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

Why I am in favor of a ban on high capacity gun magazines

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by timmy4, Jan 26, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,574
    Location:
    Morgan County, Alabama
    What shootings aren't "deadly?"
    As I said in my prior thread, even limiting magazine size does no good. It didn't stop Cho from shooting more people than Lanza.
    So your idea has no practical merit.
     
  2. labhound

    labhound Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Messages:
    574
    Well timmy4 maybe the standard 30 round AR magazine should be inscribed with the warning "Do not use in mass shootings". :mad:
     
  3. gym

    gym member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    5,903
    It takes a second to swap a magazine, how exactlly do you disarm someone out of arms reach in that time. Also remember that a pistol would be used in this case for an emergency "spare" if someone was close, you can use a pistol in hand while doing a mag change. So I don't see how any restrictions make sense at all.
    The past has taught us that if someone wants to kill you or many people at once, and is willing to die in the process, there is nothing you can do to stop them.
    Also a truck full of fertiliser and diesel fuel can take out the entire building from a mile away, with little to no knowledge of "bomb making". This would just be an inconvience to a mad man, not a way to stop or slow thwm down.
    Also knife, hatchet and Machete attacks are becoming the way of many countries who's people don't have guns.
    I believe a guy hacked up 20 something kids in a minute in some school in china or one of the 3d world countries.
    this is just being pushed as an agenda to disarm Americans for what down the road is a complete and utter Govt. controlled society, IMO.
    Obamma wishes to be king. These folks don't plan on leaving the White House in 4 years.
    Watch your 6
     
  4. Cesiumsponge

    Cesiumsponge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,266
    Location:
    Washington
    Virginia Tech was done with a 9mm handgun and .22 pistol. The media is purposely neglecting to mention this mass shooting when drumming the "high-capacity magazine" debate. I don't see how the 6,000+ annual handgun murders are less worthy of attention than the <50 annual mass shooting deaths. If gun-control advocates were truly honest, they'd be going after handguns.

    Also, Charles Whitman killed 16 people with a deer rifle. Several members on this board were there in 1966 in the streets dodging bullets.

    Also I appreciate your hanging around this forum. Looking at the totality of your other posts, it's clear you're in the minority but interested in hearing what others have to say.
     
  5. Solo

    Solo Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    838
    Timmy4, I have a question: Do you know what guns were used in Columbine?

    According to Wikipedia,
    "[Eric] Harris was equipped with a 12-gauge Savage-Springfield 67H pump-action shotgun, (which he discharged a total of 25 times) and a Hi-Point 995 Carbine 9 mm carbine with thirteen 10-round magazines, which he fired a total of 96 times.
    [Dylan] Klebold was equipped with a 9 mm Intratec TEC-9 semi-automatic handgun with one 52-, one 32-, and one 28-round magazine and a 12-gauge Stevens 311D double-barreled sawed-off shotgun. Klebold primarily fired the TEC-9 handgun, for a total of 55 times."

    So we have one firearm with high capacity magazines, one firearm with 10 round magazines, and two shotguns.

    How much better would Columbine had gone if Klebold had been restricted to 10 round magazines?
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2013
  6. MachIVshooter

    MachIVshooter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,473
    Location:
    Elbert County, CO
    Laughner didn't have a rifle, and he was tackled when the gun (A Glock) jammed.

    Here's the thing, Timmy; If a man is bent on doing maximum harm with a weapon, he will pick the softest targets. Needing to reload after every 7, 10 or however many shots is not going to minimize the carnage. Lanza could have pulled off his feat with a single shot; A bunch of first graders aren't going to rush an armed assailant during the 1-2 seconds it takes to reload.

    On the other hand, limiting capacity of magazines may have deadly consequences for someone using a firearm in self defense. Like mass shootings, attacks on individuals involving 4 or more assailants are uncommon......but they do happen. I can point you to countless reports of defenders having to fire 3, 5 or more times to stop ONE attacker; If they have 3 or 4 attackers, they may need 15, 17, 20+ rounds on tap without reloading, because in a defensive situation, that 1-2 seconds it takes to reload could cost you your life.
     
