2 gunmen w AR15s open fire in Houston; 2 citizens down; 4 cops; PD helicopter shot

[Brain357]

Loughner proceeded to fire apparently randomly at other members of the crowd.[1][21]He reportedly used a 9×19mm Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol with a 33-round magazine.[22][23] A nearby store employee said he heard "15 to 20 gunshots".[24] Loughner stopped to reload, but dropped the loaded magazine from his pocket to the sidewalk, from where bystander Patricia Maisch grabbed it.[25]Another bystander clubbed the back of the assailant's head with a folding chair, injuring his elbow in the process, representing the fourteenth injury.[26] Loughner was tackled to the ground by Bill Badger, a 74-year-old retired United States Army Colonel [27] who had been shot himself. Loughner was further subdued by Maisch and bystanders Roger Sulzgeber and Joseph Zamudio. Zamudio, a concealed weapon (CCW) permit holder, had a weapon on his person, but arrived after the shooting had stopped and did not draw his firearm.[28] Thirty-one shell casings were found at the scene by investigators.[29]

See......you are lying again....I have posted the actual witness testimony...you have seen it and now you post this....you are a liar....

Loughner shot a guy in the head.....he thought he killed the guy as the guy fell and he kept walking forward.....he only grazed the guy...by getting too close he allowed the guy to grab him.....as they wrestled...the old lady was lying on the ground...why? She laid down on the ground because she thought he would just walk by her and not shoot her....as the guy and the shooter wrestled they fell in arms length of the old lady....so she reached out and secured his magazine...

Pure dumb luck......I have posted the actual witness accounts over and over and by posting this untruthful account.....you show yourself to be a liar.....

And dumb luck causes issues reloading. Happens all the time. And the more reloading the more lives saved.

And wrong again.....I repeat...

Even in these rare events, however, LCM’s are irrelevant to the number of victims shot.

For example, in the decade before the expired AW ban, in the entire U.S. there were 15 mass shooting incidents in which more than 6 victims were killed or more than 12 were killed or wounded.

Of the 15 cases, in 14 of them either the shooter possessed multiple guns, which made it unnecessary for him to reload once one gun was empty, or the shooter in fact reloaded.

Recent history also casts doubt on whether a ban on LCM’s would alter the number of persons killed and wounded in mass public shootings.

While one of the Columbine shooters used a 995 Hi-Point carbine rifle with a 10-round limit on magazine capacity (during the AW ban), he simply brought additional magazines to the attack—13 to be exact.

The Virginia Tech shooter had 17 magazines for his handguns and most were of the 10- round variety.


The Newtown shooter brought three guns to the school and fired at least two of them.

Simply put, these killers do not need LCM’s to fire many rounds without reloading – they simply bring plenty of magazines with them or drop one gun when its ammunition is exhausted and start firing another. Further, there are virtually no mass killings in which there is a bystander or victim willing to tackle the killer even if he does need to reload.

If it isn't problem for them then it isn't for you. If you believe what you are saying then you have no reason to fear a high cap magazine ban.

Nope. because,

1. it wouldn't last
2. I have tons of higcap mags for three of the most popular fire arms.
3. A ban would fund my next gun purchas.

Why so many hicap mags if they don't matter? Why does the military use hicap mags if they don't matter?

They may matter in self defense moron you don't know how much ammo you will need........and soldiers operate out of contact with regular supply chains moron and they are actively engaged in fighting large numbers of enemies at any given time........please...engage brain before posting.....

May matter in self defense? Oh that is funny. You obviously believe they matter or you would have no issue with a ban. Stop lying.

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

You have been arguing that capacity doesn't matter, so a limit is no problem. We have speed limits on roads. Life is full of limits.

 

[Divine Wind]

Some Rifleman dude on here yesterday said he could fire 10 bullets in 10 seconds with his old Enfield, with a three second reload. That's why I used that as an example. You have to reload. Most people could not do what the Rifleman does. And in that three seconds, a lot of people could run or throw furniture at him, or whatever.

You should go into business selling meteor hats and beach property in Arizona for when "the big one hits".

I see silly people scared of terrorist attacks or mad gunmen when they really need to worry about the crap they're feeding themselves and drunk drivers.

The top 10 leading causes of death in the US
Nearly 75% of all deaths in the US are attributed to just 10 causes, with the top 3 of these accounting for over 50% of all deaths. Over the last five years, the main causes of death in the US have remained fairly consistent, although unintentional injuries (accidents) became the fourth leading cause of death in 2013, while stroke became the fifth.

