Timed 60 Rounds?

[DanTheFarmer]

I'm not an AR-15 owner.

Does anyone have a video or other records of the time it took them to fire 60 rounds using 2 30 round magazines vs. 6 10 round magazines?

I know facts aren't suppossed to matter in this discussion but I'll feel better if I can write my senator with some facts at my fingertips. My gut feeling is that the time differential will be very small, but again, being able to cite/see proof is always a good idea.

Has anyone done 30 rounds in 9mm with 2 15 round mags vs. 3 10 round mags?

Thanks guys.

Dan

 

[mcdonl]

It takes me an hour to shoot 60 rounds. Then again, I am trying to hit a target.

I dont think arguing that guns can be just as fast and lethal with smaller magazines is the best approach to take when arguing against gun control.

 

[Sam1911]

Perhaps not, but there's also nothing to gain in hiding the facts. So let's lay it out using "average" speeds for a good shooter.

Say you've got a handgun with two 15-rd. mags, starting from the holster.
Draw-1st shot: 1.5 sec.
Shots 1-15 @ 0.25sec/shot = 3.5 sec.
Reload: 2.5 seconds
Shots 16-30 = 3.5 sec.
TOTAL: 11 seconds.

Now say you've got a handgun with three 10-rd. mags, starting from the holster.
Draw-1st shot: 1.5 sec.
Shots 1-10 @ 0.25sec/shot = 2.25 sec.
Reload: 2.5 seconds
Shots 11 - 20 = 2.25 sec.
Reload: 2.5 seconds
Shots 21 - 30 = 2.25 sec.
TOTAL: 13.25 seconds.

Give or take.

 

[mcdonl]

Sam... may we never meet at an IDPA match with those three 10 round times

I suspect mine are lower. I know they are

 

[Sam1911]

Well, a very accomplished shooter could record splits down around 0.15s (I hit 0.12 ONCE!), which would be 1.5 seconds for 10 shots, but that's really very fast and hard to keep up consistently.

But 0.25 s splits is actually pretty common.

 

[mcdonl]

Im uncommonly slow - But, Im smooth

 

[taliv]

i can let 3 or 4 rounds go pretty quick, but i can't keep up that rhythm over 15 rounds in a row

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

What you'll find is there is a difference, but it isn't that great. I'm not sure how one presents this finding in a manner that doesn't suggest the capacity limit isn't effective for gun control and thus the focus of meaningful measures should be on somehow limiting the number of magazines or the elimination of detachable magazines entirely.

 

[R.W.Dale]

I think its important to make the distinction between a competition shooter whose well practiced and organized vs some rank amateur, not especially familiar w the platform and with magazines crammed in pockets or a bag.

That will change the times quite significantly




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

 

[45_auto]

That will change the times quite significantly

Only difference it's going to make in total time between emptying two 15 round mags and emptying three 10 round mags is the time required for one mag change.

Pick the slowest time you can imagine someone pulling a mag out of their pocket or a bag, and that will be the difference in total time. We're talking what, 5 seconds maybe?

 

[9mmepiphany]

But 0.25 s splits is actually pretty common.

Yes, I thought you were using very representative times for a capable but average shooter for both the splits and mag changes.

some rank amateur, not especially familiar w the platform and with magazines crammed in pockets or a bag.

One can only hope that someone who takes on the responsibility of being armed is more prepared/trained than this

 

[Sam1911]

One can only hope that someone who takes on the responsibility of being armed is more prepared/trained than this

Actually, I'd imagine the OP was asking more from the perspective of some assumed untrained "troubled young man" out to commit a mass murder.

That's usually what the antis have in mind when they call for high-cap mag bans. What they tell people at least, is that they aren't gunning for match shooters and responsible folks, but to try to minimize the damage a killer could do.

It is, obviously, a glaringly flawed concept (as 45_auto said, at WORST it adds 5 seconds) but it sounds good enough to the uninformed to get behind it.

 

[smalls]

I can already see it when they realize it doesn't matter how many rounds are in the mag:

"We have to limit how many mags a person has! They need to be registered, too!"

 

[Trent]

Only difference it's going to make in total time between emptying two 15 round mags and emptying three 10 round mags is the time required for one mag change.

