The Moment Sandy Hook Parents start cashing in their kids..

[2aguy]

Of course the actual event of the cop needing to shoot the criminal 14 times doens't count...even though if a civilian encountered the guy he would also have had to use 14 rounds to put him down.....

Any time you face a violent criminal you need as much ammo as you can carry...you do not know how much you will need before the fight and shouldn't have to die because gun grabbers hate guns, and want to control people.....

 

[2aguy]

I would not restrict ammo, I would restrict capacity. Mass shooters use hi capacity magazines, and gang bangers use hi capacity magazines. I have never heard of anyone needing a hi capacity magazine for defense. I posted a study in this thread that shows defense is 2-3 shots. So I would restrict magazine capacity back to 10, that leaves plenty extra. I wouldn't confiscate, but stop the manufacture and sale of new ones. This would over time make them used less and less in crime. Few mass shooters would be using them, fewer gang bangers would be using them. This would save lives. In the Giffords shooting he was stopped at reload. Obviously if he had to stop sooner lives would have been saved. At Newtown kids escaped when he had to reload. Had he had to reload more often more children would have escaped. Fewer people would be hit by gang banger strays if they are firing less before the magazine is empty. People would still have very capable defensive arms. I would include police in these restrictions for the typical cop. You and others have been pointing out how many defenses don't even require a single shot.

and if one innocent dies because they ran out of ammo, their loved ones should KILL those who imposed said restrictions

He asked me to provide an example (JUST one example he said) of a situation where a person/persons used more than 10 rounds to defend themselves and when I posted the evidence, he claimed that it doesn't count because no one was shot. Can you believe that BS, TD?

Of course it doesn't count. You have done nothing to show they needed hi cap magazines. Since nobody was shot they could have used cap guns.

Hey wombat brains. iF there is a one in a million chance an honest citizen might need more than 10 rounds, that alone justifies them having a "high capacity" magazine because there is no harm to people having them anyway

Yes you care nothing about innocent people getting shot. You don't care that more kids could have escaped Newtown if he had to reload more often. I'll save the lives we know we can save. You keep worrying about the one person who might possibly one day need more than 10 rounds. I'll be saving a lot more lives.

And yet....if one person had been armed with a gun at Sandy Hook all of those kids could have been saved....but no.....you guys won't save those kids.....because if you had the chance to go back and authorize the staff to have weapons, knowing what was coming, you would say no....because you won't let women have guns to fight off stalkers...I asked again and again what you anti gunners would do to help these women and not one of you said anythig...

So you are the ones who would let these people die.....because by disarming innocent people, those people alive today because they had a gun would be dead.....

 

[2aguy]

This bears repeating....for those who have no idea about how mass shooters calmly walk thru their gun free killing zones....because no one can stop them because their government disarmed them....

And this makes good sense to me. Much more sense than anything that has come from Brain's brain at least.

High-Capacity Magazines Are Needed for Self-Defense - US News

However, the limits proposed are a more arbitrary 10 rounds and that limit faces two practical realities. First, the 10-round limit assumes that one is only defending against a single attacker. Last week a mother in Loganville, Ga. hid in an attic with her children to escape a home invader. Undaunted, the criminal came after them. She emptied all six rounds of her revolver, hitting him five times. He ran out of the house, drove a distance, crashed, and finally collapsed in a nearby driveway; police then transported him to a hospital for recovery. In the real world, one handgun round does not stop people like it does in the movies. This mother is very lucky she only faced one bad guy, and that being shot five times was enough for him to decide to leave her alone while he was still a threat to her and her children.

Second, a restriction to 10 rounds would have done nothing at Sandy Hook. The evil person shot almost 80 rounds, implying he had at least three standard AR-15 magazines. It takes the unskilled about 3 seconds to change a magazine. How is it that two magazine changes were not enough to stop the violence but seven would be? Breaking news underscores this reality as the Hartford Courantreported Sunday that the killer made many more than two magazine changes, leaving 15 rounds in discarded magazines. These magazine changes didn't stop the tragedy of the unarmed facing an armed lunatic. It took 20 minutes for police armed with AR-15s and 30 round magazines to arrive to end the violence.

