• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A few seconds to reload can help lives: discussion about magazines

pamak

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
13,461
Reaction score
5,068
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
I saw a post in the Breaking News Forum related to the topic and I wanted to respond when I realized that the moderators closed that thread temporarily with a warning that such gun control discussions should take place in this subforum. So, I decided to start a thread here

If modern weapons used clips, you might be right. But the couple of seconds it takes to change magazines doesn’t make any practical difference. Larger capacity magazines are more convenient, but not more deadly.

No, actually it CAN make a difference to spend a couple of seconds in changing a magazine in a crowded space!

Waffle House 'hero' disarmed shooter, tossed rifle over counter

"Had that guy had a chance to reload his weapon, there was plenty more people in that restaurant," Cordero told the Tennessean.


Football coach hailed as hero for disarming gunman outside Oregon high school - ABC News

Hero students disarm gunman during Colorado school shooting - Chicago Sun-Times

It seems that among crowds, there is always a chance that you will have this brave individual who will decide to neutralize the shooter. And in such scenario, every second counts...
 
Even if it's true that the lack of 11+ round magazines could make a difference, banning them won't actually stop mass murderers from getting them.
 
I saw a post in the Breaking News Forum related to the topic and I wanted to respond when I realized that the moderators closed that thread temporarily with a warning that such gun control discussions should take place in this subforum. So, I decided to start a thread here



No, actually it CAN make a difference to spend a couple of seconds in changing a magazine in a crowded space!

Waffle House 'hero' disarmed shooter, tossed rifle over counter

"Had that guy had a chance to reload his weapon, there was plenty more people in that restaurant," Cordero told the Tennessean.


Football coach hailed as hero for disarming gunman outside Oregon high school - ABC News

Hero students disarm gunman during Colorado school shooting - Chicago Sun-Times

It seems that among crowds, there is always a chance that you will have this brave individual who will decide to neutralize the shooter. And in such scenario, every second counts...
Ok, yes, with inexperienced shooters at close range it can make a difference. Enough of one that a ban on higher capacity magazines make sense. I don’t think so.
 
Even if it's true that the lack of 11+ round magazines could make a difference, banning them won't actually stop mass murderers from getting them.

It would reduce many killers from having access.

My plan is the best:

Guns

Gun safety certification in High School with a mark on the driver's license and buy and five level no buy list ruled by the courts.

Any gun out of a case out of the home, range or woods is a confiscate-able offense except for actions of the militia which you would prove in Court.
 
I saw a post in the Breaking News Forum related to the topic and I wanted to respond when I realized that the moderators closed that thread temporarily with a warning that such gun control discussions should take place in this subforum. So, I decided to start a thread here

No, actually it CAN make a difference to spend a couple of seconds in changing a magazine in a crowded space!

Waffle House 'hero' disarmed shooter, tossed rifle over counter

"Had that guy had a chance to reload his weapon, there was plenty more people in that restaurant," Cordero told the Tennessean.

Football coach hailed as hero for disarming gunman outside Oregon high school - ABC News

Hero students disarm gunman during Colorado school shooting - Chicago Sun-Times

It seems that among crowds, there is always a chance that you will have this brave individual who will decide to neutralize the shooter. And in such scenario, every second counts...

You mean to tell me that if Un marches over here (or any other catastrophe) and while he deals with our army he wants my wife I must go at it with him without my magazines and then depend on you for weapons and ammunition?

If I had a locker in the Armory downtown you could keep them out of my hands.

Then if I wanted to throw you ************* out of office I'd have to do it with a shotgun and pistol.
 
From the other thread

Food for thought

Bill Clinton banned assault weapons in 1994; mass shootings dropped by 43%.

Bush and the GOP let the ban expire in 2004; they went up over 230%.

HillaryWarnedUs
 
There was a general downturn in homicides an crime in general starting around 1994. So yes, it could well be a coincidence.

Clinton Democrat, Gore, Democrat, and what did they give back?

Financial crisis.

Trump.
 
It would reduce many killers from having access.

How would banning plastic boxes of a certain size prevent mass murderers from obtaining them or making them?
 
Screw saving lives.

What's important is liberteh and the right to feel like a bad*** by shooting off as many guns into the air at one time as possible.
 
How would banning plastic boxes of a certain size prevent mass murderers from obtaining them or making them?

It makes it more difficult for them to obtain.

Only the really serious ones will attain the mass shooting, the others will give up and not try.
 
Screw saving lives.

What's important is liberteh and the right to feel like a bad*** by shooting off as many guns into the air at one time as possible.

The data above leads me to believe; "Go ahead and let them ban your rifles and magazines."
 
Screw saving lives.

What's important is liberteh and the right to feel like a bad*** by shooting off as many guns into the air at one time as possible.

Yeah, we get it. You think it's okay to sacrifice liberty to save a few lives (as long as it doesn't impact you personally, that is).
 
It makes it more difficult for them to obtain.

Only the really serious ones will attain the mass shooting, the others will give up and not try.

Deciding to carry out a mass shooting is, by definition, "really serious," or at least "really serious" enough for someone to pick up a 3d printer.
 
