old style S&W Model 59 magazine will feed most reliably if it is loaded to ten rounds. A fifteen round Glock mag is a lot easier to load to ten rounds than a ten round mag.

Then tell him the user should be allowed to have a gun which shoots ten reliable rounds. It is unfair to exercise prior restraint of the lawful actions of free citizens.

Drive him totally nuts by deconstructing his arguments and producing "liberal" style arguments for your points. Borrow fifteen bucks from him and then only pay him back ten. Then refuse to acknowledge that paying him back fifteen is any better than ten and ask him to explain why he wants more. Tell him he doesn't need fifteen bucks, that with ten he is much less lkely to go out and buy so much beer that he'd get drunk and in an accident, that you love him like a cousin and you're only thinking of his safety.

All this is rhetorical and I don't advocate any sort of abuse nor cruelty toward anties nor any other dumb animals with the sole exception of feral cats.

 

[Mike Irwin]

The same as being able to own and drive automobiles that are capable of going 150 MPH.

There are speed limits, just as there are laws that govern the use of firearms.

If you obey the law regarding use of the entire package in the first place why should there be any sort of additional upper limit ban?

It's governmental stupidity in motion.

 

[boing]

Ask him why it's OK to kill 10 innocent people, but not 11.

 

[CZ-75]

The same as being able to own and drive automobiles that are capable of going 150 MPH.

Excellent editorial by Patrick Bedard on pp. 28 of the current issue of Car and Driver addressing this very issue of gun control and fast cars.

 

[Mike Irwin]

I'll have to check that out, CZ.

I've a friend who still gets it. I'll ask him to bring it to work for me.

 

[WilderBill]

The only reason I can see for not having more than 10 is if you own a single stack 1911 and don't want it to get really awkward from the extention hanging out of the grip.

 

[BrokenPaw]

The only reason I can see for not having more than 10 is if you own a single stack 1911 and don't want it to get really awkward from the extention hanging out of the grip.

Nah, then you just need to get the .22 conversion for it. You could fit 20 or so rounds into a single-stack .22 magazine that still fits inside the grip. Or probably about 35 if you double-stack it. And no bellyaching about double-stacking making the grip uncomfortably wide, either; this is .22 we're talking about.

Actually, that raises an interesting question: It's illegal to 'make' a standard-capacity mag for a gun by modifying an existing mag for another gun such that it no longer works in the gun it was made for. But what counts as 'modification so that it no longer works in the intended gun?' If I have a .22 conversion for a (say) 9mm beretta, and I take the 9mm double-stack mag body and take the spring out, and put a (specially designed for the sake of this question, hypothetical) insert and new spring in it, it'd hold a heck of a lot of .22 rounds. You'd have to take the insert back out and put the original spring back in to use the mag for 9mm again.[0]

Hey, I guess if the feds complained about it, one could point out that they consider having all of the parts for a full-auto to be equivalent to actually having a full auto, so as long as I have all of the parts for a regular 9mm mag, that's the same as having an actual 9mm mag.

-BP, who shoots .40 anyway, and is mostly just woolgathering to avoid work.

[0] On that note, which would be better? 15+1 9mm rounds, or 30+1 .22 rounds? The 9mm would probably have a better chance of stopping the bad guy in fewer shots, but with 30+1 .22, and a spare mag in a belt clip, you could put so many holes in him he'd whistle when he walked...

 

[vi9er]

Actually, that raises an interesting question: It's illegal to 'make' a standard-capacity mag for a gun by modifying an existing mag for another gun such that it no longer works in the gun it was made for. But what counts as 'modification so that it no longer works in the intended gun?' If I have a .22 conversion for a (say) 9mm beretta, and I take the 9mm double-stack mag body and take the spring out, and put a (specially designed for the sake of this question, hypothetical) insert and new spring in it, it'd hold a heck of a lot of .22 rounds. You'd have to take the insert back out and put the original spring back in to use the mag for 9mm again.[

Broken paw,
You can modify an existing mag to accept another acliber, ie, modifying a .40cal mags feed lips to accept 9mm, PROVIDED the magazine will still work for its original purpose. If it won't work for the original purpose, as in your scenario, then that is considered manufacturing a new magazine and would not be allowed.
Ed

 

[Delmar]

Got into an argument with my gun hating cousin the other day

Get a Beretta or some such with a 15 or more capacity mag, take 5 rounds out of the mag, then point it at him and ask him if he feels any safer-well, don't point it at him, maybe

 

[Soap]

Because what goes on in my magwell, my engine compartment, my checkbook, etc. is none of the government's damn business.

 

[Ebbtide]

Because a bad guy may have 15 rounds, or two of his friends may each have ten rounds, or maybe he has three friends....who knows.

10 rounds vs. 45 is not fair.

 

[DFBonnett]

10 round ban justification

There is none. Gives the leftist political hacks something to grouse about so as to appeal to the uninformed, misinformed, and God's truly stupid. God must love the truly stupid. He made so many of them.

 

[Geech]

Since when do you have to justify not banning something? Point out that this is America, therefore there should be justification for banning something, and then ask him what it is.

 

[Smurfslayer]

could it be challenged?

Didn't the '39 Miller case essentially say that there was not a right to own a sawn off shotgun because there was no justified use as relates to militia service?

Is the National Guard, held in many court decisions to be PART of the Militia currently using magazines which are capable of holding more than 10 rounds?

It would seem that the ban on standard cap feeding devices on it's face is both 1: an Unconstitutional infringement of the 2A and 2: in opposition to SCOTUS precedent... Right ?

 

[boing]

Yes, but since when has that mattered?