Finally, a restriction on extremely common arms in regular use by lawful citizens is the definition of an infringement of the constitutional right to arms. Citizens own about a billion magazines that hold more than 10 rounds and the majority of widely owned firearms come standard from the factory with more than 10 round magazines. It is telling that law enforcement is excluded from these proposed restrictions. We don't issue 17 or 30 round magazines to our police to murder. If those larger magazines have no value for self-defense, wouldn't we prohibit them for law enforcement too?

 

[2aguy]

Again...watch this reload....tell me how many lives would be saved.....who can rush this guy......especially as he is gunning down innocent people....and these mass killers plan their attacks....and practice.....and they pick their targets....they choose gun free zones so they can do their killiing without being in a hurry or rushed....

If you read the accounts of survivors...they all say the same thing...the killer/killers were calm, relaxed and in no hurry....

 

[2aguy]

You can't deny that magazine capacity limits wouldn't help when so many lives have been saved already when a shooter has reloaded.

yes, the evidence of mass shootings doesn't support you.....too many of them kill in an hurried manner....anyone who escapes is simply lucky.....

 

[Brain357]

Why do you bother posting? You don't offer anything. I give you examples and that is all you have? Pathetic.

Give examples of how the law abiding would be negatively effected.

It would be restricting their rights to determine their own needs. It is not up to you to determine what another person might need. YOU are nothing.

Then give us some examples showing that anyone would ever need a hi cap magazine. If nobody has ever needed one, then the only ones being restricted are criminals. Are you against that?

I already gave you several instances. One was a looting instances where hundreds of looters were converging on a store, and the owners fought them off.

Yes hundreds of looters and nobody was shot and killed. Sorry that doesn't show they needed hi cap magazines. Since nobody was actually shot I think they had plenty of time to reload. As the pro gunners so often say, it's only 3 seconds to reload. Try again.

As one article pointed out....the looters know that there are a lot of rounds in the magazine....it keeps them from challenging the defenders...if they knew the defenders had fewer rounds, a riot maddened crowd just might charge....and then people would die....a lot of them...including the innocent defenders...

And the most basic point.....any magazine the military has...the civilians need to have as well....it keeps the balance of power in the hands of civilians.....and that keeps the death camps away....

Don't insult our military and suggest they would put people in death camps.

 

[Brain357]

Again...watch this reload....tell me how many lives would be saved.....who can rush this guy......especially as he is gunning down innocent people....and these mass killers plan their attacks....and practice.....and they pick their targets....they choose gun free zones so they can do their killiing without being in a hurry or rushed....

If you read the accounts of survivors...they all say the same thing...the killer/killers were calm, relaxed and in no hurry....

And I have posted a video of a failed reload as well as an ACTUAL event where the shooter was stopped at reload.

 

[Brain357]

You can't deny that magazine capacity limits wouldn't help when so many lives have been saved already when a shooter has reloaded.

yes, the evidence of mass shootings doesn't support you.....too many of them kill in an hurried manner....anyone who escapes is simply lucky.....

Yes some are lucky he had to reload. The more often he reloads the more luck they will have.

 

[Brain357]

and if one innocent dies because they ran out of ammo, their loved ones should KILL those who imposed said restrictions

He asked me to provide an example (JUST one example he said) of a situation where a person/persons used more than 10 rounds to defend themselves and when I posted the evidence, he claimed that it doesn't count because no one was shot. Can you believe that BS, TD?

Of course it doesn't count. You have done nothing to show they needed hi cap magazines. Since nobody was shot they could have used cap guns.

