High capacity magazines

Troll

No troll attempt was intended. But I think that we need to have thought through our attitudes and arguments in favor of hi-cap magazines specifically BECAUSE of what happened in Colorado. There is going to be an outcry against them so it is in our interest to have begun to think about our response.
Remember when you were a Boy Scout that the motto was Be Prepared?
I was writing as a Devil's Advocate, not as a troller.
I do in fact have several hi-cap mags myself. My real problem with them is more feed failures than capacity.
I apologize to any I have offended.
 
Only a handful of my guns take removable magazines, but their capacity's range in my set of guns from 2+1 with my Marlin Goose Gun, 10+1 with a Remington 597, 15+1 with my Baby Eagle, and I have 30+1 and a 75+1 drum for my AK pistol.
I understand that we for the most part only need single shots, and I do own a few, but I also understand what alot of bullets can do. And regardless, last time I checked I don't have to explain myself to somebody. I do many many things and have no detailed reasoning why I do such things. I have obsessions with many things and owning them, no need to explain myself. Just because someone believes everyone never needs anything more than a 1911 doesn't mean they are right. And they have the right and freedom to that, as do I with my beliefs.
 
I do in fact have several hi-cap mags myself. My real problem with them is more feed failures than capacity.
I apologize to any I have offended.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you consider a "high capacity" magazine. The Glock 17's 17 round magazine holds a lot more than your 1911 but is basically considered the pinnacle of reliability when it comes to handguns.

Now admittedly there are a lot of ultra-cheap gimmicky AR15 and 10/22 drums and such out there ('course there are some quality ones too), but in modern times 15-20 rounds has basically become "standard" capacity when it comes to handguns, and guns that carry that many certainly don't exhibit any undue reliability issues.

In particular I think that's why the anti's focus on banning anything over 10 rounds raises so many eyebrows. They got it once back in 1994 and they want that same 10-round limit again, but back in 1994 when revolvers and 1911's were more commonplace 10 rounds sounded more reasonable. Fast forward to today and the insistence that anything over 10 is excessive is laughable. It'd be as if they proposed that all cars be chipped to not drive over the "excessive" speed of 25 mph.

In a way I'm kinda glad they keep shooting for that though. Honestly we'd have a lot harder time fighting a cap on capacity to something like 20 rounds.
 
July 29, 2012, 10:52 PM #13
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member


Join Date: June 13, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 5,115 Quote:
Originally Posted by randersonabq
I cannot see the need to have high capacity magazines. My USGI 1911A1, for example, holds seven rounds. If I am a capable marksman why would I need more than that? I have seen ads for a 100 round magazine for the Ruger 10/22- why?

A capable marksman? The officer in this story was a veteran SWAT trained officer. He fired 36 of the 40 rounds he was carrying, achieving 14 hits, only 5 of which had the possibility of stopping the fight. All of this to stop just ONE assailant. If you find this guy in your living room at 2am - how many rounds do you want?

So what can we learn from this as it relates to "high" capacity debate?

1. Marksmanship - this officer was a veteran officer and SWAT trained. He averaged almost 50% hits in the adrenaline charged moment of saving his life. That places him far above the average LAPD/NYPD officer who averages only 28-33% hit rate in shootings. If you shoot as well as this officer, you may land 3 hits out of your entire magazine. If you shoot as well as the average police officer, you may land only two hits.

2. A gun, especially a pistol, is not a death ray. It isn't unusual for someone to be shot, even multiple times, and still continue to function. In this case, out of 14 hits, only 5 could have caused a physiological stop and 2 of those 5 would have allowed the assailant enough time to possibly kill the officer. So roughly 1/3 of the hits made were effective. If you get that lucky, you'll need 3 hits to get one hit that may force your attacker to stop 12-15 seconds later.

