Debunking Magazine Capacity Limits. - Page 4
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Firearms in the Media > Debunking Magazine Capacity Limits.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-31-2013, 11:07 PM   #31
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
customammo72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Kansas
Posts: 193
Liked 49 Times on 34 Posts
Likes Given: 80

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHLChris View Post
I, for one, am not very fast with reloads, but that's because I have never trained for speed. Anybody in the planning phase for a mass shooting would absolutely take some time and thought to prepare for anything. Even a double-barrel shotgun and a bag of shells can be run pretty fast by someone who practices a lot.
Exactly, it doesn't matter what magazine limits are or whatever, it is just training. I am sure if you trained enough you could reload and shoot a single shot shotgun just as fast as a pump, just takes practice
__________________
customammo72 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 02:05 PM   #32
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ClemsonSCJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 137
Liked 64 Times on 40 Posts

Default

Just be careful how you argue with gun grabbers about these issues by saying that the firearms or accessories they want banned are "no more dangerous" than other firearms or accessories that they accept. Their mind doesn't process it as "an AR-15 is no more deadly than a hunting rifle" (just an example), their kind processes it as "a hunting rifle is just as deadly as an AR-15". Therefore they then think that all guns should be banned rather than being convinced that all guns should be allowed.

__________________
ClemsonSCJ is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 05:56 PM   #33
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: North of Seattle
Posts: 37
Liked 9 Times on 6 Posts
Likes Given: 11

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemsonSCJ View Post
I don't care anything about guards or more LEO in schools. I want to be able to carry MY gun at school. Students, not just teachers.

And how many rounds you NEED in a mag or how many rounds are too dangerous is irrelevant. Limiting mag capacities is just another way the gov't is wiping their ass with the Constitution.
College sure... Highschool no... of course not only adults should have that right.

Problem with letting just anyone carry onto a k-12 school even adults and parents.. is

A) Knowing Intent could the unknown vistor end up shot etc?
B) Training for use around kids very different environment that where most people are used to using firearms.. especially in a crisis.

In WA there is no Training for a CCP.. The school's are Gun Free even for CCP holders.. Would it be smart for me if it were legal to walk on a elementry school armed.. no... would it be good to have one or more people there to trained protect the kids YES...


As we all know .. the gun is not the problem its the person using it..
That's why I would love to see the NRA plan for a fast effective BG check system.. I personally think that like the WA Arms Collectors does voluntarily that sales should only be to people with a BG check. Because it is a business event that brings strangers to tables to buy guns. The Show Owner should be providing the service so you know you are not selling your gun to the wrong person.

If you want to sell your gun to someone you trust to come over to your home or visit them in theirs etc. fine.. and that right is clearly under attack right now..

The #1 thing that can be done to help make things safer, is enforce laws we have.. We don't punish the crimnals with what we have.. ... we just make life harder for those who will follow the laws
__________________

Ken -- Washington the State --
Newer gun owner = Sig Mosquito

Ken_inWA is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 08:38 PM   #34
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ClemsonSCJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 137
Liked 64 Times on 40 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_inWA View Post
College sure... Highschool no... of course not only adults should have that right.

Problem with letting just anyone carry onto a k-12 school even adults and parents.. is

A) Knowing Intent could the unknown vistor end up shot etc?
B) Training for use around kids very different environment that where most people are used to using firearms.. especially in a crisis.

In WA there is no Training for a CCP.. The school's are Gun Free even for CCP holders.. Would it be smart for me if it were legal to walk on a elementry school armed.. no... would it be good to have one or more people there to trained protect the kids YES...


As we all know .. the gun is not the problem its the person using it..
That's why I would love to see the NRA plan for a fast effective BG check system.. I personally think that like the WA Arms Collectors does voluntarily that sales should only be to people with a BG check. Because it is a business event that brings strangers to tables to buy guns. The Show Owner should be providing the service so you know you are not selling your gun to the wrong person.

If you want to sell your gun to someone you trust to come over to your home or visit them in theirs etc. fine.. and that right is clearly under attack right now..

The #1 thing that can be done to help make things safer, is enforce laws we have.. We don't punish the crimnals with what we have.. ... we just make life harder for those who will follow the laws
Ok a few issues I have here...
So a person's life, child or not, is more important than a person's life (in this case children) inside a school? What's the difference in finding myself in a situation where I have to use deadly force in a mall over a school? I have just as much opportunity to accidentally harm someone else due to my lack of training. So if that is your logic then carrying a firearm should be illegal period. What you're saying is that if someone accidentally gets shot outside of a school, that's ok, but if it happens inside a school then that's when it becomes tragic.

It's like I have argued with my representatives here in SC many times...I jumped through all the unconstitutional hoops that the state of SC requires to be allowed to take advantage of my 2nd amendment right (define irony...asking permission to be able to take advantage of a right). So if they now think I am qualified to carry a gun out into public, what is it about the imaginary line of a school campus that all of the sudden strips me of my responsibility and competency that my concealed weapons permit was supposed to give me?