Hey wombat brains. iF there is a one in a million chance an honest citizen might need more than 10 rounds, that alone justifies them having a "high capacity" magazine because there is no harm to people having them anyway

Yes you care nothing about innocent people getting shot. You don't care that more kids could have escaped Newtown if he had to reload more often. I'll save the lives we know we can save. You keep worrying about the one person who might possibly one day need more than 10 rounds. I'll be saving a lot more lives.

And yet....if one person had been armed with a gun at Sandy Hook all of those kids could have been saved....but no.....you guys won't save those kids.....because if you had the chance to go back and authorize the staff to have weapons, knowing what was coming, you would say no....because you won't let women have guns to fight off stalkers...I asked again and again what you anti gunners would do to help these women and not one of you said anythig...

So you are the ones who would let these people die.....because by disarming innocent people, those people alive today because they had a gun would be dead.....

I'm still open for debate on whether you arms people at schools. Sometime ago there was a mass knifing at a school that had an armed guard. It wasn't the armed guard that eventually stopped the person...

Also while I've not heard of a teacher stopping a bad guy several have shot themselves.

So it is something that should be debated.

 

[Brain357]

and if one innocent dies because they ran out of ammo, their loved ones should KILL those who imposed said restrictions

He asked me to provide an example (JUST one example he said) of a situation where a person/persons used more than 10 rounds to defend themselves and when I posted the evidence, he claimed that it doesn't count because no one was shot. Can you believe that BS, TD?

Of course it doesn't count. You have done nothing to show they needed hi cap magazines. Since nobody was shot they could have used cap guns.

Hey wombat brains. iF there is a one in a million chance an honest citizen might need more than 10 rounds, that alone justifies them having a "high capacity" magazine because there is no harm to people having them anyway

Yes you care nothing about innocent people getting shot. You don't care that more kids could have escaped Newtown if he had to reload more often. I'll save the lives we know we can save. You keep worrying about the one person who might possibly one day need more than 10 rounds. I'll be saving a lot more lives.

And yet....if one person had been armed with a gun at Sandy Hook all of those kids could have been saved....but no.....you guys won't save those kids.....because if you had the chance to go back and authorize the staff to have weapons, knowing what was coming, you would say no....because you won't let women have guns to fight off stalkers...I asked again and again what you anti gunners would do to help these women and not one of you said anythig...

So you are the ones who would let these people die.....because by disarming innocent people, those people alive today because they had a gun would be dead.....

Do you think those smart guns might be an answer for schools? Like teachers can be armed, but they have to have the smart guns? That might make it easier for people to accept. I think they are too untested to try to make them the norm for guns, but perhaps this is a good application for them? Just a thought.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Did anyone else know the columbine killers used a weapon with a 10 round magaziine.....? Kind of shows how stupid that argument is then....considering the santa barbara killer did the same thing......

And how many people escaped because they used 10 rd magazines? We know children escaped at Newtown while he reloaded. I've posted several other examples of people escaping during reload for you in the past. People have escaped from almost every mass shooting and reloading certainly helped some of them. The Giffords shooter was stopped at reload. I have posted several examples of shooters stopped at reload in the past. I have also posted an example for you of a shooter stopped after reload by a concealed carry owner. The shooter stopping to reload helps the armed and unarmed all the same. You can't deny that magazine capacity limits wouldn't help when so many lives have been saved already when a shooter has reloaded.

"So many lives have been saved." If you were really interested in volume of lives saved, you'd be championing gun ownership, since "so many lives" have been saved by it.

Meanwhile, I'm less than impressed by your "Let's just slow down his killing and hope someone eventually tackles him" plan.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Again...watch this reload....tell me how many lives would be saved.....who can rush this guy......especially as he is gunning down innocent people....and these mass killers plan their attacks....and practice.....and they pick their targets....they choose gun free zones so they can do their killiing without being in a hurry or rushed....

If you read the accounts of survivors...they all say the same thing...the killer/killers were calm, relaxed and in no hurry....

And I have posted a video of a failed reload as well as an ACTUAL event where the shooter was stopped at reload.

