Why Does Anybody Need a 30-Round Magazine?

[Crackerjack]

No one needs a 30 round magazine.

I support the constitution the way the founding fathers intended it to be. Every American should be able to own a musket, nothing more.

The 2nd amendment was designed so that the American people can defend themselves from a tyrannical government you numb-nutted puke.

Right, that's why I support your right to own a single shot musket.

Which part of the constitution gives you the right to own a semi-automatic gun with a 30 round clip?

The same part that protects elective abortions and typing up idiotic posts on the Internet.

 

[martybegan]

No one needs a 30 round magazine.

I support the constitution the way the founding fathers intended it to be. Every American should be able to own a musket, nothing more.

The Founders supported the right of the people to have weapons appropriate to a militia, thus military type weapons. Unless you think the Marin Corps should be restricted to muzzle loaders, your argument is as stupid as your usual tripe.

That's a pretty convenient interpretation.

A milita would not be worth much at the time if all the members showed up with a bunch of squirrel guns.

 

[RDD_1210]

How many kids were killed using free speech?

Hundreds, if not thousands, every year. Not to mention the ones who live but are scarred for life.

Bullying and Suicide - Bullying Statistics

Ok, fair point. The difference I see however is that children have to make the decision to kill themselves after being bullied, where as with a gun, those children had no choice.

 

[martybegan]

How many kids were killed using free speech?

Hundreds, if not thousands, every year. Not to mention the ones who live but are scarred for life.

Bullying and Suicide - Bullying Statistics

Ok, fair point. The difference I see however is that children have to make the decision to kill themselves after being bullied, where as with a gun, those children had no choice.

So because they took thier own life due to being bullied, you are somehow OK with that?

 

[Mad Scientist]

No one needs a 30 round magazine.

I support the constitution the way the founding fathers intended it to be. Every American should be able to own a musket, nothing more.

Wrong.

The Gov't had Muskets so the People had to be armed equally.

If the Kings Army had .50 cal machine guns, then the Founding Fathers would have had them too.

Then you would be here saying; "I support the constitution the way the founding fathers intended it to be. Every American should be able to own a .50 cal Machine Gun, nothing more."

The point of the 2nd Amendment is for the People to armed in such a manner that Gov't won't even consider trying to violate your rights.

 

[RDD_1210]

Senator Dianne Feinstein's latest divide-and-conquer attack on the Second Amendment has made even Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) a sucker for the argument that private citizens do not need high-capacity magazines. These include not only 30-round rifle magazines, but 17-round magazines for handguns like the Glock.

Why does anybody need a high capacity magazine? If Senator Manchin were to educate himself by, for example, attending Front Sight's four-day defensive handgun class, he would learn the two primary answers:

(1) Failure to stop the aggressor
(crazies will not stop)

(2) Multiple aggressors
(gang bangers don't play nice)


Read more: Articles: Why Does Anybody Need a 30-Round Magazine?
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

They showed a clip of a guy shooting an assault weapon with a 30 round on a news program this morning. All they have to do is show that thing over and over and plenty of people will understand why nobody needs one.

Extremely powerful weapon, the guy was barely holding onto it. There is no good reason why citizens need this type of automatic weapon. Your excuses are stupid and so are you.

There is a lot of things in life you do not need.

Does that mean you should not want what you do not need?

I don't need a 30 round magizine, I own many of them.

I don't need more than one pistol, I own nine.

I don't need more than one long rifle, I own twelve.

I don't need a Thompson 1928 submachine gun (full auto) but I own two.

I don't need an M16 with a tri-burst pack, but I own one.

I don't need to be a firearm collector, but I enjoy collecting and shooting firearms.

You don't need to like it and no one is forcing you to.

Great point! You should be able to own a nuclear device as well. Maybe biological weapons as well. Who are we to tell you that you can't have your own nuclear weapons.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

No one needs a 30 round magazine.

I support the constitution the way the founding fathers intended it to be. Every American should be able to own a musket, nothing more.

Wrong.

The Gov't had Muskets so the People had to be armed equally.

If the Kings Army had .50 cal machine guns, then the Founding Fathers would have had them too.

Then you would be here saying; "I support the constitution the way the founding fathers intended it to be. Every American should be able to own a .50 cal Machine Gun, nothing more."

The point of the 2nd Amendment is for the People to armed in such a manner that Gov't won't even consider trying to violate your rights.

The 2nd amendment was never intended to give people a right to murder U.S. federal, state, or local government officials you idiot. Our system of governing is what protects our rights, not any supposed right to gun down any government agent who does something you perceive as violating your rights.