3. The majority of criminal assaults involve more than one attacker. JohnKSa has done a nice probability analysis that shows a 10rd magazine gives you about a 50% chance of winning a gunfight with two attackers.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=495800

Of course, none of that is relevant to Aurora. Giving that person 10 ten round magazines is just as much of a problem as him having a 100rd magazine, probably more since the 10rd mag is actually reliable. Not to mention the entire idea that law-abiding citizens should be treated as potential lunatics. There is no safe amount of ammo you can give to a mass murderer. There is no safe magazine for a murderer.

And lets face it, from a practical perspective, you couldn't get rid of them if you wanted to. Detachable magazines with more than 10 rounds date back to the early 1900s. There are probably hundreds of millions of untraceable "high capacity" magazines out there.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by Bartholomew Roberts; July 29, 2012 at 11:21 PM.
Click to expand...

This was a great post in a thread that had many other great replies.

Personally speaking, I debate this with one of my brothers all the time. He's a wheel gunner. I'm a double stack semi afficionado.

I remember back in the day when I was in police work, from 1981 until 1985, we were mandated to carry any .357 mag as long as we qualified with it. I started with a S&W 19, then got a S&W 66 and then a Ruger GP100.

And then, after BEGGING our chief, writing reports on other departments that switched to semis and taking him out for testing, he finally gave the ok for us to switch to semis in 1985 IF we wanted to. All but the 3 oldest members of our department switched. A few years later, semis were mandatory. The 3 revolver men were "intimidated", to say the least, with the semis.

THE primary reason I loved them was simple.....available firepower. Not the spray and pray type of firepower. The firepower needed for a Platt and Matix type encounter.

Yes, the odds are SLIM that you'll need that in LE, however, nobody can PROVE you won't need that kind of ammo at some point.

I got so used to carrying that type of pistol that even when I retired in early 2011, they're still my 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice for a carry or home defense pistol.

A quick note on civilians and high capacity. I'm just an regular retired guy, no longer an officer. But I have found out that I've either become so comfortable with carrying the high capacity 40's and 45's that when I carry a slim stack, I just don't feel like I'm "ready". I know that's not the right way to put it, but it's honestly how I feel.

And last but not least, the old stand by....."It's better to have the extra ammo and not need it than to need it and not have it."
 
"In Arizona, that Jared creep was stopped because his high-capacity Glock magazine caused a failure. In Colorado, police found the front of the theater littered with unused .223 rounds, and noticed that the drum mag had failed, causing the shooter to cycle through several rounds in an attempt to get it going again."


Maybe the law should REQUIRE aftermarket extended mags and "rely on their unreliability" as a safety feature...

:rolleyes:


Willie

.
 
What 44AMP wrote should be printed as an appendix to the BOR; We should not have to justify NEED to exercise a right. I don't need Free Speech because I seldom exercise it, but it is nice to know that it is my right if I want to use it. And I'm darned tired of the Nanny State, particularly of it's President Bloomberg and his mouth.

I don't NEED hi-caps to shoot, but they sure make it more enjoyable because I hate to waste time reloading magazines at the range. Nothing irks me more than, say, a 22 rifle with a 5 round magazine...takes about 2 seconds to go through it. The 10/22 10 round mags are bad enough. If limited to 10 rounds I'm going to buy a whole lot of mags for range time.
 
I live in an area prone to hurricanes. We saw what happened to the business owners of New Orleans during a natural disaster. Is a 7-round handgun going to help me defend my property and family against a crazed mob? No. I have a right to have and use enough firepower to resist a crazed mob trying to destroy me, my family and my property during such an event.

There are many areas in this country that are prone to hurricanes, horrific tornadoes, blizzards, floods, tsunamis, earth quakes, and other natural disasters. With "global warming" the occurrence of these things will be happening with far more frequency....(so we are told by those who don't want us to have guns). Over 20% of this nation are unemployed. The FBI has many terrorist groups inside our nation on their "watch list" - I'm sure even the Southern Poverty Law Center will agree with this.

Do you think we should all become victims to those who would take advantage of any natural disaster, killing, butchering, rioting and stealing just to get "free stuff"? Where were the police in New Orleans? The police chief lied - they didn't exist and couldn't protect anyone from anything!
 