Oh, so now your plan is all about slower kills AND hoping for a reload failure.

Hey, why don't we just hand out magic amulets to schoolchildren and call it a day? Sounds about as sensible as your "hope they'll be lucky" ideas.

 

[Brain357]

Again...watch this reload....tell me how many lives would be saved.....who can rush this guy......especially as he is gunning down innocent people....and these mass killers plan their attacks....and practice.....and they pick their targets....they choose gun free zones so they can do their killiing without being in a hurry or rushed....

If you read the accounts of survivors...they all say the same thing...the killer/killers were calm, relaxed and in no hurry....

And I have posted a video of a failed reload as well as an ACTUAL event where the shooter was stopped at reload.

Oh, so now your plan is all about slower kills AND hoping for a reload failure.

Hey, why don't we just hand out magic amulets to schoolchildren and call it a day? Sounds about as sensible as your "hope they'll be lucky" ideas.

So the Giffords shooter being stopped at reload means nothing? The Newtown kids escaping while he reloads means nothing? Sorry but these are actual lives saved. They mean a lot.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

He asked me to provide an example (JUST one example he said) of a situation where a person/persons used more than 10 rounds to defend themselves and when I posted the evidence, he claimed that it doesn't count because no one was shot. Can you believe that BS, TD?

Of course it doesn't count. You have done nothing to show they needed hi cap magazines. Since nobody was shot they could have used cap guns.

Hey wombat brains. iF there is a one in a million chance an honest citizen might need more than 10 rounds, that alone justifies them having a "high capacity" magazine because there is no harm to people having them anyway

Yes you care nothing about innocent people getting shot. You don't care that more kids could have escaped Newtown if he had to reload more often. I'll save the lives we know we can save. You keep worrying about the one person who might possibly one day need more than 10 rounds. I'll be saving a lot more lives.

And yet....if one person had been armed with a gun at Sandy Hook all of those kids could have been saved....but no.....you guys won't save those kids.....because if you had the chance to go back and authorize the staff to have weapons, knowing what was coming, you would say no....because you won't let women have guns to fight off stalkers...I asked again and again what you anti gunners would do to help these women and not one of you said anythig...

So you are the ones who would let these people die.....because by disarming innocent people, those people alive today because they had a gun would be dead.....

I'm still open for debate on whether you arms people at schools. Sometime ago there was a mass knifing at a school that had an armed guard. It wasn't the armed guard that eventually stopped the person...

Also while I've not heard of a teacher stopping a bad guy several have shot themselves.

So it is something that should be debated.

That's something we can agree upon. All we've been asking for is that schools not be a gun free zone, the kind that cowards look for.

 

[2aguy]

He asked me to provide an example (JUST one example he said) of a situation where a person/persons used more than 10 rounds to defend themselves and when I posted the evidence, he claimed that it doesn't count because no one was shot. Can you believe that BS, TD?

Of course it doesn't count. You have done nothing to show they needed hi cap magazines. Since nobody was shot they could have used cap guns.

Hey wombat brains. iF there is a one in a million chance an honest citizen might need more than 10 rounds, that alone justifies them having a "high capacity" magazine because there is no harm to people having them anyway

Yes you care nothing about innocent people getting shot. You don't care that more kids could have escaped Newtown if he had to reload more often. I'll save the lives we know we can save. You keep worrying about the one person who might possibly one day need more than 10 rounds. I'll be saving a lot more lives.

And yet....if one person had been armed with a gun at Sandy Hook all of those kids could have been saved....but no.....you guys won't save those kids.....because if you had the chance to go back and authorize the staff to have weapons, knowing what was coming, you would say no....because you won't let women have guns to fight off stalkers...I asked again and again what you anti gunners would do to help these women and not one of you said anythig...

So you are the ones who would let these people die.....because by disarming innocent people, those people alive today because they had a gun would be dead.....

