Large-capacity gun magazine possession law on pause while Supreme Court petitioned

[Rogue AI]

In your subjective, personal opinion – not as a fact of law.

Not really, unless you can produce evidence to the contrary. There is also the matter of enforcement. The potential for abuse far outweighs any possible benefit.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

That's not an argument. Repeating a claim is not an argument for that claim. You would lose the court case in about 30 seconds.

Its video proof by a professional that shows magazine size has no significant effect on load and fire times and there are a ton more that reinforces the argument. Sorry but feelings don't win cases, actual evidence does and I provided that.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The thread is about high-capasity magazines I posted a video showing there is no significant load and fire time between those with less than 10 rounds and more. Arguments to banning them is useless and unconstitutional.

And yet shootings involving high capacity mags have more deaths.

So, we can go with your little bit of theater and your specious appeals to emotion, or we can go with the data.

Easy call.


"Shootings involving high-capacity magazines have more fatalities and injuries than those that do not. In mass shootings between 2009 and 2018, events that involved high-capacity magazines had 2x as many deaths and 14x as many injuries."

Prohibit High-Capacity Magazines | Everytown

Nine states and D.C. have enacted high-capacity magazine bans. Congress and the remaining states should also ban them to reduce gun violence in America.

www.everytown.org

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Its video proof

It's only proof of what he can do. Nothing else. Sorry. The data trumps your little bit of preconditioned theater.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

You can swap 10 round magazines pretty quick.

Might even make you more careful with your aim.

Just ask Nicholas Cruz

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

"The National Firearms Act of 1934" restricts a lot of things.

What does it restrict?

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

You said "And if forced by the government, its an infringement."

And I said, "A lot of things are restricted under the National Firearms Act of 1934."

They can put magazines greater than 10 rounds under the NFA. They won't be banned, just like many fully auto weapons aren't banned. You'll just have to fill out paperwork.

So it's not an infringement if done that way.

A right can't be taxed.

 

[progressive hunter]

Banning the possession of high-capacity magazines altogether is not an ‘infringement.’

Should the Supreme Court rule that that high-capacity magazine bans are un-Constitutional, then and only then would the enforcement of the ban manifest as an infringement.

your premise is a lie

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Banning the possession of high-capacity magazines altogether is not an ‘infringement.’

Should the Supreme Court rule that that high-capacity magazine bans are un-Constitutional, then and only then would the enforcement of the ban manifest as an infringement.

30 round magazines are normal capacity, not high capacity.

 

[toobfreak]

The Founding Fathers wanted and allowed citizens to own every weapon the military had.
If Iran can have nukes, so can everyone on my street.

 

[2aguy]

Just the circumstantial evidence of reducing capacity,forcing more reloads and forcing someone to carry more clips.

Theidea is that fewer people would die, in a mass shooting. A simple idea.

Wrong.....magazine capacity is not the factor.....the gun free status of the location is the factor........the shootings you will point out later were all in gun free zones.....where the attacker was left alone....

Sandy Hook..... the shooter picked Sandy Hook because of the 3 schools in town, it was the only one with no police officer on site......and the shooting could have been done with pistols or shotguns...

Killed in Sandy Hook....26.

Virginia Tech with 2 pistols....32.

Parkland.....the shooter was not stopped by the police...who did not enter the building....

Killed in Parkland...17

Luby's cafe, 2 pistols....24.

Virginia Tech....32.

Pulse Night Club...50 killed in a gun free zone...the only one with a gun, an off duty police officer working the front door, ran away to get help....leaving everyone in the club helpless.....this shooting, like the others, could have been done with pistols or shotguns....

The range for these shootings was well under 30 yards......making the rifle arbitrary....

The only shooting where the rifle was important was the Las Vegas shooting....where he was firing at 400 yards from a concealed and fortified position.....into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people....who had limited ability to disperse when the attack began......

You don't know what you are talking about.......

 

[2aguy]

Just the circumstantial evidence of reducing capacity,forcing more reloads and forcing someone to carry more clips.

Theidea is that fewer people would die, in a mass shooting. A simple idea.

Wrong....

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

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

I.

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
========
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.

Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
==========

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.

--------

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

Specifically, we searched for

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,

(4) the types of guns possessed,

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,

(6) the number of rounds fired,

(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.