Pick the slowest time you can imagine someone pulling a mag out of their pocket or a bag, and that will be the difference in total time. We're talking what, 5 seconds maybe?

Actually, I'd imagine the OP was asking more from the perspective of some assumed untrained "troubled young man" out to commit a mass murder.

Considering the skill can be learned and improved without access to firearms (Airsoft are dimensionally / functionally accurate)... that is really a worst case scenario. A person doesn't have to have firearms training, to.. well, have firearms training.

First time I took my son to the pistol range he was very proficient from the get-go. After a couple of sessions he's both accurate and fast.

Although shooting accurately fast, and reloading fast are things that can be learned pretty quickly, "noobs" can't handle failures very well. It takes a lot more range time to handle those events smoothly. I even see (occasionally) more "seasoned" folks totally botch up failure clearing when under stress of competition. It doesn't fit with what they've mentally arranged for themselves prior to starting the round, and when it happens it seems to cause their brains to hiccup.

We've seen at least two public shootings in the last year where the perpetrators main weapons have jammed (oregon mall and Aurora). They've generally planned ahead for these to the point they have backup weapons.

If they're already bringing backup guns, what does that say about magazines? A 10 round limit won't affect their intentions.

 

[TenDriver]

My dad arguing with me over high capacity mags has said over 100 were fired in the school.

I'd love to know how long it would take me to dump 120 rounds from 4 30s as opposed to 12 10 rd mags. I'm not real proficient with external mag weapons but I'm betting I could change a mag in 3 seconds or less. That would be 27 seconds as opposed to 6 for mag changes with obviously different intervals.

The biggest difference I can see is 12 10 rd mags takes up a lot more space than 4 30s. Unfortunately that would limit the amount of ammo carried.

Now, someone please come in and blow that out of the water for me in the next hour....

 

[Trent]

I can change a handgun mag before the one I release hits the ground, pulling from my coat pocket.

Just takes practice.

 

[Sam1911]

So it takes you 27 extra seconds and you need a coat with big pockets... is that somehow an insurmountable obstacle to a killer? What kind of crazy logic would call that a significant deterrence?

It boggles the mind what some folks will cling to in these debates. A passably rational person should be able to reject most of these claims without more than a moment's reflection, but ... for some reason they just can't think their way past these little stumbling blocks.

 

[TenDriver]

So it takes you 27 extra seconds and you need a coat with big pockets... is that somehow an insurmountable obstacle to a killer? What kind of crazy logic would call that a significant deterrence?

It boggles the mind what some folks will cling to in these debates. A passably rational person should be able to reject most of these claims without more than a moment's reflection, but ... for some reason they just can't think their way past these little stumbling blocks.

That's my problem. There is little logic behind the argument.

 

[R.W.Dale]

So it takes you 27 extra seconds and you need a coat with big pockets... is that somehow an insurmountable obstacle to a killer? What kind of crazy logic would call that a significant deterrence?

It boggles the mind what some folks will cling to in these debates. A passably rational person should be able to reject most of these claims without more than a moment's reflection, but ... for some reason they just can't think their way past these little stumbling blocks.

Here's the problem with that arguement.

The shooter ny all accounts being the coward these guys always are shot himself once he heard the police arrive. The folks on the limits bandwagon will merely asked how many children would still be alive because of that 27seconds.


Don't you guys see the problem? If our counter is merely "it doesn't matter and only stupid people think it will." We'll be immediately labeled as heartless degenerates who care more about p-mags than kindergarten kids lives and that might earn us 5 round magazines that aren't detachable.




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

 

[Sam1911]

There are lots of other arguments against mag bans. The FACT that IF someone's firing 100 rounds it might take an extra 27 seconds doesn't change, and we shouldn't pretend that it does.

That's not a "problem with the argument." It's just facts. You can believe the facts show a substantial and important difference in an ultra-rare mass killing situation, or you can believe they really don't matter much.

In the end, the shooter wasn't only allowed to run rampant for just a minute or two, before the cops showed up so any extra time to reload mags was insignificant in the broader space of time he had available.

If you've got 10 minutes to fire 100 shots, it really doesn't matter if your mags only hold ONE round.

 

[Trent]

There's more here than round count.

Soldiers with an M1 garand averaged between 40-50 shots per minute, accurate out to 300 yards. (I quoted a source for this in another thread).