Do you think those smart guns might be an answer for schools? Like teachers can be armed, but they have to have the smart guns? That might make it easier for people to accept. I think they are too untested to try to make them the norm for guns, but perhaps this is a good application for them? Just a thought.

Smart guns are more than likely a fools errand....they add complexity that will still do nothing to stop criminals.....they will eventually learn to make chips that will allow them to use stolen smart guns.....and they prevent normal people from sharing their guns in an emergency.....if I am wounded, why shouldn't my wife or kids be able to use my gun to carry on the fight.....but they can't if they don't have the added electronic or biometric device to allow the weapon to function....

I still like my idea of arming peripheral staff, Principals, nurses, librarians, deans, and other administrators.....since they have less physical contact with students, and may be moving around the school more anyway...

Also....get rid of the stupid gun free zones....if a parent can legally carry a concealed gun they should be able to carry it onto school grounds....it adds another layer of protection that doesn't cost anything....one way would be to have them inform the school that they are bringing a gun onto the grounds...if they are going to be volunteering for any length of time.....just as a courtesy...

those two ideas would help create an environment that killers will have to deal with...right now....we know what happens when only the killer has guns in a gun free zone...

 

[Brain357]

Of course it doesn't count. You have done nothing to show they needed hi cap magazines. Since nobody was shot they could have used cap guns.

Hey wombat brains. iF there is a one in a million chance an honest citizen might need more than 10 rounds, that alone justifies them having a "high capacity" magazine because there is no harm to people having them anyway

Yes you care nothing about innocent people getting shot. You don't care that more kids could have escaped Newtown if he had to reload more often. I'll save the lives we know we can save. You keep worrying about the one person who might possibly one day need more than 10 rounds. I'll be saving a lot more lives.

And yet....if one person had been armed with a gun at Sandy Hook all of those kids could have been saved....but no.....you guys won't save those kids.....because if you had the chance to go back and authorize the staff to have weapons, knowing what was coming, you would say no....because you won't let women have guns to fight off stalkers...I asked again and again what you anti gunners would do to help these women and not one of you said anythig...

So you are the ones who would let these people die.....because by disarming innocent people, those people alive today because they had a gun would be dead.....

I'm still open for debate on whether you arms people at schools. Sometime ago there was a mass knifing at a school that had an armed guard. It wasn't the armed guard that eventually stopped the person...

Also while I've not heard of a teacher stopping a bad guy several have shot themselves.

So it is something that should be debated.

That's something we can agree upon. All we've been asking for is that schools not be a gun free zone, the kind that cowards look for.

Well good. That is one where arming people might win. I'm really sorta neutral on that one just yet. But would be very interested in reading a good debate on it.

 

[2aguy]

So the Giffords shooter being stopped at reload means nothing? The Newtown kids escaping while he reloads means nothing? Sorry but these are actual lives saved. They mean a lot.

Giffords was an exception, not even close to the rule...the Principal at Newton was gunned down as she charged the killer....and there were still more kids killed at Newton until the guys with the gun arrived than escaped his immediate kill zone, 26 people were killed before the guys with guns arrived...and he changed magazines repeatedly, only guns stopped him and almost all other mass shootings.....your notions are wrong.....

Norway, and South Korea and the other mass shootings around the world......gun free zones and large numbers of people killed........

End the freakin gun free kill zones....and you will save lives.....

 

[Brain357]

Of course it doesn't count. You have done nothing to show they needed hi cap magazines. Since nobody was shot they could have used cap guns.

Hey wombat brains. iF there is a one in a million chance an honest citizen might need more than 10 rounds, that alone justifies them having a "high capacity" magazine because there is no harm to people having them anyway

Yes you care nothing about innocent people getting shot. You don't care that more kids could have escaped Newtown if he had to reload more often. I'll save the lives we know we can save. You keep worrying about the one person who might possibly one day need more than 10 rounds. I'll be saving a lot more lives.