  7. willroute

    willroute Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    88
    Location:
    Texas
    yes, only bad guys use guns and limiting magazine capacity will make them obey.

    "2. I fully acknowledge that limiting gun magazines will not have any effect whatsoever on gun crimes in general. My reason for limiting them is specific to mass shootings. "

    Sounds like you went to the Dianne Feinstein school of non thought.


    follow the link in my signature and review what happens when you give up your second and fourth amendments.
     
  8. LNK

    LNK Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    299
    Location:
    SE MA Soon Somewhere else
    Seems like a ploy to get people to say things that you could cross post to anohter forum. I don't believe you are genuine in your second amendment support. As far as lives being saved in Aurora, I believe he used a drum magazine that jammed and made his rifle non-operational. Thus the larger feeding device actually saved lives. Nice try, come back when you've thought this through some more....

    LNK
     
  9. timmy4

    timmy4 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    Sorry that I can't respond to each and every post. To summarize your responses:

    1. My analysis of the Second Amendment is not correct. This is a violation or infringement.

    2. Police chiefs and executives cannot be trusted as they are no different from politicians. Rank and file police are in favor of high capacity gun magazines.

    3. This proposed ban is the beginning of a "slippery slope" designed to seize all firearms from law abiding citizens.

    4. The ban would have no effect because there are millions of such magazines already in existence, bad guys can obtain them illegally (or print them) with ease. And even if they can't, it won't make any difference anyhow because they can reload within a few seconds, or do as much damage with other weapons, as proven in Columbine and Virginia Tech.

    Do I have all of this correct? And am I missing anything?
     
  10. labhound

    labhound Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Messages:
    574
    Obviously you neither own nor have shot a shotgun or an AR!!
     
  11. Gaiudo

    Gaiudo Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,623
    Location:
    Durham, NC
    5. Round limitations hurt the normal, law-abiding person who often purchases a rifle with a single magazine, much more than it hurts a criminal intent on harm who will carry multiple magazines. Why pass a law that will only hurt the law-abiding?
     
  12. Solo

    Solo Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    838
    That seems to be the gist of it. I would give most weight to #4, as # 1-3 rely on ideological arguments. #4, however, is indisputable fact.
     
  13. timmy4

    timmy4 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    Thanks.

    Any other points I am missing?
     
  14. David White

    David White member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2012
    Messages:
    117
  15. PRM

    PRM Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Messages:
    2,060
    You are absolutely correct. My full time occupation is a police firearms instructor. The standard we encourage officers to attain is 1.65 seconds for a mag change. Two seconds is what most who practice get on a bad day at the range. You got two fifteen round mags or three ten round mags - the math is pretty easy on how much of a difference that will make.

    This whole thing is about diminishing the the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution. It's about control.

    You would be hard pressed to find even 1% of LEOs in our region who support any of the anti-gun proposals. Don't listen to the liberal BS about significant support for this.
     
  16. Gaiudo

    Gaiudo Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,623
    Location:
    Durham, NC
    Think of a college administrator/principle who is tasked to defend his school. Someone pops into his school with a rucksack full of 10 round mags. The principle has an ar-15 in the safe, and the mag that goes with it. You've just significantly decreased the odds that the principle will survive the next two minutes of gunfire.
     
  17. ATBackPackin

    ATBackPackin Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,125
    Location:
    Valley Forge, PA.
    Timmy, the most effective thing we as a nation could do to stop these mass shootings is to deprive them of the notoriety that they are so desperately seeking. These people are nobodies who are trying to get the nation to feel their plight. They honestly believe that if their story was to get out that people would feel sorry for them. Sadly they are correct. Listen to the media playing and replaying their lives for everyone to hear and even calling them victims in their own right. Victims of an underfunded mentally ill program. Victims of society. Victims of their parents. Victims of bullying. Everyone is a victim.

