Plenty of "Good Guys with Guns" But 6 Injured Anyway

[eflatminor]

You say that banning high capacity magazines serves no purpose? It makes the assault weapon an offensive weapon. Unless you really REALLY believe that you will need more than ten rounds of ammunition to extricate yourself from a dangerous situation, you must agree. Unless, of course, you harbor some fantasy of holding back hordes of zombies or Chinese troops landing off the coast of Sarasota or fending off all the gangbangers in Detroit all by yourself. Ten rounds serves for self defense. More than that enables postal workers to go postal, mass shooters to shoot masses of people, and bank robbers to pin down the LAPD.

And how is it that you know, for sure, that no one will ever need more than 10 rounds to defend themselves?

And just to educate you, the difference between an offensive weapon and a defensive weapon (in this context) is the way it is used. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the matter. If I attack you with a derringer, that makes the two shot pistol an offensive weapon.

If I walked into a shopping mall with a 60 round clip, I could kill more people faster than with a two shot derringer. That's the difference between a weapon used for defense and one used for offense.

It's a magazine, not a clip. If you're going to argue about this shit, try not to sound so ignorant. There is no such thing as a 60 round clip.

That said, since you're going to kill all these people, would it not makes sense for the good guys to not be placed at a tactical disadvantage? Why would you want to do that?

 

[Nosmo King]

And how is it that you know, for sure, that no one will ever need more than 10 rounds to defend themselves?

And just to educate you, the difference between an offensive weapon and a defensive weapon (in this context) is the way it is used. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the matter. If I attack you with a derringer, that makes the two shot pistol an offensive weapon.

If I walked into a shopping mall with a 60 round clip, I could kill more people faster than with a two shot derringer. That's the difference between a weapon used for defense and one used for offense.

It's a magazine, not a clip. If you're going to argue about this shit, try not to sound so ignorant. There is no such thing as a 60 round clip.

That said, since you're going to kill all these people, would it not makes sense for the good guys to not be placed at a tactical disadvantage? Why would you want to do that?

The point is not to have blood baths like those depicted in the movies.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What's more realistic: kids shot in school or your fantasy of the NKVD?

The NKVD - in real life it's happened 10,000 times more often than kids shot in school.

The US experiences an average of 2.46 school shootings per year - out of 340 MILLION people. More children die of FIRE ANT bites.

School Shootings: What Are The Odds? ~ PsychLaw Journal

Your claim of school shootings is a fantasy, a delusion that you leftists trot out in you desire to disarm the peasants.

Should we accept the stench of death in our schools as the cost of your warped fantasy

Should we accept your paranoid and delusional fantasy as the cost of your mental instability? Or just as a manifestation of your agenda driven willingness to play fast and loose with the facts?

 

[WinterBorn]

What's more realistic: kids shot in school or your fantasy of the NKVD? Should we accept the stench of death in our schools as the cost of your warped fantasy

What's more realistic, keeping violent felons locked up (they commit 75% of gun murders) or banning weapons or magazines based on their use in mass shootings (which account for 1% of gun murders)?

You get the small government hyperConservatives in congress to appropriate the money for more prisons and we'll both count it as a minor victory.

Funny, yesterday you said "We are not reducing gun violence by locking up the criminals for a longer time". (post #389)

And, as I said in my first post (which you dismissed), if we release the nonviolent drug offenders there will be plenty of room for those who are actually a danger to society.

There are far better ways to treat drug users than prison.

 

[eflatminor]

If I walked into a shopping mall with a 60 round clip, I could kill more people faster than with a two shot derringer. That's the difference between a weapon used for defense and one used for offense.

It's a magazine, not a clip. If you're going to argue about this shit, try not to sound so ignorant. There is no such thing as a 60 round clip.

That said, since you're going to kill all these people, would it not makes sense for the good guys to not be placed at a tactical disadvantage? Why would you want to do that?

The point is not to have blood baths like those depicted in the movies.

Which your magazine limiting law will not only fail to prevent, but will help to ensure that any bloodbath is in favor of the batshit crazy criminal.

Again, wonderful plan...

 

[eflatminor]

More children die of FIRE ANT bites.

Oh shit. Insect control!!!

 

[WinterBorn]

You say that banning high capacity magazines serves no purpose? It makes the assault weapon an offensive weapon. Unless you really REALLY believe that you will need more than ten rounds of ammunition to extricate yourself from a dangerous situation, you must agree. Unless, of course, you harbor some fantasy of holding back hordes of zombies or Chinese troops landing off the coast of Sarasota or fending off all the gangbangers in Detroit all by yourself. Ten rounds serves for self defense. More than that enables postal workers to go postal, mass shooters to shoot masses of people, and bank robbers to pin down the LAPD.

And how is it that you know, for sure, that no one will ever need more than 10 rounds to defend themselves?

And just to educate you, the difference between an offensive weapon and a defensive weapon (in this context) is the way it is used. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the matter. If I attack you with a derringer, that makes the two shot pistol an offensive weapon.

If I walked into a shopping mall with a 60 round clip, I could kill more people faster than with a two shot derringer. That's the difference between a weapon used for defense and one used for offense.

No, you are wrong. The difference between an offensive weapon and a defensive weapon is how it is used. That is the only determining factor.

 

[eflatminor]

And how is it that you know, for sure, that no one will ever need more than 10 rounds to defend themselves?

And just to educate you, the difference between an offensive weapon and a defensive weapon (in this context) is the way it is used. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the matter. If I attack you with a derringer, that makes the two shot pistol an offensive weapon.

If I walked into a shopping mall with a 60 round clip, I could kill more people faster than with a two shot derringer. That's the difference between a weapon used for defense and one used for offense.