I think it breaks into several parts. Lets start with who needs what?

How do you shoot a 10-round group with a 7-shot magazine?

If I go squirrel hunting on a camping trip in the woods for several days (which I’ve done) a single 25 round magazine is easier than 2 10-rounders & a reload in deep leaf litter.

I shoot in steel plate matches where there are several plates at 100, 200, 300, 400,500, & 600 Yds. The object of the match is to drop them all faster than the other shooter. Trust me on this you’ll want more than 7 rounds for that kind of shooting, I frequently use 5 X 20 round ones, if they weren’t so long I’d be using 30’s!

Using dueling post targets the match lasts longer with bigger magazine capacities.

I’d say there’s a need there. Maybe you don’t feel a need but others who do different things might & it not just about your needs.

Next I’d ask why is the need even relevant?
I know of no reason why a need is mandatory; sometimes a want is what is the driving force is made up of. The fun of making a foam ball target bounce about for 25 rounds is more entertaining than having to stop after 5, that’s reason enough for me, I don’t NEED to do it, but I do enjoy doing it.
:)
 
randersonabq: said:
I cannot see the need to have high capacity magazines. My USGI 1911A1, for example, holds seven rounds. If I am a capable marksman why would I need more than that? I have seen ads for a 100 round magazine for the Ruger 10/22- why?
(I know that this is an emotional issue but I would like to hear calm, reasonable responses about this issue.)
Click to expand...

Just because you see no need for "high capacity" magazines does not mean that none exists.

You are arguing from an unsupported conclusion (I cannot see the need to have high capacity magazines.), an unsound basis at best and any conclusions based upon it (If I am a capable marksman why would I need more than that?) will be equally faulty.

Your question, "If I am a capable marksman why would I need more than that?" suggests on its face, that you have an incomplete understanding of what can go wrong during a gunfight; the innumerable, darned near infinite variables that can arise, and the fact that although you may be a really great marksman, your abilities will be lessened under the life-threatening stress of such an event in spite of how good you are on a static non-threatening range.

Your statement also suggests that you haven't thought of encounters that will involve more than one assailant or that each one may require multiple shots to incapacitate them. If you truly believe that you can handle all of these contingencies and all of those unanticipated variables with just one magazine filled with 7 rounds of .45 ammo, you are either extremely gifted or fooling no one but yourself- you'll need to decide for yourself, which that is.
 
I've had to deal with the "why isn't this a reasonable limitation" argument on occasion. The best of those conversations typically goes something like this:

Me: Would you say that is a reasonable limitation to apply to the police?
They: Of course not! They have to deal with bad guys on the street!
Me: Exactly...

Might not be the perfect approach, but it's one that at least gets some people thinking...
 
One real problem not addressed is the concept that many have that since they do not see a need for something or other, that same something or other ought to be prohibited or restricted. And their justification for this position is always the same, someone may (or has) done something bad with the something or other.

It doesn't seem to matter much specifically what it is, people who don't see a "need" (or have a personal use) for the thing are quite happy to agree on laws restricting it. As long as its not their personal ox being gored, they don't care. In fact, lots of them will actively work at getting what they don't "need" restricted.

Coffee drinkers are often fine with a sin tax on soda (which they don't drink), but if you want that same tax to be applied to coffee, whoa! slow down there fellah, can't do that....

It wouldn't bother me if there was a $200 tax on golf clubs. I mean, after all, why do you need a whole bagful of clubs, anyway? One can take that line of reasoning a long way, false though it is.

I don't have a need for a baby stroller, or an SUV, but I wouldn't even begin to think of telling anyone they shouldn't be able to buy one.

Recent shootings with hi-cap mags are bad, but then all murders are bad. Dahmer, Gacy, and Bundy, etc.. killed dozens + and never used a gun at all.

A handful of fanatics killed over 2,000 people one September day, and didn't use a single gun or extended capacity magazine to do it.....