The most recent data (2013) reveals that annually there were 2,596,993 deaths registered in the US, which equates to:1,2,41,44

• 1,306,034 males
• 1,290,959 females
• An age-adjusted death rate, which accounts for the aging population, of 731.9 deaths per 100,000 US standard population
• A life expectancy at birth of around 78.8 years.

Heart disease remains the leading cause of death in the US, accounting for 1 in every 4 deaths, and affecting significantly more men than women.....

....The top 10 leading causes of death in the US are below together with the most recent statistics and facts, together they accounted for 73.6% of deaths in 2013:44

Annually there are around 2,596,993 deaths registered in the US with the leading top 10 causes accounting for nearly 75% of all deaths.

1. Heart disease
2. Cancer (malignant neoplasms)
3. Chronic lower respiratory disease
4. Accidents (unintentional injuries)
5. Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases)
6. Alzheimer's disease
7. Diabetes (diabetes mellitus)
8. Influenza and pneumonia
9. Kidney disease (nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis)
10. Suicide (intentional self-harm).

 

[2aguy]

See......you are lying again....I have posted the actual witness testimony...you have seen it and now you post this....you are a liar....

Loughner shot a guy in the head.....he thought he killed the guy as the guy fell and he kept walking forward.....he only grazed the guy...by getting too close he allowed the guy to grab him.....as they wrestled...the old lady was lying on the ground...why? She laid down on the ground because she thought he would just walk by her and not shoot her....as the guy and the shooter wrestled they fell in arms length of the old lady....so she reached out and secured his magazine...

Pure dumb luck......I have posted the actual witness accounts over and over and by posting this untruthful account.....you show yourself to be a liar.....

And dumb luck causes issues reloading. Happens all the time. And the more reloading the more lives saved.

And wrong again.....I repeat...

Even in these rare events, however, LCM’s are irrelevant to the number of victims shot.

For example, in the decade before the expired AW ban, in the entire U.S. there were 15 mass shooting incidents in which more than 6 victims were killed or more than 12 were killed or wounded.

Of the 15 cases, in 14 of them either the shooter possessed multiple guns, which made it unnecessary for him to reload once one gun was empty, or the shooter in fact reloaded.

Recent history also casts doubt on whether a ban on LCM’s would alter the number of persons killed and wounded in mass public shootings.

While one of the Columbine shooters used a 995 Hi-Point carbine rifle with a 10-round limit on magazine capacity (during the AW ban), he simply brought additional magazines to the attack—13 to be exact.

The Virginia Tech shooter had 17 magazines for his handguns and most were of the 10- round variety.


The Newtown shooter brought three guns to the school and fired at least two of them.

Simply put, these killers do not need LCM’s to fire many rounds without reloading – they simply bring plenty of magazines with them or drop one gun when its ammunition is exhausted and start firing another. Further, there are virtually no mass killings in which there is a bystander or victim willing to tackle the killer even if he does need to reload.

Nope. because,

1. it wouldn't last
2. I have tons of higcap mags for three of the most popular fire arms.
3. A ban would fund my next gun purchas.

Why so many hicap mags if they don't matter? Why does the military use hicap mags if they don't matter?

They may matter in self defense moron you don't know how much ammo you will need........and soldiers operate out of contact with regular supply chains moron and they are actively engaged in fighting large numbers of enemies at any given time........please...engage brain before posting.....

May matter in self defense? Oh that is funny. You obviously believe they matter or you would have no issue with a ban. Stop lying.

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

 

[Brain357]

And dumb luck causes issues reloading. Happens all the time. And the more reloading the more lives saved.

And wrong again.....I repeat...

Even in these rare events, however, LCM’s are irrelevant to the number of victims shot.

For example, in the decade before the expired AW ban, in the entire U.S. there were 15 mass shooting incidents in which more than 6 victims were killed or more than 12 were killed or wounded.

Of the 15 cases, in 14 of them either the shooter possessed multiple guns, which made it unnecessary for him to reload once one gun was empty, or the shooter in fact reloaded.

Recent history also casts doubt on whether a ban on LCM’s would alter the number of persons killed and wounded in mass public shootings.

While one of the Columbine shooters used a 995 Hi-Point carbine rifle with a 10-round limit on magazine capacity (during the AW ban), he simply brought additional magazines to the attack—13 to be exact.