 

[RDD_1210]

Hundreds, if not thousands, every year. Not to mention the ones who live but are scarred for life.

Bullying and Suicide - Bullying Statistics

Ok, fair point. The difference I see however is that children have to make the decision to kill themselves after being bullied, where as with a gun, those children had no choice.

So because they took thier own life due to being bullied, you are somehow OK with that?

Of course not, but there are steps that can be taken to intervene in between the bullying and suicide. There's not exactly a lot of time to persuade a bullet to not hit a child.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Ok, fair point. The difference I see however is that children have to make the decision to kill themselves after being bullied, where as with a gun, those children had no choice.

So because they took thier own life due to being bullied, you are somehow OK with that?

Of course not, but there are steps that can be taken to intervene in between the bullying and suicide. There's not exactly a lot of time to persuade a bullet to not hit a child.

So how do you propose to stop a bad guy from getting a gun and pulling the trigger?

 

[RDD_1210]

No one needs a 30 round magazine.

I support the constitution the way the founding fathers intended it to be. Every American should be able to own a musket, nothing more.

Wrong.

The Gov't had Muskets so the People had to be armed equally.

If the Kings Army had .50 cal machine guns, then the Founding Fathers would have had them too.

Then you would be here saying; "I support the constitution the way the founding fathers intended it to be. Every American should be able to own a .50 cal Machine Gun, nothing more."

The point of the 2nd Amendment is for the People to armed in such a manner that Gov't won't even consider trying to violate your rights.

So every citizen should have their own missiles and nuclear weapons?

 

[Crackerjack]

Senator Dianne Feinstein's latest divide-and-conquer attack on the Second Amendment has made even Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) a sucker for the argument that private citizens do not need high-capacity magazines. These include not only 30-round rifle magazines, but 17-round magazines for handguns like the Glock.

Why does anybody need a high capacity magazine? If Senator Manchin were to educate himself by, for example, attending Front Sight's four-day defensive handgun class, he would learn the two primary answers:

(1) Failure to stop the aggressor
(crazies will not stop)

(2) Multiple aggressors
(gang bangers don't play nice)


Read more: Articles: Why Does Anybody Need a 30-Round Magazine?
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

That's just what we need, more 30 round magazines in gangland.

I bet if we just send them more of your money they'll settle down.

 

[martybegan]

They showed a clip of a guy shooting an assault weapon with a 30 round on a news program this morning. All they have to do is show that thing over and over and plenty of people will understand why nobody needs one.

Extremely powerful weapon, the guy was barely holding onto it. There is no good reason why citizens need this type of automatic weapon. Your excuses are stupid and so are you.

There is a lot of things in life you do not need.

Does that mean you should not want what you do not need?

I don't need a 30 round magizine, I own many of them.

I don't need more than one pistol, I own nine.

I don't need more than one long rifle, I own twelve.

I don't need a Thompson 1928 submachine gun (full auto) but I own two.

I don't need an M16 with a tri-burst pack, but I own one.

I don't need to be a firearm collector, but I enjoy collecting and shooting firearms.

You don't need to like it and no one is forcing you to.

Great point! You should be able to own a nuclear device as well. Maybe biological weapons as well. Who are we to tell you that you can't have your own nuclear weapons.

A nuclear warhead is considered artillery, which was held in common, in the armory by the milita. It has never been considered an "arm" which since the advent of the proto-modern infantryman (circa 1500's-1600's) has always been a shoulder mounted firearm. Starting with muskets, progressing to rifled muskets, and through the single shot rifles to today's modern semi-automatic and automatic rifles.

Biological weapons would probably be considered artillery as well, as that is thier preferred means of dispersal, and thus not an "arm" and thus not covered under the 2nd amendment.

 

[Contumacious]

Ok, fair point. The difference I see however is that children have to make the decision to kill themselves after being bullied, where as with a gun, those children had no choice.

So because they took thier own life due to being bullied, you are somehow OK with that?

Of course not, but there are steps that can be taken to intervene in between the bullying and suicide. There's not exactly a lot of time to persuade a bullet to not hit a child.

That is true.

Eliminate GUN FREE ZONES.

No one can guarantee than even then, he/she will be 100% safe.

.

 

[DiamondDave]

No one needs a 30 round magazine.

I support the constitution the way the founding fathers intended it to be. Every American should be able to own a musket, nothing more.

Wrong.

The Gov't had Muskets so the People had to be armed equally.

If the Kings Army had .50 cal machine guns, then the Founding Fathers would have had them too.

Then you would be here saying; "I support the constitution the way the founding fathers intended it to be. Every American should be able to own a .50 cal Machine Gun, nothing more."