Yeah, we get it. You think it's okay to sacrifice liberty to save a few lives (as long as it doesn't impact you personally, that is).

Apparently a lot of people had/have no problems with the Patriot Act.
 
Apparently a lot of people had/have no problems with the Patriot Act.

What liberty did you have to sacrifice because of the Patriot Act?
 
Even if it's true that the lack of 11+ round magazines could make a difference, banning them won't actually stop mass murderers from getting them.
Right.

It just means that 11+ round magazines will be sold on Black Market, and be more expensive. The madman mass shooter will still get them.
 
What liberty did you have to sacrifice because of the Patriot Act?

It was enacted after 9/11 when America was paralyzed with fear of terrorists. but, protect us from terrorists? It didn't protect us from the Boston Marathon bombing, did it? And "I caught a terrorist", said no TSA officer ever. But then, the Patriot Act was never intended to protect us from terrorists. It's an omnibus law enforcement wish-list of emergency powers, intended for use against US citizens. The fact that this bill, hundreds of pages, was presented to Congress so soon after the 9/11 event, and rushed into law without any member having time to read it, indicates that it was prepared well in advance ready for just such an occasion. Some people believe that the arrival of that occasion was curiously opportune, but I'm sure it was just a coincidence. :roll:

The first use of the new FBI powers granted by the Patriot Act was in the investigation of a county commissioner thought to have been accepting favors from a strip club owner. I'm sure we all feel safer knowing that. In an ideal world it actually would protect us from terrorists. In the real world, where we have to live our lives, it utterly fails.
The intrusions into essential liberties in the name of [alleged] security are too much of an over-reach.

The Patriot Act is primarily used against citizens instead of terrorists. It is being used to erode our civil liberties, invade our privacy, and to justify ever increasing budgets for dozens of government agencies. It is doing more damage to America than the terrorists, which makes the terrorists very happy.
 
It was enacted after 9/11 when America was paralyzed with fear of terrorists. but, protect us from terrorists? It didn't protect us from the Boston Marathon bombing, did it? And "I caught a terrorist", said no TSA officer ever. But then, the Patriot Act was never intended to protect us from terrorists. It's an omnibus law enforcement wish-list of emergency powers, intended for use against US citizens. The fact that this bill, hundreds of pages, was presented to Congress so soon after the 9/11 event, and rushed into law without any member having time to read it, indicates that it was prepared well in advance ready for just such an occasion. Some people believe that the arrival of that occasion was curiously opportune, but I'm sure it was just a coincidence. :roll:

The first use of the new FBI powers granted by the Patriot Act was in the investigation of a county commissioner thought to have been accepting favors from a strip club owner. I'm sure we all feel safer knowing that. In an ideal world it actually would protect us from terrorists. In the real world, where we have to live our lives, it utterly fails.
The intrusions into essential liberties in the name of [alleged] security are too much of an over-reach.

The Patriot Act is primarily used against citizens instead of terrorists. It is being used to erode our civil liberties, invade our privacy, and to justify ever increasing budgets for dozens of government agencies. It is doing more damage to America than the terrorists, which makes the terrorists very happy.

You're a real ninja at dodging my questions aren't you?
 
Deciding to carry out a mass shooting is, by definition, "really serious," or at least "really serious" enough for someone to pick up a 3d printer.

Dude, some-one walking around thinking, "I put this clip into this holster and blow them all away." Is so much different than, "I'm so going to get off my ass and chop up a printer, or find somebody who'll give me a clip."

Some may succeed, but not all will, and that reduces your statistic for the win.
 
Dude, some-one walking around thinking, "I put this clip into this holster and blow them all away." Is so much different than, "I'm so going to get off my ass and chop up a printer, or find somebody who'll give me a clip."

Some may succeed, but not all will, and that reduces your statistic for the win.

It is too easy to actually manufacture a magazine even without a 3d printer, simple sheet metal work, all it takes if for some body shop workers to get creative and join the black market.

Besides that magazines are too easy to swap unless you were already incompetent at using that firearm to begin with. In the army we used 20 and 30 round mags, mostly 30 but sometimes we had to use leftover 20 round mags from the vietnam era. We found 30 easy as hell to swap, but found anything larger tended to jam and be difficult to swap. the 20 round mags were super easy as well, and smaller size would just be easier to swap. Heck there is a reason even the military does not adopt 50 and 100 round drums and sticks with simple, smaller mags are more reliabloe than max capacity and switching mags of smaller amounts is much easier and faster than unjamming some 50 round mag or drum.
 
It is too easy to actually manufacture a magazine even without a 3d printer, simple sheet metal work, all it takes if for some body shop workers to get creative and join the black market.

Besides that magazines are too easy to swap unless you were already incompetent at using that firearm to begin with. In the army we used 20 and 30 round mags, mostly 30 but sometimes we had to use leftover 20 round mags from the vietnam era. We found 30 easy as hell to swap, but found anything larger tended to jam and be difficult to swap. the 20 round mags were super easy as well, and smaller size would just be easier to swap. Heck there is a reason even the military does not adopt 50 and 100 round drums and sticks with simple, smaller mags are more reliabloe than max capacity and switching mags of smaller amounts is much easier and faster than unjamming some 50 round mag or drum.