The Virginia Tech shooter had 17 magazines for his handguns and most were of the 10- round variety.


The Newtown shooter brought three guns to the school and fired at least two of them.

Simply put, these killers do not need LCM’s to fire many rounds without reloading – they simply bring plenty of magazines with them or drop one gun when its ammunition is exhausted and start firing another. Further, there are virtually no mass killings in which there is a bystander or victim willing to tackle the killer even if he does need to reload.

Why so many hicap mags if they don't matter? Why does the military use hicap mags if they don't matter?

They may matter in self defense moron you don't know how much ammo you will need........and soldiers operate out of contact with regular supply chains moron and they are actively engaged in fighting large numbers of enemies at any given time........please...engage brain before posting.....

May matter in self defense? Oh that is funny. You obviously believe they matter or you would have no issue with a ban. Stop lying.

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

 

[2aguy]

See......you are lying again....I have posted the actual witness testimony...you have seen it and now you post this....you are a liar....

Loughner shot a guy in the head.....he thought he killed the guy as the guy fell and he kept walking forward.....he only grazed the guy...by getting too close he allowed the guy to grab him.....as they wrestled...the old lady was lying on the ground...why? She laid down on the ground because she thought he would just walk by her and not shoot her....as the guy and the shooter wrestled they fell in arms length of the old lady....so she reached out and secured his magazine...

Pure dumb luck......I have posted the actual witness accounts over and over and by posting this untruthful account.....you show yourself to be a liar.....

And dumb luck causes issues reloading. Happens all the time. And the more reloading the more lives saved.

And wrong again.....I repeat...

Even in these rare events, however, LCM’s are irrelevant to the number of victims shot.

For example, in the decade before the expired AW ban, in the entire U.S. there were 15 mass shooting incidents in which more than 6 victims were killed or more than 12 were killed or wounded.

Of the 15 cases, in 14 of them either the shooter possessed multiple guns, which made it unnecessary for him to reload once one gun was empty, or the shooter in fact reloaded.

Recent history also casts doubt on whether a ban on LCM’s would alter the number of persons killed and wounded in mass public shootings.

While one of the Columbine shooters used a 995 Hi-Point carbine rifle with a 10-round limit on magazine capacity (during the AW ban), he simply brought additional magazines to the attack—13 to be exact.

The Virginia Tech shooter had 17 magazines for his handguns and most were of the 10- round variety.


The Newtown shooter brought three guns to the school and fired at least two of them.

Simply put, these killers do not need LCM’s to fire many rounds without reloading – they simply bring plenty of magazines with them or drop one gun when its ammunition is exhausted and start firing another. Further, there are virtually no mass killings in which there is a bystander or victim willing to tackle the killer even if he does need to reload.

Nope. because,

1. it wouldn't last
2. I have tons of higcap mags for three of the most popular fire arms.
3. A ban would fund my next gun purchas.

Why so many hicap mags if they don't matter? Why does the military use hicap mags if they don't matter?

They may matter in self defense moron you don't know how much ammo you will need........and soldiers operate out of contact with regular supply chains moron and they are actively engaged in fighting large numbers of enemies at any given time........please...engage brain before posting.....

May matter in self defense? Oh that is funny. You obviously believe they matter or you would have no issue with a ban. Stop lying.

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

You have been arguing that capacity doesn't matter, so a limit is no problem. We have speed limits on roads. Life is full of limits.

Sorry.......limiting magazine capacity does nothing to stop crime or mass shootings...there is no need to do it and every reason for normal people to have access to as many rounds as they can carry........they can't carry police around and when facing multiple attackers you don't know how much ammo you will need.....

And on top of that...if military and police can have 30 round magazines....we get them too.....in countries where the police and military out gun the civilians...the civilians end up in mass graves...just ask our Mexican freinds across the border...


And ask the store owners in Ferguson and Baltimore.....their AR-15s with standard magazines made sure thugs didn't burn them out....

 

[2aguy]

And wrong again.....I repeat...

Even in these rare events, however, LCM’s are irrelevant to the number of victims shot.

For example, in the decade before the expired AW ban, in the entire U.S. there were 15 mass shooting incidents in which more than 6 victims were killed or more than 12 were killed or wounded.

Of the 15 cases, in 14 of them either the shooter possessed multiple guns, which made it unnecessary for him to reload once one gun was empty, or the shooter in fact reloaded.