-----



-----

The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

-----


SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

 

[2aguy]

Just the circumstantial evidence of reducing capacity,forcing more reloads and forcing someone to carry more clips.

Theidea is that fewer people would die, in a mass shooting. A simple idea.

A simple idea that is just that.....simple....and not based in facts, truth or reality.....just another bid to attack the ability to keep and own a gun for self defense....since banning anything over 10 rounds would make large numbers of regular rifles and pistols illegal....since they have magazines over 10 rounds....

 

[2aguy]

Just the circumstantial evidence of reducing capacity,forcing more reloads and forcing someone to carry more clips.

Theidea is that fewer people would die, in a mass shooting. A simple idea.

Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Kazan, Russia school shooting....semi-automatic shotgun 5 + 1 or 7 +1 capacity...9 killed, 23 injured



Perm, Russia school shooting.... 4 + 1 capacity, 6 killed, 43 injured



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine doesn't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....





-Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



-Kazan, Russia school shooting....semi-automatic shotgun 5 + 1 or 7 +1 capacity...9 killed, 23 injured



-Perm, Russia school shooting.... 4 + 1 capacity, 6 killed, 43 injured





-Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



-Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.

What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.

 

[2aguy]

The thread is about high-capasity magazines I posted a video showing there is no significant load and fire time between those with less than 10 rounds and more. Arguments to banning them is useless and unconstitutional.

The ban isn't useless...and the anti-gunners know this....by banning anything over 10 rounds, they essentially make rifles and pistols that take magazines that hold more than 10 rounds illegal......first, because the owners of a glock 19 wouldn't be able to use the gun because its regular magazines hold 15-19 rounds....

And second.......from banning 10 round magazines they would quickly move to the argument that any gun holding any magazine could hold more than 10 rounds at any time...so they all must be banned because magazine size is variable.......

 

[2aguy]

And yet shootings involving high capacity mags have more deaths.

So, we can go with your little bit of theater and your specious appeals to emotion, or we can go with the data.

Easy call.


"Shootings involving high-capacity magazines have more fatalities and injuries than those that do not. In mass shootings between 2009 and 2018, events that involved high-capacity magazines had 2x as many deaths and 14x as many injuries."

Prohibit High-Capacity Magazines | Everytown

Nine states and D.C. have enacted high-capacity magazine bans. Congress and the remaining states should also ban them to reduce gun violence in America.

www.everytown.org

Wrong......as I have shown already........pump action shotguns and pistols have killed more people than AR-15s....the location, and not having a good guy with a gun shooting at the attacker determines how many die...not the magazine.....you doofus.

 

[2aguy]

And yet shootings involving high capacity mags have more deaths.

So, we can go with your little bit of theater and your specious appeals to emotion, or we can go with the data.

Easy call.


"Shootings involving high-capacity magazines have more fatalities and injuries than those that do not. In mass shootings between 2009 and 2018, events that involved high-capacity magazines had 2x as many deaths and 14x as many injuries."

Prohibit High-Capacity Magazines | Everytown

Nine states and D.C. have enacted high-capacity magazine bans. Congress and the remaining states should also ban them to reduce gun violence in America.

www.everytown.org

It wasn't the weapon or the magazines, you doofus......it was the gun free zone location that allowed the killing......as the distances involved were too short to matter with a rifle.......and the magazine capacity didn't matter.......pistols or shotguns could produce the same numbers and have....

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

And yet shootings involving high capacity mags have more deaths.

So, we can go with your little bit of theater and your specious appeals to emotion, or we can go with the data.

Easy call.


"Shootings involving high-capacity magazines have more fatalities and injuries than those that do not. In mass shootings between 2009 and 2018, events that involved high-capacity magazines had 2x as many deaths and 14x as many injuries."

Prohibit High-Capacity Magazines | Everytown

Nine states and D.C. have enacted high-capacity magazine bans. Congress and the remaining states should also ban them to reduce gun violence in America.

www.everytown.org

I will refer you to the video again, proof that magazine capacity has no noticeable effect on fire times. You may want to get that comprehension problem looked at.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I will refer you to the video again, proof that magazine capacity has no noticeable effect on fire times. You may want to get that comprehension problem looked at.

Sorry, your staged bit of theater does not trump the data, for any rational person.

 

[2aguy]

Sorry, your staged bit of theater does not trump the data, for any rational person.

Not data....lies.