Isn't it ironic...

F

Freetacos

New member
that since states started instituting 10 round limit laws, people have simply opted for more lethal calibers such as .357 mags, .45s, and 10mm's. Imagine if they lowered the mag count even further; people would just be loading up 10 gauge shotguns standard.

It amazes me how gun illiterate the far left politicians are.
 
Not saying this isn't true...

...but have you any data to back up this assertion?

Springmom, in Texas with no mag limits and a nice .40 and .45.....
 
not scientific studies, but by judging what the local guys are carrying now compared to what they were carrying pre ban, there is a noticible difference.
 
I, also, wonder if it is simply an assumption that a big shift toward bigger calibers occurred. I can't say I know of statistical data that confirms this.

But I do agree that the "logic" and the "thinking" behind the idiotic anti-gun schemes that the anti-gunners come up with amounts to something pathetic and laughable.

They couldn't legislate their way out of a paper bag, but they blame the gun companies for reading the laws they wrote, seeing what they didn't ban, and then manufacturing that. (I refer to the so-called "post-ban" AR-15s and stuff, which dropped the prohibited features -- per the antis' law -- and continued to be produced.)

These are people either too dumb to see the forest through the trees, or they are just monumentally disingenuous. Did they also not realize that a magazine limit of 10 rounds would affect little or nothing, given that most gun crimes did not involve more than ten rounds fired, or that people might just as easily carry a third ten-rounder instead of two fifteen-rounders?

The far left politicians are either gun-illiterate, or they are gun-literate and just very cynical and disingenuous.

I lean toward believing the latter. There is little to no way they can possibly have not been exposed to clear explanations of why their anti-gun junk doesn't -- and can't -- work.


-azurefly
 
Actually I remember such a claim from the NRA or GOA or somesuch, supposedly backed up by stats. *shrug* I'm too lazy to go searching for it...
 
I agree with what you've said. I often think that my 1911 with ten round magazines gets the same capacity as my Glock, without having to have such a thick grip. In a "Free state", the Glock can take advantage of that wide grip and surpass the 1911 in capacity; but in CA the 1911 can hang right with it.

BTW, I don't use the 1911 (Kimber Team Match) for SD or HD. It's too nice of a gun to sit in an evidence locker!
 
The far left politicians are either gun-illiterate, or they are gun-literate and just very cynical and disingenuous.

I lean toward believing the latter. There is little to no way they can possibly have not been exposed to clear explanations of why their anti-gun junk doesn't -- and can't -- work.
Click to expand...

You're right Azurefly. It's all about scoring political points with people that don't know better.After all the pols are doing something!:rolleyes:

badbob
 
No documentation here either but I think he's right. I know more people now than ever, that have/carry larger caliber weapons.
Click to expand...

Well, ok....but my point is, larger caliber weapons may be becoming more popular for a whole host of reasons:

1) concealed carry is also on the rise, and people want the most potent round they can carry;

2) calibers are like miniskirts and bell-bottoms...they come and go in fashion. Right now, the big ones are "in". (Evidence the increase in .50 caliber handguns, which I've noticed in the gun cases of my local gunshops).

3) particular models also come and go in fashion, and right now, 1911's are popular, as is the new XD-45 and other polymer .45's. If you want an XD-45, well, you're shooting a large caliber weapon.

I just don't think you can make a case that this has to do with magazine restrictions. Especially here, where there is no such thing (thank God!!!!)

Springmom
 
With all do respect Springmom, if you are limited to 10 rounds, you might as well make each of those rounds count. In no way was this post meant to offend anyone who chooses to use a non .40/.45/magnum load etc..
 
you're preaching to the choir

Freetacos, my carry is a .45 Kimber Ultra Carry II and my BUG is a .38 special. My XD-40 is being reassigned to bedside gun for now. I have no problem AT ALL with carrying big calibers. I'm just saying that the mag limits in California have nothing to do with what the rest of us carry. ;)

Springmom, glad to live in Texas whenever mag limits come up...:D
 
I think in the end we're both saying the same thing here, from different points of view. That is, this sort of silliness (10 round max mags) has utterly no impact on the damage you can do. Heck, even with a .22, if you have 10 10-round mags in your pocket, that's still 100 rounds! And if you have a .45 with 10 round mags and you have 10 of THOSE mags, all they did was make you spend more money on mags to carry around the same number of rounds :rolleyes:

It's like the anti-gun folks just keep looking for the magic, um, bullet to take all the crime and violence away and since there isn't one, by golly, they'll just make one up. Makes about as much sense as requiring everyone who owns a gun to keep a goldfish ('cause maybe that will make them kinder and more sensitive and then they won't go kill people with them...the guns, not the goldfish...). :eek:

The older I get, the more human stupidity amazes me. You'd think it would wear off, but nope.
 