Recent history also casts doubt on whether a ban on LCM’s would alter the number of persons killed and wounded in mass public shootings.

While one of the Columbine shooters used a 995 Hi-Point carbine rifle with a 10-round limit on magazine capacity (during the AW ban), he simply brought additional magazines to the attack—13 to be exact.

The Virginia Tech shooter had 17 magazines for his handguns and most were of the 10- round variety.


The Newtown shooter brought three guns to the school and fired at least two of them.

Simply put, these killers do not need LCM’s to fire many rounds without reloading – they simply bring plenty of magazines with them or drop one gun when its ammunition is exhausted and start firing another. Further, there are virtually no mass killings in which there is a bystander or victim willing to tackle the killer even if he does need to reload.



They may matter in self defense moron you don't know how much ammo you will need........and soldiers operate out of contact with regular supply chains moron and they are actively engaged in fighting large numbers of enemies at any given time........please...engage brain before posting.....

May matter in self defense? Oh that is funny. You obviously believe they matter or you would have no issue with a ban. Stop lying.

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

 

[Brain357]

And dumb luck causes issues reloading. Happens all the time. And the more reloading the more lives saved.

And wrong again.....I repeat...

Even in these rare events, however, LCM’s are irrelevant to the number of victims shot.

For example, in the decade before the expired AW ban, in the entire U.S. there were 15 mass shooting incidents in which more than 6 victims were killed or more than 12 were killed or wounded.

Of the 15 cases, in 14 of them either the shooter possessed multiple guns, which made it unnecessary for him to reload once one gun was empty, or the shooter in fact reloaded.

Recent history also casts doubt on whether a ban on LCM’s would alter the number of persons killed and wounded in mass public shootings.

While one of the Columbine shooters used a 995 Hi-Point carbine rifle with a 10-round limit on magazine capacity (during the AW ban), he simply brought additional magazines to the attack—13 to be exact.

The Virginia Tech shooter had 17 magazines for his handguns and most were of the 10- round variety.


The Newtown shooter brought three guns to the school and fired at least two of them.

Simply put, these killers do not need LCM’s to fire many rounds without reloading – they simply bring plenty of magazines with them or drop one gun when its ammunition is exhausted and start firing another. Further, there are virtually no mass killings in which there is a bystander or victim willing to tackle the killer even if he does need to reload.

Why so many hicap mags if they don't matter? Why does the military use hicap mags if they don't matter?

They may matter in self defense moron you don't know how much ammo you will need........and soldiers operate out of contact with regular supply chains moron and they are actively engaged in fighting large numbers of enemies at any given time........please...engage brain before posting.....

May matter in self defense? Oh that is funny. You obviously believe they matter or you would have no issue with a ban. Stop lying.

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

You have been arguing that capacity doesn't matter, so a limit is no problem. We have speed limits on roads. Life is full of limits.

Sorry.......limiting magazine capacity does nothing to stop crime or mass shootings...there is no need to do it and every reason for normal people to have access to as many rounds as they can carry........they can't carry police around and when facing multiple attackers you don't know how much ammo you will need.....

And on top of that...if military and police can have 30 round magazines....we get them too.....in countries where the police and military out gun the civilians...the civilians end up in mass graves...just ask our Mexican freinds across the border...


And ask the store owners in Ferguson and Baltimore.....their AR-15s with standard magazines made sure thugs didn't burn them out....

Your dishonestly is so blatant.

 

[Divine Wind]

I am sceptical of the claim, but who am I to say ? .....

Me too, but she saw it on the Internet so it must be true.

This article shows that, with practice and proficiency, British soldiers could fire 15 rounds into a 12 inch target at 300 yards in 60 seconds. That's not one-per-second, but still impressive. No doubt, as some on this thread have already alluded, if magazines over 10 rounds are successfully banned, the next step is banning anything over 5 rounds.

Gun Review: Lee-Enfield SMLE MkIII* - The Truth About Guns
The bolt’s smoothness and the magazine’s capacity add up to a much faster rate of fire than other bolt guns. Back in the day, the British Army actually had a drill called the Mad Minute, which required a soldier to make 15 hits on a 12-inch target at 300 yards in sixty seconds. This would include reloading with clips (not mags, you cheater). Many soldiers could beat this score. The world record was set in 1914 by a Sergeant Alfred Snoxall with 38 rounds. Personally, I’d pay money to see Jerry Miculek beat that score.

 

[Brain357]

May matter in self defense? Oh that is funny. You obviously believe they matter or you would have no issue with a ban. Stop lying.

