"Nobody needs a 30 round magazine to defend themselves"

[bossy22]

"nobody needs a 100 round drum to target shoot"

While this may be factually correct, how is this logically used to defend a 10+ ban? It seems to be jumping from A-->Z.

So my question to gun control proponents is this- why 10? Why not cap it at 15?

My problem is those two quotes are often used in the media to support a 10+ ban and it is disingenous. Yes, I'll agree, no body needs to really be carrying around a 30 round magazine on their person for self defense but what about 15? 10-17 round magazines are used by most police in this country for their sidearms. It seems capping the amount at that would atleast have a stronger logical basis then arbitrarily limiting magazines to 10

[Glassunion]

1. Not when the police should not have 30, 20, 17 or 15

Not good for us, and it sure as hell ain't good for them.

[Ashgrey77]

2. I'm against a magazine ban, but I could compromise at 20.

That way modern handgun magazines stay legal for the most part. And I'm fine with 20 round magazines in a AR15. I'd prefer the newer standard of 30, but could live with the older standard of 20. Limiting them at 10 rounds is going to far though. It's like going back in time technology wise and as a professional computer technician I don't like the idea of being denied common modern technology on a arbitrary basis.

[darkangel218]

3. +1

[krispos42]

4. Put the limit at 33

That covers pretty much every standard magazine capacity, plus some outliers like Uzi mags (32) and Glock 18 mags (33).

[spin]

5. I agree, but chances are that the gun control groups will push for 10. ...

Perhaps we could compromise on allowing standard sized magazines currently sold with semi-auto firearms and an exception for smaller very compact pistols which would allow an extended magazine that would hold no more than 10 rounds.

[krispos42]

6. ten figures, ten toes, ten cartridges.

At least my limit is based on something beside random biological facts.


They can prohibit handgun magazines that protrude past the bottom of the grip. I have no problem with that. I don't think it will help any, but I don't have a problem with it.

[iiibbb]

7. What would they say about the grips or those tabs

like on Glock or other compacts that give you more control.... err make it more lethal because you can hold it

[ManiacJoe]

8. Tabs?

[Glaug-Eldare]

9. I assume he's talking about magazines

which technically extend well past the bottom of the grip, but whose floors (the bottom piece of the magazine) are designed to extend the short grip of a compact or sub-compact handgun. Without these extended floors, you may only be able to get three fingers on the grip. That may be suitable for pocket carry or deep concealment, but better control is usually desired.

[ManiacJoe]

10. That is a reasonable explanation.

Most of the folks that have such pistols and mags carry one of the full-size mags as the backup mag.

[iiibbb]

11. +0 extender

[ManiacJoe]

20. Yah, just never heard them referred to as tabs before.

[iiibbb]

21. brain fart on my part

[Dash87]

12. Nobody needs more than a revolver's amount of bullets.

Police or not.

If you can't hit something with that much, then you're putting others at risk.

I can see why more would be needed for the military, but what are civilians shooting at? The occasional home invader that's 5 feet away?

30 round magazines are desired only for the "coolness" factor of having that many bullets. They're completely unnecessary.

[Remmah2]

13. And how would the Secret Service respond to that recommendation?

Everyone's life is equally as important, do we not all deserve the same opportunity to protect ourselves or our loved ones?

[Dash87]

14. They protect the President and are part of the Govt.

There is a reasonable amount of firepower that normal everyday people should be allowed to have.

Those shouldn't include rocket launchers, .50 caliber mounted machine guns, or 100-bullet drums.

[Puha Ekapi]

15. How...

...and why, did you make the leap from 30 round magazines to .50 caliber machine guns?

[Dash87]

16. Because both are unnecessary.

The average person wouldn't need either.

[Remmah2]

17. You do realize rocket launchers are usually single shots breach loaders?

Make up your freakin mind.

[Dash87]

18. I think you misunderstood my point.

Both 30 bullet magazines and rocket launchers are not needed by the general populace.

[DonP]

19. I need them, I have been known to miss on occasion.

I guess I'm not as good a shot as you are. Better practice more.

[Remmah2]

32. Hand grenades.

For bad shots.

[DonP]

36. Tried to buy some at the last few gun shows...

... but everyone was fresh out of grenades and RPG's, which my gun control oriented sister tells me are always there with those $5 conversion kits to full auto.

Maybe next week.

[Remmah2]

37. What?

You got a full auto conversion kit for $5!

I paid too much.

Damn. I knew I should have waited for the BOGO sale.

