Can someone explain?

Gather App
Guns.com Vault
C

Capt.Jim

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
303
Reaction score
403
City & State/Province
California :(
What is the thought process behind the proposed magazine capacity limits?
Since when a gun with 12 round capacity mags became dangerous but 10 round capacity ones remained safe?

Who makes this decision and based on what?
Which method they use to determine the safest number of rounds in a magazine?
Science, dice roll ??

What they really expect to accomplish when magazine capacity is reduced from 12 to 10 ?
Less accidents, less murders?

Remember these people are creative.
They may say; "2A guarantees the ownership of a gun but doesn't say anything regarding ammunition!"

Then we can yell "bang bang" towards the criminals with an unloaded gun in our hands!

What you think?
 
I think they are more concerned with the 30 round mags. True, if you have only 10 round mags you are vulnerable when you change mags, but so is the bad guy. The guy that shot Giffords was only stopped when he tried to insert a new 30 round mag. I have no problem with 10 round mags, my Shield holds 8 + 1. I practice so that I have 3" groups at 50'. If I can't at least do that I should not carry a gun. When I am at the range I shoot 5 round groups, so that is what I load and 10 round mags are not a problem.
 
Having gone through the 10-round routine before, this has been an old discussion for us here, in New York, for many years.

As per the 'reasoning' behind the origional AWB, the bad-guys could be out-gunned by the "exempted" good-guys (LEO), who were not restricted by the limited-capacity magazines. After ten years of no such advantage found in this, or any other provision of the AWB, the law was allowed to "sunset" peacefully, and it died away quite nicely. Almost.

A few states, including my home (temporarily) state of New York, instituted their newer rendition of the federal AWB, which imposed the ten round limit indefinately. Along with several other provisions which are equally ineffective.

Fast-forward to 15 January, 2013. These ten-round magazine limits have still proven ineffective at reducing or deterring crime, so the fault is obviously due to the otrageously high capacity! Simple solution? Lower the allowable capacity even further; any autoloading pistol taken into possession after 15 April, 2013, may not have a magazine capacity which exceeds seven (7) rounds! If you have previously owned one of the "high capacity" magazines, designed to contain more than seven, and up to ten rounds of ammunition, you may retain possession of said magazine only if it is registered with the State Police. Oh, by the way... At no time may it be loaded with more than seven rounds of ammo, unless at a sanctioned event, at a registered shooting range, and you are a bonified competitor at said match. Those old (previously) "grandfathered" ASSAULT magazines, which may contain more than ten rounds? They must be sold out-of-state, destroyed, or surrendered for destruction by 14 January, 2014.

This is all for the good and safety of the People of New York, while protecting your Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms! Don't you all feel just great knowing that those who represent you are so concerned and benevolent?
 
Last edited:
gdauth said:
I think they are more concerned with the 30 round mags. True, if you have only 10 round mags you are vulnerable when you change mags, but so is the bad guy. The guy that shot Giffords was only stopped when he tried to insert a new 30 round mag. I have no problem with 10 round mags, my Shield holds 8 + 1. I practice so that I have 3" groups at 50'. If I can't at least do that I should not carry a gun. When I am at the range I shoot 5 round groups, so that is what I load and 10 round mags are not a problem.
Click to expand...

So if we go with your logic, if the 30 round capacity mag was banned she wasn't going to be shot at all.
Is that what you're saying?
He couldn't think to buy one from black market.

I don't understand why people keep thinking CRIMINALS will consider the laws and arm themselves ONLY with the guns and mags permitted by the law. Therefore banning stuff will stop criminals on their tracks.

Most interestingly why people naively think when something is banned it simply disappears from the face of earth and it will be impossible to access by the criminals.
Especially when a banned gun or mag in CA is perfectly OK and available at AZ.
 
Last edited:
Gun restriction proposals are generally written by and for people that learned everything they know about guns from watching TV crime dramas and action movies. It is dangerous for people to regulate things they know nothing about, other than they think they are bad.
 
Anyone remember Bill Ruger? Wasn't it he that said, "No one needs a magazine with more than 10 rounds." This is where the number 10 came from I believe.
 
gdauth said:
I think they are more concerned with the 30 round mags. True, if you have only 10 round mags you are vulnerable when you change mags, but so is the bad guy. The guy that shot Giffords was only stopped when he tried to insert a new 30 round mag. I have no problem with 10 round mags, my Shield holds 8 + 1. I practice so that I have 3" groups at 50'. If I can't at least do that I should not carry a gun. When I am at the range I shoot 5 round groups, so that is what I load and 10 round mags are not a problem.
Click to expand...
Glad to have you on our side. I see if it don't effect you, you could care less. What if they put a ban on semi auto pistols with barrels less than 3 1/2"? I don't own one and there is no reason to be sneaking around with a gun that small anyway. The guy who shot Giffords is a murderous animal that should not be wasting our air. Had the dirt bag been a good shot like yourself he could have done the same thing with a Shield. The anti gun folks want ALL our guns, don't try to fool yourself that you can compromise with them. We don't need to divide ourselves when our strength is in our numbers . Like it or not we our all in this together and make no compromises with our enemies.
 