No, you are wrong. The difference between an offensive weapon and a defensive weapon is how it is used. That is the only determining factor.

That^

 

[Uncensored2008]

The effectiveness of machine gun laws is actually a great example of why this would be effective.

Machine gun laws are effective?

In what way? What EXACTLY have they done?

 

[Uncensored2008]

More children die of FIRE ANT bites.

Oh shit. Insect control!!!

The feds can't get the damned bugs to submit to background checks....

 

[WinterBorn]

More children die of FIRE ANT bites.

Oh shit. Insect control!!!

Hell YES!!! I have no problem with a ban on fire ants. Those little bastards are like wingless wasps!!

 

[eflatminor]

More children die of FIRE ANT bites.

Oh shit. Insect control!!!

Hell YES!!! I have no problem with a ban on fire ants. Those little bastards are like wingless wasps!!

Indeed. I was travelling through the South as a kid, a family vacation. On the way to a pool, I stepped on a colony of biting ants. Don't know for sure what kind of ants, but oh crap did that hurt! I ran to the pool and jumped in, but I swear they kept biting. Nasty little buggers.

 

[WinterBorn]

Just an FYI for the discussion:

from:http://www.policymic.com/articles/2...magazine-ban-would-not-prevent-mass-shootings

"A Department of Justice report from 2004 about the previous Federal Assault Weapons Ban – a report which Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the creator of that ban, links on her official website – says that most studies say the information they can obtain shows fewer than 10 shots are used to kill most murder victims, meaning that a 10-round limit isn't likely to have a measurable effect on murder rates. “Specific data ... suggest that relatively few attacks involve more than 10 shots fired.”

The report went on to say: “Gun murder victims are shot two to three times on average according to a number of sources, and a study at a Washington, DC trauma center reported that only 8% of all gunshot victims treated from 1988 through 1990 had five or more wounds,” though they note that number of gunshots may not be representative of the total number of shots fired.

However, the report also states: “the few available studies on shots fired show that assailants fire less than four shots on average, a number well within the 10-round magazine limit” adding “it is usually unclear how many cases, if any, involved more than 10 shots.""

So the average number of rounds fired by assailants is 4. If the study showing the average number of defensive round fired being 2 is adequate evidence that no one ever uses more than 2 rounds in self defense, then the study by the DoJ is adequate evidence that the criminals don't use more than 4 rounds to kill people.

 

[zeke]

Just an FYI for the discussion:

from:Gun Control Facts: Why a "High Capacity" Magazine Ban Would Not Prevent Mass Shootings - PolicyMic

"A Department of Justice report from 2004 about the previous Federal Assault Weapons Ban – a report which Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the creator of that ban, links on her official website – says that most studies say the information they can obtain shows fewer than 10 shots are used to kill most murder victims, meaning that a 10-round limit isn't likely to have a measurable effect on murder rates. “Specific data ... suggest that relatively few attacks involve more than 10 shots fired.”

The report went on to say: “Gun murder victims are shot two to three times on average according to a number of sources, and a study at a Washington, DC trauma center reported that only 8% of all gunshot victims treated from 1988 through 1990 had five or more wounds,” though they note that number of gunshots may not be representative of the total number of shots fired.

However, the report also states: “the few available studies on shots fired show that assailants fire less than four shots on average, a number well within the 10-round magazine limit” adding “it is usually unclear how many cases, if any, involved more than 10 shots.""

So the average number of rounds fired by assailants is 4. If the study showing the average number of defensive round fired being 2 is adequate evidence that no one ever uses more than 2 rounds in self defense, then the study by the DoJ is adequate evidence that the criminals don't use more than 4 rounds to kill people.

Well hell, there goes your justification for needing high capacity magazines.

Of course you might say that you still need those high capacity mags because the OTHER bad guys have high capacity mags for THEIR assault rifles and you need to keep up in this ever escalating arms race.

But you also might say it doesn't make any difference.

Back to work for me. You to I think.

 

[koshergrl]

Since when do we need to have justification to do what we like to do and to own what we want?

Screw you. If I want a high capacity magazine, I should be able to have one. We do live in the US.

 

[Spoonman]

44 pages later and the bottom line is the OP is totally wrong. There weren't plenty of good guys with guns. it was a no guns allowed area. once again laws don't stop the problem. once again lcriminals do't obey the laws.

 

[koshergrl]

It should be closed or in badlands.

But noooooo...

 

[koshergrl]

This is disinformation spread among the low information voters.

They do a search, they see the headers, and they think it's truth. Never mind it's just a leftist loon paid to spread crap on message boards.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hell YES!!! I have no problem with a ban on fire ants. Those little bastards are like wingless wasps!!

I think the EPA has made them a protected species...

 

[OriginalShroom]

You say that banning high capacity magazines serves no purpose? It makes the assault weapon an offensive weapon. Unless you really REALLY believe that you will need more than ten rounds of ammunition to extricate yourself from a dangerous situation, you must agree. Unless, of course, you harbor some fantasy of holding back hordes of zombies or Chinese troops landing off the coast of Sarasota or fending off all the gangbangers in Detroit all by yourself. Ten rounds serves for self defense. More than that enables postal workers to go postal, mass shooters to shoot masses of people, and bank robbers to pin down the LAPD.

And how is it that you know, for sure, that no one will ever need more than 10 rounds to defend themselves?

And just to educate you, the difference between an offensive weapon and a defensive weapon (in this context) is the way it is used. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the matter. If I attack you with a derringer, that makes the two shot pistol an offensive weapon.

If I walked into a shopping mall with a 60 round clip, I could kill more people faster than with a two shot derringer. That's the difference between a weapon used for defense and one used for offense.

Please post a picture of a "60 round clip".

I have never seen one.