The point of the 2nd Amendment is for the People to armed in such a manner that Gov't won't even consider trying to violate your rights.

The 2nd amendment was never intended to give people a right to murder U.S. federal, state, or local government officials you idiot. Our system of governing is what protects our rights, not any supposed right to gun down any government agent who does something you perceive as violating your rights.

Yeah.. they did not have the declaration of independence in their minds AT ALL

Oh.. and BTW... war is not murder...

And our system of government has shown to take away our rights as well.. and it is upon the individual to also protect their individual rights from things such as tyrants, criminals, etc

 

[martybegan]

Ok, fair point. The difference I see however is that children have to make the decision to kill themselves after being bullied, where as with a gun, those children had no choice.

So because they took thier own life due to being bullied, you are somehow OK with that?

Of course not, but there are steps that can be taken to intervene in between the bullying and suicide. There's not exactly a lot of time to persuade a bullet to not hit a child.

In the case of Newtown, considering the cops took 10 MINUTES to respond, the attacker probably could have used your cherished musket unloaded as a club and kill just as many people. Should we limit people to nerf versions of all blunt objects?

 

[Crackerjack]

They showed a clip of a guy shooting an assault weapon with a 30 round on a news program this morning. All they have to do is show that thing over and over and plenty of people will understand why nobody needs one.

Extremely powerful weapon, the guy was barely holding onto it. There is no good reason why citizens need this type of automatic weapon. Your excuses are stupid and so are you.

There is a lot of things in life you do not need.

Does that mean you should not want what you do not need?

I don't need a 30 round magizine, I own many of them.

I don't need more than one pistol, I own nine.

I don't need more than one long rifle, I own twelve.

I don't need a Thompson 1928 submachine gun (full auto) but I own two.

I don't need an M16 with a tri-burst pack, but I own one.

I don't need to be a firearm collector, but I enjoy collecting and shooting firearms.

You don't need to like it and no one is forcing you to.

Great point! You should be able to own a nuclear device as well. Maybe biological weapons as well. Who are we to tell you that you can't have your own nuclear weapons.

Yes, people don't own nuclear weapons because of some law that forbids it.

 

[RDD_1210]

So because they took thier own life due to being bullied, you are somehow OK with that?

Of course not, but there are steps that can be taken to intervene in between the bullying and suicide. There's not exactly a lot of time to persuade a bullet to not hit a child.

So how do you propose to stop a bad guy from getting a gun and pulling the trigger?

Good question. There is no simple answer. But doing nothing is not a solution. Neither is adding more guns to the mix. We as a society have shown that we're not capable of being responsible with guns.

So what is the solution? I wish there was an easy answer. But it could start with extremely harsh penalties on those who own guns illegally. We can greatly restrict the type of fire arms that can be purchased and increase the screening for who is allowed to purchase weapons.

I'm actually fine with responsible people owning weapons (as you've pointed out with Switzerland in other threads), people just can't be trusted in this country on the whole with the power of having high powered guns. We need to be stricter across the board.

 

[martybegan]

So because they took thier own life due to being bullied, you are somehow OK with that?

Of course not, but there are steps that can be taken to intervene in between the bullying and suicide. There's not exactly a lot of time to persuade a bullet to not hit a child.

That is true.

Eliminate GUN FREE ZONES.

No one can guarantee than even then, he/she will be 100% safe.

.

Or use gun free zones as they were intended. Controlled locations with a secure (not just locked) perimeter, and armed responders onsite who take the mantle of protection in place of the people in the area who have willingly relequished thier right to self protection.

Just calling an area "gun free" and doing nothing to assure this, or respond if a gun is used in the area is the worst form of feel good rules that do nothing to protect anyone.

 

[RDD_1210]

So because they took thier own life due to being bullied, you are somehow OK with that?

Of course not, but there are steps that can be taken to intervene in between the bullying and suicide. There's not exactly a lot of time to persuade a bullet to not hit a child.

That is true.

Eliminate GUN FREE ZONES.

No one can guarantee than even then, he/she will be 100% safe.

.

Gun Free Zones do nothing.

 

[RDD_1210]

So because they took thier own life due to being bullied, you are somehow OK with that?

Of course not, but there are steps that can be taken to intervene in between the bullying and suicide. There's not exactly a lot of time to persuade a bullet to not hit a child.

In the case of Newtown, considering the cops took 10 MINUTES to respond, the attacker probably could have used your cherished musket unloaded as a club and kill just as many people. Should we limit people to nerf versions of all blunt objects?

Extremely Doubtful.