There have been numerous tests done to study the effectiveness of armed students during a school shooting. They found that in MOST cases the students were unable to even get to their gun before being shot, and very few were able to neutralize the situation before being shot due to such high adrenaline. There were two problems I had with the conclusion of these tests:
1) They only covered the scenario of an armed student IN the room with the shooter. An armed student in the next classroom over or down the hall would at the very least be able to protect the classroom that they are in, and possibly be able to neutralize the shooter given that they aren't directly confronted with them and therefore wouldn't suffer from a paralyzing state of shock.
2) They didn't elaborate on the data that showed that in NONE of the cases did a student get struck with "friendly fire". So to me, this would only argue FOR having guns in schools. Because if the chances of neutralizing the shooter are only increased by very very little and had no negative effects, at least that is better than GUARANTEEING absolutely no chance.

Now as far as background checks go, I'm not sure how things are run where you live, but any and every gun show I have ever attended absolutely requires background checks for every purchase. It is no different than going to an FFL dealer. So I'm not sure where these politicians are getting this "gun show loophole" that they keep referring to.
__________________

Last edited by ClemsonSCJ; 04-01-2013 at 08:44 PM.
ClemsonSCJ is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 08:48 PM   #35
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ClemsonSCJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 137
Liked 64 Times on 40 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_inWA View Post
College sure... Highschool no... of course not only adults should have that right.
And just to clarify, I didn't mean let any and everybody be able to carry such as high school students. When I say let students carry, I mean let students who already have that right outside of school be able to carry inside of school.
__________________
ClemsonSCJ is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 09:06 PM   #36
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Rocky7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Red Deer,Alberta
Posts: 1,409
Liked 1396 Times on 730 Posts
Likes Given: 1932

Default

Excellent video. It reveals another gun control law as irrational.

__________________

C.S.S.A.; N.F.A.; N.R.A. Life Member
Make the world a better place; have your liberal spayed or neutered.

Rocky7 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 10:00 PM   #37
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Great North Woods
Posts: 2,565
Liked 2050 Times on 1072 Posts
Likes Given: 392

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemsonSCJ View Post
Just be careful how you argue with gun grabbers about these issues by saying that the firearms or accessories they want banned are "no more dangerous" than other firearms or accessories that they accept. Their mind doesn't process it as "an AR-15 is no more deadly than a hunting rifle" (just an example), their kind processes it as "a hunting rifle is just as deadly as an AR-15". Therefore they then think that all guns should be banned rather than being convinced that all guns should be allowed.
I don't argue with gun grabbers. Complete waste of time - time that I COULD be using shooting my gun at the range.......
__________________
chloeshooter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 10:10 PM   #38
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: North of Seattle
Posts: 37
Liked 9 Times on 6 Posts
Likes Given: 11

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemsonSCJ View Post
Ok a few issues I have here...
So a person's life, child or not, is more important than a person's life (in this case children) inside a school? What's the difference in finding myself in a situation where I have to use deadly force in a mall over a school? I have just as much opportunity to accidentally harm someone else due to my lack of training. So if that is your logic then carrying a firearm should be illegal period. What you're saying is that if someone accidentally gets shot outside of a school, that's ok, but if it happens inside a school then that's when it becomes tragic.

It's like I have argued with my representatives here in SC many times...I jumped through all the unconstitutional hoops that the state of SC requires to be allowed to take advantage of my 2nd amendment right (define irony...asking permission to be able to take advantage of a right). So if they now think I am qualified to carry a gun out into public, what is it about the imaginary line of a school campus that all of the sudden strips me of my responsibility and competency that my concealed weapons permit was supposed to give me?

There have been numerous tests done to study the effectiveness of armed students during a school shooting. They found that in MOST cases the students were unable to even get to their gun before being shot, and very few were able to neutralize the situation before being shot due to such high adrenaline. There were two problems I had with the conclusion of these tests:
1) They only covered the scenario of an armed student IN the room with the shooter. An armed student in the next classroom over or down the hall would at the very least be able to protect the classroom that they are in, and possibly be able to neutralize the shooter given that they aren't directly confronted with them and therefore wouldn't suffer from a paralyzing state of shock.
2) They didn't elaborate on the data that showed that in NONE of the cases did a student get struck with "friendly fire". So to me, this would only argue FOR having guns in schools. Because if the chances of neutralizing the shooter are only increased by very very little and had no negative effects, at least that is better than GUARANTEEING absolutely no chance.

Now as far as background checks go, I'm not sure how things are run where you live, but any and every gun show I have ever attended absolutely requires background checks for every purchase. It is no different than going to an FFL dealer. So I'm not sure where these politicians are getting this "gun show loophole" that they keep referring to.
interesting Points...
What's the difference.
School.. Soft Target pretty much mandatory attendance and with set outs, many potential victims not even close to being experienced enough to even get out of the way.. seems to attract loons more..
Mall Private Property probably has armed guards like banks etc. already do. Has right of owner to define what they allow.