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

So doesn't effect the mass killer shooting everyone, but does effect someone just trying to defend themselves. That is too funny. And your the same guy who says a gun is almost never even fired in defense.

 

[Brain357]

May matter in self defense? Oh that is funny. You obviously believe they matter or you would have no issue with a ban. Stop lying.

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

So mass shooters can just reload, but not defenders. You are too funny today.

 

[2aguy]

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

So doesn't effect the mass killer shooting everyone, but does effect someone just trying to defend themselves. They is too funny. And your the same guy who says a gun is almost never even fired in defense.

Wow...you are fucking dense......

Every mass shooter to this day could have killed as many people as they did with several 6 shot revolvers, a lever action rifle or a pump action shotgun.......that means, moron, that magazine capacity has no bearing on the casualties in a mass public shooting...and since mass public shooters are firing in a relaxed frame of mind, changing 10 round magazines in not a problem for them either...again, making magazine limits stupid.....

A law abiding person, facing one or more attackers, isolated and alone may have to fire more than 10 rounds to stay alive......you can't predict how many rounds will be needed and you have no right to limit that persons chance to survive....

 

[Brain357]

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

So doesn't effect the mass killer shooting everyone, but does effect someone just trying to defend themselves. They is too funny. And your the same guy who says a gun is almost never even fired in defense.

Wow...you are fucking dense......

Every mass shooter to this day could have killed as many people as they did with several 6 shot revolvers, a lever action rifle or a pump action shotgun.......that means, moron, that magazine capacity has no bearing on the casualties in a mass public shooting...and since mass public shooters are firing in a relaxed frame of mind, changing 10 round magazines in not a problem for them either...again, making magazine limits stupid.....

A law abiding person, facing one or more attackers, isolated and alone may have to fire more than 10 rounds to stay alive......you can't predict how many rounds will be needed and you have no right to limit that persons chance to survive....

Then let mass shooters have to carry many guns and magazines. More chances for them to drop one.

Defenders can't reload? I've never heard of anyone needing more than 10 rounds for defense.

 

[2aguy]

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

So mass shooters can just reload, but not defenders. You are too funny today.

A defender may be wounded at the start of a fight.....and if they have to change a magazine simply because stupid people like you don't like 30 round magazines...it may put their lives at risk...their small motor skills may be affected by adrenaline or they may only have the use of one arm....like the federal agent in the Miami Bank Robbery shootout.....

So having a large capacity magazine aids the innocent defender but makes no difference to the mass shooter...who goes to a gun free zone to murder unarmed people....and has no need to worry about return fire....since they either kill themselves or surrender as soon as they face armed resistance....

 

[Brain357]

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

So mass shooters can just reload, but not defenders. You are too funny today.

A defender may be wounded at the start of a fight.....and if they have to change a magazine simply because stupid people like you don't like 30 round magazines...it may put their lives at risk...their small motor skills may be affected by adrenaline or they may only have the use of one arm....like the federal agent in the Miami Bank Robbery shootout.....

So having a large capacity magazine aids the innocent defender but makes no difference to the mass shooter...who goes to a gun free zone to murder unarmed people....and has no need to worry about return fire....since they either kill themselves or surrender as soon as they face armed resistance....

Give an example of a defense ever in the situation you describe where he needed a hi cap mag.

 

[2aguy]

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

So mass shooters can just reload, but not defenders. You are too funny today.

A defender may be wounded at the start of a fight.....and if they have to change a magazine simply because stupid people like you don't like 30 round magazines...it may put their lives at risk...their small motor skills may be affected by adrenaline or they may only have the use of one arm....like the federal agent in the Miami Bank Robbery shootout.....

So having a large capacity magazine aids the innocent defender but makes no difference to the mass shooter...who goes to a gun free zone to murder unarmed people....and has no need to worry about return fire....since they either kill themselves or surrender as soon as they face armed resistance....

Give an example of a defense ever in the situation you describe where he needed a hi cap mag.

Every single one.....when the fight starts you aren't a fucking psychic who can see the future........if you don't use all of your bullets...great...but you still have them.

 

[Divine Wind]

Here.....I found it...Klecks actual paper on magazine capacity...


Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?

The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.


LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.

News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.

There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.

In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.


Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

-------------

Methods Definition of Eligible Incidents We tried to identify, as comprehensively as possible, all mass shootings that occurred in the U.S. in the twenty-year period from 1994 through 2013 inclusive and that involved an LCM.