[DonP]

39. I wanted to show my sister a shoelace, but she wouldn't get the joke.

I'm always a little amazed at people like her, that absolutely "KNOW" what goes on at a gun show. Even though they've never been to one in their life.

But Karma being what it is, her husband sidled over to me at the family Christmas dinner, looked around to make sure she wasn't in the room, and asked me about ammo for home defense for a 1936 Belgian made Browning Auto 5 he had inherited from his late Dad.

[Glaug-Eldare]

22. Police hit ratios are not stellar.

According to a study by the Police Policy Studies Council, it appears that hit ratios vary widely, as low as 9% to as high as 51%, depending on training, number of officers, time of day, etc. Assuming 50% of a 6-shot revolver's capacity strike the target (a big assumption, considering hit ratios of ~30% were more common), there's no guarantee that the threat will be stopped, or that there won't be additional threats. Just two(!) attackers would almost certainly succeed against a single defender armed with a revolver.

[Dash87]

23. I'm no police officer, but couldn't they just get backup?

Also, how many times do police officers get in that situation where such a thing would be necessary?

Also, with 2 bad guys with 30 bullet magazines vs. one cop with a 30 bullet magazine, wouldn't the odds still be lop-sided?

[gejohnston]

24. what makes you think the bad guys won't have access to them after the ban?

[Dash87]

25. They might, but why don't many have military grade

weapons now? Most bad guys won't go through the trouble of getting them. They favor quick and easy handguns instead.

[gejohnston]

26. pistols are easy to conceal

unlike machine guns. Automatic weapons are more likely to be used in Europe for some reason. Besides, a magazine is simpler than the firearm.

[Glaug-Eldare]

30. Backup takes a while.

Particularly if you're not a police officer.

[Flyboy_451]

27. Just an interesting note

Magazine bans don't work for a variety of reasons. The most prevalent that I saw on the street as a cop were magazines modified to accept more rounds than the 10 round limit that was in place. The lowest tech, and possibly the most unique, used nothing more than a hacksaw, lead fishing sinkers and duct tape. Interestingly enough, it worked flawlessly! simply cut and joined two 10 round mags together.

JW

[Callisto32]

38. Two words oh sage of the internet.

Multiple attackers.

You lose.

[Dash87]

40. Has nothing to do with the argument.

I already said above - the same issue exists today: 30 bullets vs. 6 bullets doesn't matter.

If you can't post w/o being rude, I would recommend not doing so. This is a debate site, after all.

[upaloopa]

28. It is not about you! It's about the victims of mass

shootings. Less lives lost the smaller the amount of bullets flying at them at one time.
If you cared a twit you would understand why!

[sigmasix]

29. distract and confuse

Where does this notion that gun fetishists should have parity of weapon choice with law enforcement come from? The NRA and teabagger types use small distinctions and questions about ancillary regulatory needs and language in attempts to distract the American public from enacting universal back round checks and restrictions on clips and weapons that give the nuts such large kill numbers. When gun fetishists try to divide Americans by ridiculing "reasonable" questions about clip size and assault weapon definitions, they are exposing their hatred for law and order and the future of our country.
Regulation is not confiscation. Those right wing antiAmerican gun fetishists that attempt to conflate the two have destroyed any moral authority they may have had regarding fire arm regulation. This sort of "only gun nuts understand guns enough to make the rules" nonesense is supported by OPs like this one.
The gun fetishist is JUST asking about clip size regulations, right?

[gejohnston]

31. there always have been parity

during much of our history, until the mid 20th century, there has been parity or superior to the military.
Where does this notion that gun grabbers have that there should not be parity with LE?

[iiibbb]

33. 10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

The police are the same as citizens as far as the US code is concerned.

[krispos42]

34. one-fifth of all homicides involve multiple attackers.

How many shots do you need, keeping in mind that either you'll get the drop on them and hit them before they begin moving (in which case, you'll only need a couple of rounds) or things will become very dynamic, and 10 rounds might easily not be enough.

Jeez, doesn't anybody go play paintball? Ever try hitting somebody that's frantically moving to dodge behind a wall or a piece of furniture or into another room?

I've played laser tag a few times, and even with a speed-of-light gun missing a moving target is not that difficult.

[guardian]

35. "why 10?"

Because a 10 round cap is step one. Step two sometime down the road is a further reduction to a 5 round cap. Then step three is banning/confiscation of all weapons except single shot. Step four is complete prohibition of private ownership of all firearms (including air rifles).

The rabid frothing antigunners are soooooo transparent. They make me want to puke.