Hmmm, limit size of magazine or clip?

[Lzen]

[petegz28]

=pr_capone;9383010]Those 100rd cylinder magazines are garbage and jam all the time. It was one of those that jammed up on the shooter in Aurora.

I disagree where limiting magazine size would make a difference. I am not a competition shooter by any stretch of the imagination and I can tell you that *I* can drop a magazine and reload in a second or two.



I am purposely not quoting the rest of this post because the statement quoted above is one of, if not the biggest, problem in having this conversation. The rifles that would be banned are in no way shape or form "military grade assault weapons".

Military grade assault weapons feature select fire (fully auto - burst) while the rifles targeted by this ban are not. They are only semi-auto rifles that fire a single round with a single pull of the trigger. Military grade assault weapons have been banned for quite some time already.

As an example... the Ruger Mini-14 ranch rifle is not on the banned rifles list. My Ruger Mini-14 Ranch Tactical, which has the exact same action as the base Ranch model, would be banned. It would be banned strictly and only because it has a pistol grip and a collapsible stock.

Why is mine a "military grade" weapon when it has the exact same function as the base model which will go unaffected by this law?

As a Mni-14 and AR-15 owner I have made this point time and time again and people just go "well, uh, uh, uh"

My Tac-Vest carries 6 handgun clips alone. All of them are in easy reach and can easilly be grabbed with one hand while I am firing my handgun with the other. So if you are able to count and start to grab your next mag as you get the end of your current you are looking at literally under a second to reload and continue firing.

[DementedLogic]

Originally Posted by go bowe

fortunately, most mass killers have not spent a major part of their lives on a gun range and/or are not world champions like those folks...

the chick with the shotgun loaded fast but it still took her a few seconds which could be enough for someone to tackle her before she could resume firing...

or be able to stand up and fire accurately at the killer....

With a little practice, anyone can change magazines in less than 2 seconds. The shooter at Virginia Tech only used magazines with 10 and 15 round capacities, and he killed more people than any of these shooters using "assault rifles".

[The_Doctor10]

Originally Posted by jjjayb

I don't shoot regularly. I can change a magazine in under 2 seconds. People who know nothing about a subject should listen more and talk less.

Then what's a solution? Besides 'do nothing' or pass laws wherein everyone is armed all ghe time... I'm not even trying to be a dick, I'd legit like to know what some of your ideas are for tackling a troubling issue.

[jjjayb]

There is no solution. Yes, I know Sandy Hook was a terrible crime. And yes. That's exactly what it was. A crime. But it is a miniscule drop in the bucket to the amount of people killed every year. I know it's not politically correct to say, but I've never been politically correct. The murders of the Sandy Hook kids are no more tragic than the other thousands of kids that are killed each year by people who didn't use assault weapons.

What's the solution to the amount of people strangled each year? Stabbed each year? Both of these outnumber the amount of people killed by assault rifles each year. How many people have been killed by the 11th bullet in a magazine in the last 15 years? Without a doubt, less than the number of people stabbed in the last 1 year. Without a doubt less than the number of people strangled to death in the last 1 year. Without a doubt less than the number of people killed by blunt force trauma in the last 1 year. The amount of people killed by assault weapons is already small in comparison, but then narrow that to the amount killed by any of the bullets after the magic "tenth bullet" in the big scary evil 30 round clip and it's incredibly rare.

Any of the measures you are proposing aren't solutions. They won't solve the problem. The problem is crazy ****ers that kill indicrimintely. You need to figure out a solution to that problem.

[Garcia Bronco]

Originally Posted by go bowe

fortunately, most mass killers have not spent a major part of their lives on a gun range and/or are not world champions like those folks...

the chick with the shotgun loaded fast but it still took her a few seconds which could be enough for someone to tackle her before she could resume firing...

or be able to stand up and fire accurately at the killer....

You mean time to run away and until you'r ein the situation there is no way to know. I prefer violence in action...meaning I would prefer to have at least 15 rounds of 9m to keep throwing lead at her until I can get close enough to permanently solve the problem.

[lcarus]

Originally Posted by InChiefsHell

It's a stupid argument anyway because law abiding citizens (99% of gun owners) don't use large capacity magazines for mayhem. Limit them, and the only people affected are the good guys.

Yeah lol, it was funny seeing dumbshit Piers Morgan shooting that big turret thing (sorry don't know what its called) and he was like "why would anyone need this?!?!". As if ANYONE has used that or anything like it to go on a killing spree.

[lcarus]

Originally Posted by jjjayb

There is no solution. Yes, I know Sandy Hook was a terrible crime. And yes. That's exactly what it was. A crime. But it is a miniscule drop in the bucket to the amount of people killed every year. I know it's not politically correct to say, but I've never been politically correct. The murders of the Sandy Hook kids are no more tragic than the other thousands of kids that are killed each year by people who didn't use assault weapons.

What's the solution to the amount of people strangled each year? Stabbed each year? Both of these outnumber the amount of people killed by assault rifles each year. How many people have been killed by the 11th bullet in a magazine in the last 15 years? Without a doubt, less than the number of people stabbed in the last 1 year. Without a doubt less than the number of people strangled to death in the last 1 year. Without a doubt less than the number of people killed by blunt force trauma in the last 1 year. The amount of people killed by assault weapons is already small in comparison, but then narrow that to the amount killed by any of the bullets after the magic "tenth bullet" in the big scary evil 30 round clip and it's incredibly rare.

Any of the measures you are proposing aren't solutions. They won't solve the problem. The problem is crazy ****ers that kill indicrimintely. You need to figure out a solution to that problem.

Don't you care about the children of Sandy Hook? Don't you?!?! THE CHILDREN!!! WE MUST DO SOMETHING!!!

[2bikemike]

Originally Posted by The_Doctor10

Then what's a solution? Besides 'do nothing' or pass laws wherein everyone is armed all ghe time... I'm not even trying to be a dick, I'd legit like to know what some of your ideas are for tackling a troubling issue.

Why pass laws that do nothing to solve the problem and only affects the law abiding citiizen?

The heart of the matter here is mentally ill people. Every mass shooting has involved a mentally disturbed person. But the liberal agenda is to focus on the tool. To take it one step further the so called "assault weapon" is responsible for something like 350 deaths since 2004. These are very miniscule numbers when compared to all the other causes of death.

People need to start asking why would a politician be so focused about something that causes so few deaths instead of the true causation of these mass shootings.