    You want to stop them? Make a law that makes it illegal to even mention their name or talk about their life. Journalists can report the incident, just refer to them as the criminal, monster, lunatic, etc. Then they will go back to being nobodies and if they still decide to off themselves, then they will do it alone in their parents basement.

    Obviously there are other things we can do as well, but limiting magazine limits will only hinder citizens who are trying to protect themselves, not the insane or criminals.

    Shawn
     
  18. MachIVshooter

    MachIVshooter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,473
    Location:
    Elbert County, CO
    Pretty much, although #2 overstates the point to the extent that it is misleading of our opinion as a group. Some police chiefs and other high up LEO's are power hungry monsters. Many aspire to higher office, and so pander to the politicians they wish to govern with or even replace. But there are plenty that are good, trustworthy people who serve with honor and integrity. Our county sheriff is one such, and the people of this county do absolutely trust him. Of course, he also understands what "shall not be infringed" means, and has publicly stated as much; To quote the last line in his letter (verbatim), "the right to keep and bear arms is absolute!"
     
  19. wooly bugger

    wooly bugger Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    98
    That was before Heller. I am not aware of any NEW magazine restrictions being passed since Heller, except for the NYS one, which will shortly be challenged.

    Unless there is a particular fear of dying in a mass shooting rather than an individual one, it makes no sense to separate them out. The proper metric should be overall chance of being murdered, which you acknowledge above is unchanged by magazine limits.


    These are highly politicized groups. If their stance is tenable, it should withstand reason, rather than just an appeal to their authorityc.

    Faulty logic, but you're in good company with a lot of our leaders. You present no evidence that removing those magazines wouldn't just result in the same slaughters occurring with smaller magazines.

    CmdrSlander has made a very good point in several threads, comparing the lethality of a pump action shotgun with 5 rounds of buckshot to an AR15 with a 30 round magazine. It's incredibly ironic that the AWB could have the unintended consequence of forcing killers to use MORE lethal weapons. In the case of deranged murderers, we can be thankful that many of them share the same misinformation as our politicians.

    And no, the shotgun described above will not be banned any time soon. It's the first and only gun of millions of hunters.
     
  20. USAF_Vet

    USAF_Vet Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2011
    Messages:
    5,773
    Location:
    Hastings, Michigan
    You realize that Jared Loughner used a pistol with a 33 round extended magazine, and not a rifle?

    As per Aurora, Holmes had a 100 round Beta magazine in his AR, which jammed, as they are well know for doing.

    Do some research before making your claims, and you won't look quite so foolish.
     
  21. skeeziks

    skeeziks Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    395
    Trying to "rush" the assailant during a reload will get you killed. And any idea of rushing is automatically thrown out the window when there are 2 or more gunmen, anyway.
     
  22. Sav .250

    Sav .250 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,461
    Location:
    Central Fla
    "Hot button" issues, like them or not, only serves to anger some. Cause others to march on the court house and those left with out a torch, to plead for more dialogue. Some interesting points of view.
     
  23. goon

    goon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,251
    Again, what if the attacker is carrying a second weapon? What if he just leaves a round chambered while reloading. It is possible to replace an empty magazine and still have a round chambered, which allows the attacker to still shoot you with the same weapon WHILE reloading.
     
  24. wooly bugger

    wooly bugger Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    98
    One more point about the possibility of taking down a shooter during a reload....

    Using this as a justification for banning high capacity magazines can cause some cognitive dissonance amongst gun banners. Remember, according to their dogma, only highly trained police officers are capable of facing off an armed marauder. If you allow for the possibility of a bystander having the presence of mind to incapacitate a shooter during a 2 second pause, then wouldn't it be better if he had the ability momentarily to emerge from cover and do so from a distance rather than by means of a kamikaze charge??

    I'll consider accepting a stricter magazine capacity limit in my home state of NJ in exchange for "shall issue" CCW.
     
  25. David White

    David White member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2012
    Messages:
    117
    Probably the most important one of all...
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1359225335.695924.jpg
    This one is just for you "Timmy"..
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1359225581.680673.jpg
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page