My best friend and unofficial gun consultant lives in SC .. Would think it would have looser gun laws than than Left Coast WA.. but I know SC has training requirements for CCP WA does not.

I had mine in 7 days from finger-printing to coming in the mail. It took about 2 hours to buy the gun at Cabela's with paper work and they also do an on-sight BG check.. the CCP just lets me get the gun same day.. vs waiting 3-4 weeks for a longer check that is required here. Depending on the back up..

I had the license to walk around with a loaded gun in my jacket.. with no training... I am pretty pro 2nd Amendment and thats a bit "scary to me" because background checks don't check of "clueless and stupid" so if they had told me get a class first.. I would not have felt infringed on.
In WA someone can open carry in lots of places with NO licenses at all.

But in many places based on my reading the Gun shows are like swap meets where private non-commercial sellers can sell a few guns as private citizens with much less or no paper work. I think the rules again are by state.. because the Federal laws don't cover that. Even -in WA we had a local show advertise "no background checks" as a way to compete with the larger show.

The "loophole" as stated is that you go to a gun-shop you do the paper work.. you go to the Gun Show.. which is a "mall" of guns.. sometimes you don't depending on the rules.... Again its a business model the show owners make money on, I think they should provide the system for BG checks. ..

BG checks if done right are about the people which is always the problem.. not the guns.. which are tools.
__________________

Ken -- Washington the State --
Newer gun owner = Sig Mosquito

Ken_inWA is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 10:57 PM   #39
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ClemsonSCJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 137
Liked 64 Times on 40 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_inWA
interesting Points...
What's the difference.
School.. Soft Target pretty much mandatory attendance and with set outs, many potential victims not even close to being experienced enough to even get out of the way.. seems to attract loons more..
Mall Private Property probably has armed guards like banks etc. already do. Has right of owner to define what they allow.
So you're saying life is more valuable in one over the other? And what does "experienced enough to get out of the way" mean? Most any age child, as long as they can walk, will run like hell when they get scared. That's basic animal instinct, nothing to do with experience. And the problem with the laws the way they are, the only people getting guns into schools right now are the ones bent on killing tons of people. All we're doing is stripping everyone else of their right to self defense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_inWA
I had the license to walk around with a loaded gun in my jacket.. with no training... I am pretty pro 2nd Amendment and thats a bit "scary to me" because background checks don't check of "clueless and stupid" so if they had told me get a class first.. I would not have felt infringed on.
In WA someone can open carry in lots of places with NO licenses at all.
Webster Dictionary definition of "infringe: any act that limits or undermines (something)". So how you would have felt had they required you to take a class is irrelevant. Requiring people to take a class before allowing them to carry a gun is limiting their ability to do so. Check out the 2nd amendment and let me know if you see anything about permits or classes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_inWA
BG checks if done right are about the people which is always the problem.. not the guns.. which are tools.
Now this is where you are VERY greatly mistaken. Background checks are about keeping tabs on the guns and creating a registry. The government could care less what other purposes they serve.
__________________
ClemsonSCJ is offline  
motorheadwayne Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 11:15 PM   #40
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
customammo72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Kansas
Posts: 193
Liked 49 Times on 34 Posts
Likes Given: 80

Default

Here is my issue with these universal background checks, I do agree that it is just a way to keep tabs on guns and the owners, not so much prevent them from getting into the hands of the wrong people but here is my big issue with what they are wanting. Mental health records to be a part of the BG checks.... now this is why, I have been diagnosed with severe PTSD from a lot of things I went thru in foreign countries in combat, I am currently an LEO and carry all the time, own plenty of guns, love to shoot, love to gunsmith, build guns, reload ammo, etc..... I am afraid that it would prevent someone like me from being able to buy guns. All they would see is "Severe PTSD" on my record and deny me and then ban me from ever owning or buying guns but never take into account that I am still sane, never used a gun unlawfully and would never go into a school or such and start shooting people for no reason..... I don't think they would even care to check into it any more than just seeing the diagnoses and saying "NO"......... Now if you have ever snapped and been involuntarily committed then that is a whole different story, then the BG check would be a good thing.

__________________
customammo72 is offline  
motorheadwayne Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Simple Explanation of Magazine Capacity Limits CA357 Legal and Activism 10 02-14-2013 02:23 AM
Are there magazine limits in MN? getem2011 Minnesota Gun Forum 2 01-21-2013 10:19 PM
What exactly is a Hi capacity magazine? gunnut07 The Club House 21 08-10-2012 10:18 PM
Ohio Laws? Magazine round limits? ineedagoodername Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection 8 11-30-2011 11:10 AM
Magazine Ammo Limits canebrake Legal and Activism 45 02-26-2011 03:19 AM