An LCM was defined as a magazine holding more than ten rounds of ammunition. A mass shooting was defined as one in which more than six people were shot, either fatally or nonfatally, in a single incident.

Any specific numerical cutoff is necessarily somewhat arbitrary, but some are less arbitrary than others.

The six-victim cutoff was used because an offender could shoot as many as six persons using a typical old-fashioned six-shot revolver of the sort that has been around since the 19th century, and our goal was to identify all incidents in which it was plausible that use of an LCM (always used in connection with modern semiautomatic firearms) affected the number of casualties.


It is less likely that LCMs affect the casualty count in incidents in which few people were shot, and generally fewer rounds were fired.

Thus, had the numerical cutoff been set lower, the sample of incidents would have included more cases in which LCM use was unlikely to have affected the number of victims. In that way, we have intentionally biased the sample in favor of the hypothesis that LCM use causes a higher casualty count.

We relied on a list compiled by the staff of the Violence Policy Center (2015) to identify LCM-involved mass shootings. Because this organization advocates bans on LCMs (Violence Policy Center 2011), we are confident its staff were well-motivated to compile as comprehensive

Thanks, but facts never get in the way of the fanatical anti-gun Left's desire to ban guns or otherwise limit the Second Amendment rights of all American in a desire to support the complete authoritarian power of the Federal government.

 

[Crixus]

You have no right to set a limit on how much ammo a normal, law abiding citizen who commits no crime can carry.....

And again....we know the goal....use magazine capacity to ban whole categories of regular rifles and pistols......

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

So mass shooters can just reload, but not defenders. You are too funny today.

Semantics aside, if it makes no difference one way or the other, why should my ability to own semiautomatic weapons and high capacity magazines be hindered because a bunch of hood rats want to kill each other when it's proven that the amount of bullets in their guns makes no diffrence on who or how many people they shoot ?

 

[2aguy]

Sorry but the right to life is an important one.

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

So mass shooters can just reload, but not defenders. You are too funny today.

Semantics aside, if it makes no difference one way or the other, why should my ability to own semiautomatic weapons and high capacity magazines be hindered because a bunch of hood rats want to kill each other when it's proven that the amount of bullets in their guns makes no diffrence on who or how many people they shoot ?

Facts, the truth and reality....mean nothing to brain and the other gun grabbers...they hate guns....they fear people...and no matter how much you explain the truth, facts and reality to them.....they don't care......they are gun phobic...and nothing will change that.

 

[Crixus]

Yes it is which is why you trying to limit the right of people to defend themselves is so disgusting...

You have spent all this time explaining how mag cap doesn't matter. Now it is limiting the right to defend oneself? Make up your mind. So now it does matter?

No....moron.....magazine capacity does not matter in mass shootings.....for self defense the individual on their own will never know how much ammunition they will need......

You are wrong....you are just interested in getting certain categories of pistol and rifles banned without having to call it a ban on those weapons...you will simply ban their magazines...which bans the pistol or rifle....

So mass shooters can just reload, but not defenders. You are too funny today.

Semantics aside, if it makes no difference one way or the other, why should my ability to own semiautomatic weapons and high capacity magazines be hindered because a bunch of hood rats want to kill each other when it's proven that the amount of bullets in their guns makes no diffrence on who or how many people they shoot ?

Facts, the truth and reality....mean nothing to brain and the other gun grabbers...they hate guns....they fear people...and no matter how much you explain the truth, facts and reality to them.....they don't care......they are gun phobic...and nothing will change that.

nope. but on a brighter note, most anti gun types can be converted pretty easily when you can get them out shooting with ya. it's mostly a fear of the unknown type thing.

 

[Papageorgio]

They guy was insane, just like the others that do this crap. The fact people that his politics meant anything is pretty stupid. The guy that shot Giffords was from the left, no he wasn't, he was insane. This guy isn't from the right, he is insane. Not everything is political.

Oh look, we have an armchair psychiatrist.

Who diagnosed him?

This guy was anti-Government, yelling about homosexuals, Jews, Walmart, and the end of the world.

Try again, buddy.

So sane people pull this kind of crap. If he was yelling about Walmart, wouldn't that make him a liberal? Those the only people I know that hate Walmart! LOL!

I'm convinced that you're a tard.

Gee, that has me worried, a loser that can't comprehend what they read calling me a tard. LOL!