I think there's got to be some correlation between increased restriction and increased innovation...

Overnight, you can't buy normal capacity magazines for a Glock 17 (or in some areas, you can't even use your old ones, and have to buy new 10rd magazines). Why carry something so large now? I remember reading somewhere that the glock 26 was inspired by the idea of "If i can only have 10 rounds, im going to fit them into the smallest package possible".
Wasn't it also right around the AWB that we began to see guns like doublestack .45's that held 10rounds like the Kimber plastic 10's (even though they were capable of more)?

Make a law, and someone will find a loophole. Progress and invention are rarely made "for the good of humanity" and all that jazz. Most inventions were discovered by lazy people looking for an easier way of doing things, or smart people attempting to circumvent existing rules.
 
My choice of .45 had nothing to do with magazine limits (Canada has a Civvie ten round mag cap limit for semi automatic pistols). I really like the M1911s in .45ACP as they are accurate, safe, reliable and fast to bring into action. Besides, from my experience and that of a few guys I know, it isn't the bullet as much as where you put it. I just happen to be able to put the bullet from a .45 M1911 a lot better than any other pistol I have used.
 
I think vitamin G hit the nail on the head.

The CCW movement gained a lot of speed in the 90's after the AWB. That 10rd mag limit caused a lot of innovation in firearms manufacture. The G26/G27 platform, the various Kahrs, and I think the smaller Paraordnance weapons came out during this time.

Why would I want a G17 over a G26? Because it can hold 17 (i think) rounds. If I can only hold 10, then I want the smaller and lighter platform that I can carry with me discretely all day.

Why would I want a G30 over a G21? Because it's smaller and holds the same amount of rounds (10) as its bigger cousin. Easier to carry and conceal.

I also worry about lefty legislation regarding brass-stamping or mag limits on autoloaders. I don't know about you, but I don't want criminals suddenly choosing to use 357mag or 44mag revolvers. Right now they seem to favor lighter caliber autoloaders... I'd prefer to keep it that way. Not that I'm looking to get shot or anything, but I'd rather be hit with the cheapest 9mm available than the cheapest 357 or 44 available.
 
ok, gotcha

Put this way, I get what you're saying and that does make sense on its face. OTOH, there are lots of other reasons for wanting small, concealable guns. One of the other variables that's changed is the increasing number of women carrying concealed, and in general we tend to find mostly (how's that for qualifiers?) that smaller ones are easier for us to hide on our persons. Becuase of how we're built, hanging a full size semiauto in an OWB on our hips (or, for that matter, IWB) doesn't work very well. But my Kimber does a pretty good "disappearing act" in an IWB holster much better than my XD.

Don't mean to be devil's advocate, it's just that there's more than one thing that's been going on at that same time that could also account, at least in part, for the shift.

Springmom
 
Hmm, he did say the states that implemented 10 rnd limits huh? Not being in a mag limited state, I couldn't really say then. I think I had the AWB stuck in my head when I read that. I can't say that I'd agree with the innovation thing of smaller packages either. There is lots of new innovative pistols out for sure but most the people I know opted for the bigger pistols as did myself with the 5" 45. I did go 'hi cap' with 8 rounders but nothing came down the pike that was innovative enough and easier to shoot than a full size so I kept the bigger one.

I wish skirts & dresses would come back around in a bigger way. If bellbottoms came back in we could all go out and get ankle rigs for the mouse guns that are at high tide in the marketplace too, but then bellbottoms would become probable cause for being armed...:D
 
innovation or market-ability

What is the point of carrying a pistol designed (and sized) for 15,16,or 17 rounds (etc.) is the legal limit is ten? None, for most people. Compact autos in service calibers have been around a long time, but were never so popular as after the ten round limit.

The small butt on the compact pistols makes them more difficult to hold and shoot well, the trade off accepted as in the nature of the beast. This kind of pistol sold, but to a smaller market. Along comes the 10 round law, and what it really does is encourage smaller handguns.

Reducing the size of a service type auto doesn't qualify as innovation in my book. Good market sense yes, innovation? not really.

Of course, those of us who place our faith in the 1911 (and marksmanship) were never bothered by the 10 round restriction. For handguns that is. Rifles were a completely different story.

As to why larger calibers are more popular, well......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top