I tried explaining to some tacticool wannabe why no one in the military would want the 100 round magazine he was showing off. He didn’t get it.
 
It is too easy to actually manufacture a magazine even without a 3d printer, simple sheet metal work, all it takes if for some body shop workers to get creative and join the black market.

Besides that magazines are too easy to swap unless you were already incompetent at using that firearm to begin with. In the army we used 20 and 30 round mags, mostly 30 but sometimes we had to use leftover 20 round mags from the vietnam era. We found 30 easy as hell to swap, but found anything larger tended to jam and be difficult to swap. the 20 round mags were super easy as well, and smaller size would just be easier to swap. Heck there is a reason even the military does not adopt 50 and 100 round drums and sticks with simple, smaller mags are more reliabloe than max capacity and switching mags of smaller amounts is much easier and faster than unjamming some 50 round mag or drum.

Dubious.
 
From the other thread

Food for thought


Nothing but nonsense by people who don't know anything about guns.Because the only thing the Brady assault weapons ban do was ban firearms by cosmetic features and name only. It also did not effect so called high capacity magazines because those manufactured before the ban were grandfathered in. Ak-47s became Norinco MAK-90 rifles, Tech- 22 pistols became Sport 22 pistols while Colt AR15 Sporter rifles became Colt Match Target rifles with only a few cosmetic changes. So any any drop in crime is not related to the brady assault weapons ban.

From the 60 minutes special What Assault Weapons Ban?

If you have a CBS all access membership.
What Assault Weapons Ban? - CBS News

If you don't have a CBS all access membership.
http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Books and News/What Assault Weapons Ban?/


Stahl [voiceover]: To make sure that supply remains
endless, some gun distributors have come up with a
creative strategy. They're trying to get old pre-ban
magazines back from_cops_to be resold to the public,
because the law applies to_all_magazines, including those
for pistols. [cut to photo of gun-swap flyer] The flyer
sent to police chiefs offers to make an even swap: brand
new pistols and magazines in exchange for the police
departments' used ones.

[cut to Louisville, KY police chief Doug Hamilton's
office]
Doug Hamilton: At first, of course, it seems to
violate the first law of fraud, you know "if it sounds
too good to be true, it probably is"... (laughs)
Stahl [voiceover]: Doug Hamilton is the police chief
in Louisville, Kentucky. He got the swap offer from his
local distributor, Kiesler Police Supply.
Stahl [interviewing Hamilton]: They were trying to
get around this_ban_because they could sell_your_gun...
Hamilton: They could sell our weapon...
Stahl: ...with the 15 rounds...
Hamilton: ...and they could sell our magazine, out on
the street, retail over the counter, and it was strictly,
like I say, legal.
Stahl [voiceover, footage of police on indoor firing
range]: Legal because the law says that new magazines
that hold more than ten bullets can be made_only_if
they're sold to law enforcement, while the others can be
sold to anyone. That's why gun dealers are so eager to
get the old 15, 17 or 20 round clips back from the
police.


snip...



Stahl [voiceover]: Senator Feinstein thought she had
figured out a way to stop another problem. She wrote
something called a "physical features" test into the law,
designed to keep gun makers from turning their banned
guns into legal ones by making just a few minor changes.
The law bans any new gun that has two or more of the
these military-style features: [closeup of hand pointing
out features on gun show table] a pistol grip, a folding
stock, a bayonet mount, a flash supressor, or a grenade
launcher.
Feinstein: It also, in its physical features test, is
aimed at copycats, and one of the things that we found
was if you just_ban_19 specific weapons, suddenly
the_name_changes, and instead of an AK-47 you have a
Mitchell this, or a Norinco that. And to a great extent
we get at this.
Stahl [voiceover, footage of Norinco MAK-90 rifle]:
But once agian, the ban has backfired. Five months after
it took effect, the copycats are_already_out. [cut to
photo graphics] This is the TEC-22, banned by the
assault weapons bill. This is the new Sport 22 from the
same manufacturer. The only difference? The new gun has
no threads on the barrel. [return to footage of the MAK-
90] The ban_specifically_outlaws the AK-47, but it
doesn't do anything about the_M_AK-90.
Stahl [interviewing unidentified dealer at Miami gun
show about the MAK-90]: Isn't this exactly the same gun
as the AK-47?
Dealer: It's very similar.
Stahl: What's different? Can you show me?
Dealer: It's got a thumbhole stock, which is
necessary for importation, and it does not have a
bayonet.
Stahl [pointing]: No bayonet, which would have gone
here...
Dealer [pointing]: Which would have gone here.
Stahl: And, it's just a different grip, really...
Dealer: Exactly.


snip..

Stahl [voiceover, footage of Colt AR-15 Sporter]: No
question, Colt's Sporter rifle looks menacing. It failed
the features test because it has both a pistol grip, and
a flash supressor on the end of the barrel. [cut to
photo of Colt Match Target brochure] They can't legally
make it anymore. So now they make the Match Target. Can
you tell the difference? No flash supressor on the
end...
 
Back
Top Bottom