People who spend their time and energy trying to restrict/ban spring loaded metal or plastic boxes don't have their priorities straight.
 
Been some good comments. I agree with the main gist of want, not need.

Saw this commentary on PBD's blog. He makes some good points. Heads up for languge if you go to the blog.

Quoted from PBD's blog,

".....The free exercise of my rights is not contingent on the approval of some parasite government bureaucrat or their pathetic fan club. My right to free speech is not confined to what is considered inoffensive or sensible. I explicitly lay claim to be as offensive as possible without causing provable harm to another. Similarly, the protections offered by the 2nd Amendment to my natural right to keep and bear arms is not limited by “reasonableness” or the comfort level of my neighbors. The words “shall not be infringed” seem completely unambiguous to me, and the use of “militia” in the preamble indicates that anything that is available to light infantry should be available to citizens."


The page in it's entirety,

http://www.papadeltabravo.com/blog/?p=1397
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well I agree completely with the original poster. There's no need for anyone to have a magazine with more than 17 rounds. I chose that number because I have a pistol that comes with 17 round mags, and what's right for me must be right for everyone else.

:)
 
I was done postinG nere then I went to wally-world, & had an epihany, so I proudly present, (a little tongue in cheek).

The top ten ultimate A#1 reason for having a high capacity magazine:confused:

*drum roll, please*

Because watermellons come in gaylords!
 
Pandoras Box

when it comes to Hi-Cap mags , well Pandoras box has been opened.
There are Millions of Hi-Cap mags in the world and they will not be disappearing any time soon.
My Advice: Read the serenity prayer.

There are several Pandoras boxes which have been opened by man,
1. creation of Nuclear weapons
2. Making steel - guns, knives, pots , pans, bicycles.....
3. Etc.....

To me the real issue with all these Rampage killings is to identify
the mental health issues of these broken people and get them proper medical
treatment for their psychotic, paranoid, delusions.
 
Here is a good link on this topic. JohnKSa's "Capacity, Hit Rate and Multiple Assailants" thread. If you shoot as well as a typical big city police officer in LA or NYC and manage a 30% hit rate, and you face the typical scenario (2 assailants), a 10 round magazine gives you a 35% chance of being able to land 2 hits on each attacker.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=494257

When you start thinking about how likely it is you get effective hits, you start getting an appreciation for just how much of a handicap people who suggest magazine capacity limitations are really pushing. And worth noting, just a measly 2 extra rounds (12rd magazine) brings you from a 1/3 chance to an even 50% chance of getting 2 hits on each attacker.
 
I don't have any high capacity magazines. I have full capacity or regular capacity.

The problem with a "high capacity" mag ban is not so much that I need all 15 rounds in my Beretta. My problem with a ban would be that:

1. It doesn't solve anything. Do the anti-gunners really feel safer letting homicidal nutcases run loose as long as they can only shoot 10 people at a time before reloading?

2. This useless law would put law abiding people at risk. I flew to CA not long ago. I had to read up on all the laws to ensure I was in compliance before I went there. I'm sure there are people in my position who haven't spent a half hour online and were arrested for felonies that would be perfectly normal, legal activities in their home states. Depending on the details of another federal ban, people could end up going to prison for pulling their old gun out of the safe, and selling it or carrying it, not realizing a new law has passed since they bought or inherited it.

3. There are better ways to deal with the problem, if there is one. Loughner, Hasan, Page, Holmes, Cho, etc. all exhibited warning signs before the shooting. Isn't it better to go to the root cause and get these people help than to strip the rights of a whole bunch of gun owners?

4. Is there even a problem to begin with? Violent crime is down despite the sensationalistic news reports of mass shootings. There are more effective things we could work on if we want to reduce murder rates.
 
I have used 50 round magazines for the 10/22, and they work great when you are hunting gophers at close and long ranges. It could also be a lifesaver for HD if necessary (would not be my first choice).

Most of the bad element are either cowards or smart - which means they do not come calling solo. A person may need a hi-cap mag for personal protection against the ring leader and their multiple pawns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top