That's 40-50 hits with a full power 30-06 in a short period of time. It was the most revolutionary improvement in infantry weapons since the introduction of the German Mauser in the late 1800's.

Remember the Beltway sniper attacks?

"In each shooting, the victims were killed by a single bullet fired from some distance." (source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beltway_sniper_attacks)

Remember Charles Whitman? He took shots over 1/4 mile with a Remington 700.

What about Virginia Tech? Reduced capacity magazines.

Ever hear of Going Postal? Most of these postal shooting sprees have been with Shotguns and Revolvers. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_postal_killings)

1915 Brunswick massacre? Shotgun. (http://www.glynngen.com/history/bwkmassacre.htm)

Charles Robert? In 1900 he shot 27 people with a 38 cal rifle, sparking race riots which killed many more.

But wait, let's go back further. Let's go clear back to BEFORE the United States was even a country! In the Illinois territory, close to home for me.

Unarmed school house attacked by Indians, 10 children and school master killed. (source; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac's_Rebellion_school_massacre)


Synopsis:

As long as man finds motive to kill, he will find a way.

 

[suemarkp]

Saw something on the tube with some police chief says the reason you want smaller mags is you can "jump the shooter" during a reload. I can't believe they are this stupid. I know how fast a mag change can occur, and that you can do it with a round still in the chamber. If the shooter is really smart, he'll have a handgun to use to fend people off during a reload and perhaps a long knife as a last ditch weapon.

Having LE tell unarmed people to charge a shooter during a reload seems incredibly irresponsible to me.

 

[Trent]

I remember reading at Columbine, the shooters went to knives. They got bored shooting people; witnesses in hiding overheard them saying "it was too easy."

They were actively attacking people in the building for over an hour and a half before committing suicide.

Magazine capacity has NO bearing on death toll.

Virginia tech?

"Cho shot his first victims around 7:15 am" ... got away from the initial attack.. "About two hours after the initial shootings, Cho entered Norris Hall" ... "Approximately 10–12 minutes after the second attack began, Cho shot himself in the head."

The police were faster this time.

"Within one or two minutes of the first shots, the first call to 9-1-1 was received." ... "Police arrived within three minutes of receiving an emergency call but took about five minutes to enter the barricaded building"

Police were ON CAMPUS (LOTS of police, since they were all still trying to figure out what happened during the first shooting spree he went on and escaped from 2 hours previously).

Despite being there... they still took 9-10 minutes to actually get to Cho.

"During this second assault, he had fired at least 174 rounds,[22] killing 30 people and wounding 17 more.[1][38] All of the victims were shot at least three times each; of the 30 killed, 28 were shot in the head.[39][40]"

That was with standard capacity magazines. And a MASSIVE complement of police already on the campus, armed to the teeth.


174 rounds fired, 30 dead, 17 wounded, cops within HEARING distance of the gun fire when it started. From a law enforcement standpoint, they couldn't have had it any better - their force wasn't divided up and spread out all over town.

This is what you get with police on site and standard capacity magazines.
"As police reached the second floor, they heard Cho fire his final shot."

That's it. Time to write reports.

No, no.. no.

You want to STOP this, arm the PEOPLE. Forget about police security, magazine bans, assault rifle bans, and all that other crap. They won't do one damn bit of good.

 

[BLB68]

Saw something on the tube with some police chief says the reason you want smaller mags is you can "jump the shooter" during a reload. I can't believe they are this stupid. I know how fast a mag change can occur, and that you can do it with a round still in the chamber. If the shooter is really smart, he'll have a handgun to use to fend people off during a reload and perhaps a long knife as a last ditch weapon.

Having LE tell unarmed people to charge a shooter during a reload seems incredibly irresponsible to me.

The Gabrielle Giffords shooter was jumped during a reload that he fumbled.

I think comparing these spree shooters to the standards held by trained individuals is a stretch at best. Most of them seem have very little training and poor gun handling skills.

 

[larryh1108]

Having LE tell unarmed people to charge a shooter during a reload seems incredibly irresponsible to me.

If you were unarmed, at the school in CT, when would you choose to jump the shooter? I bet you'd wait until he was reloading. So what is irresponsible here?