And yet....if one person had been armed with a gun at Sandy Hook all of those kids could have been saved....but no.....you guys won't save those kids.....because if you had the chance to go back and authorize the staff to have weapons, knowing what was coming, you would say no....because you won't let women have guns to fight off stalkers...I asked again and again what you anti gunners would do to help these women and not one of you said anythig...

So you are the ones who would let these people die.....because by disarming innocent people, those people alive today because they had a gun would be dead.....

Do you think those smart guns might be an answer for schools? Like teachers can be armed, but they have to have the smart guns? That might make it easier for people to accept. I think they are too untested to try to make them the norm for guns, but perhaps this is a good application for them? Just a thought.

Smart guns are more than likely a fools errand....they add complexity that will still do nothing to stop criminals.....they will eventually learn to make chips that will allow them to use stolen smart guns.....and they prevent normal people from sharing their guns in an emergency.....if I am wounded, why shouldn't my wife or kids be able to use my gun to carry on the fight.....but they can't if they don't have the added electronic or biometric device to allow the weapon to function....

I still like my idea of arming peripheral staff, Principals, nurses, librarians, deans, and other administrators.....since they have less physical contact with students, and may be moving around the school more anyway...

Also....get rid of the stupid gun free zones....if a parent can legally carry a concealed gun they should be able to carry it onto school grounds....it adds another layer of protection that doesn't cost anything....one way would be to have them inform the school that they are bringing a gun onto the grounds...if they are going to be volunteering for any length of time.....just as a courtesy...

those two ideas would help create an environment that killers will have to deal with...right now....we know what happens when only the killer has guns in a gun free zone...

I think this topic is one for it's own debate. It is hard to not wish that somebody was at Newtown who could have stopped him when he shot through the door. Of course even if someone was there he was so well armed it's hard to say what might have happened. Had he had limited magazine capacity it would have helped the good guy.

 

[Brain357]

So the Giffords shooter being stopped at reload means nothing? The Newtown kids escaping while he reloads means nothing? Sorry but these are actual lives saved. They mean a lot.

Giffords was an exception, not even close to the rule...the Principal at Newton was gunned down as she charged the killer....and there were still more kids killed at Newton until the guys with the gun arrived than escaped his immediate kill zone, 26 people were killed before the guys with guns arrived...and he changed magazines repeatedly, only guns stopped him and almost all other mass shootings.....your notions are wrong.....

Norway, and South Korea and the other mass shootings around the world......gun free zones and large numbers of people killed........

End the freakin gun free kill zones....and you will save lives.....

Do you doubt that more people are getting hit by strays from gang bangers because they can fire so many rounds before reloading? It seems obvious to me the more rounds going off the more likely for people to get hit by strays.

I've not yet formed an opinion on gun free zones. The one thing they do is eliminate accidental shootings. So the question might be if that saves more lives than potentially stopping a shooter sooner?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

So the Giffords shooter being stopped at reload means nothing? The Newtown kids escaping while he reloads means nothing? Sorry but these are actual lives saved. They mean a lot.

Giffords was an exception, not even close to the rule...the Principal at Newton was gunned down as she charged the killer....and there were still more kids killed at Newton until the guys with the gun arrived than escaped his immediate kill zone, 26 people were killed before the guys with guns arrived...and he changed magazines repeatedly, only guns stopped him and almost all other mass shootings.....your notions are wrong.....

Norway, and South Korea and the other mass shootings around the world......gun free zones and large numbers of people killed........

End the freakin gun free kill zones....and you will save lives.....

Do you doubt that more people are getting hit by strays from gang bangers because they can fire so many rounds before reloading? It seems obvious to me the more rounds going off the more likely for people to get hit by strays.

I've not yet formed an opinion on gun free zones. The one thing they do is eliminate accidental shootings. So the question might be if that saves more lives than potentially stopping a shooter sooner?

Gang bangers aren't in legal possession of guns to begin with. Something you can't get through your thick skull is that these people don't obey the law.