USAF385 said:
Well I carry a 2 shot derringer so I don't care if they make a two round limit. :cool:
Click to expand...

What if they make it one round, or none in the chamber, just a Barney round in your pocket?

Please don't think your exempt because your favorite gun is currently not under attack......
 
Generally, a population is not subjugated until after it is disarmed.
And that's a fact.
 
Rastoff said:
Anyone remember Bill Ruger? Wasn't it he that said, "No one needs a magazine with more than 10 rounds." This is where the number 10 came from I believe.
Click to expand...

It was during an interview with Tom Brokaw. He said 'no honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun'. Many think it was his quote that gave the anti gunners the arbitrary 10 round limit.
 
Rastoff said:
It was much more than an off hand comment in an interview.

The Gun Zone RKBA -- William B. Ruger, Sr.'s dirty little secret

The question was asked about where the number 10 came from. This pretty much answers it directly.
Click to expand...

Thanks, it was a good read (the side bar was very interesting). It shows how the media and the anti-gunners have not changed there tactics one bit. They are despicable liars who will stop at nothing to disarm all of us, they dance in the blood of children, ridicule and lie about law abiding gun owners. They have not and will not change, we know there goal and their should be no compromise with them ever.
 
Capt.Jim said:
So if we go with your logic, if the 30 round capacity mag was banned she wasn't going to be shot at all.
Is that what you're saying?
He couldn't think to buy one from black market.

I don't understand why people keep thinking CRIMINALS will consider the laws and arm themselves ONLY with the guns and mags permitted by the law. Therefore banning stuff will stop criminals on their tracks.

Most interestingly why people naively think when something is banned it simply disappears from the face of earth and it will be impossible to access by the criminals.
Especially when a banned gun or mag in CA is perfectly OK and available at AZ.
Click to expand...
And somehow people don't realize the people who are planning mass shootings will simply bring extra 10 rounders to the event if that was all that available. For Joe CCW, he's not going to carry a bunch of extra mags just going to the store. So instead of 16 rounds he has 11; or if he carries an extra, instead of 31 he has 21. Who's getting punished? Nutbags has a pocket full of mags cause he knows he needs them.
 
Capt.Jim said:
What is the thought process behind the proposed magazine capacity limits?
Since when a gun with 12 round capacity mags became dangerous but 10 round capacity ones remained safe?

Who makes this decision and based on what?
Which method they use to determine the safest number of rounds in a magazine?
Science, dice roll ??

What they really expect to accomplish when magazine capacity is reduced from 12 to 10 ?
Less accidents, less murders?

Remember these people are creative.
They may say; "2A guarantees the ownership of a gun but doesn't say anything regarding ammunition!"

Then we can yell "bang bang" towards the criminals with an unloaded gun in our hands!

What you think?
Click to expand...

I try to keep it simple in my head, and just look at pictures for an explanation...

guncontrolexplained.jpg​
 
Magazine capacity, firearm(s) type nor anything else for that matter, has anything to do with it.

When these horrific tragedies happen...Those that seek power over all things large and small,
they enjoy chipping away at the American Way, at Lady Liberty....at Personal Liberties,
their attempts at under-mining of The Constitution and that of The Bill of Rights.

Some seek a 'New America'..........I'm standing up for the one we've got!


As the country crooner sang;

If you don't stand for something....You'll fall for anything!
 
gdauth said:
I think they are more concerned with the 30 round mags. True, if you have only 10 round mags you are vulnerable when you change mags, but so is the bad guy. The guy that shot Giffords was only stopped when he tried to insert a new 30 round mag. I have no problem with 10 round mags, my Shield holds 8 + 1. I practice so that I have 3" groups at 50'. If I can't at least do that I should not carry a gun. When I am at the range I shoot 5 round groups, so that is what I load and 10 round mags are not a problem.
Click to expand...

One of the kids from Columbine fired 96 rounds using a Hipoint carbine with thirteen 10rd mags. If memory serves, having to reload multiple magazines didn't slow him down any.

I'm not sure what the rational is with this. That most criminals don't have adequate training or practice to quickly change magazines, therefore slowing their flow of destruction? I'm sure that's the case in some instances, but not in most.

Supported by the fact that in most crimes involving guns, the criminal on average only uses 3.2-3.7 rounds.

I don't need to justify why I need a larger magazine. The burden of proof lies with anti-gunners to proof why they are so dangerous to society. They haven't done that. What hey have done is twisted and manipulated facts, statistics and opinions to push their agenda.

For the range guy above, I use STANDARD capacity magazines with all my guns. It can be argued that the original magazine for an AR-15 was 20 rounds but it's now 30. My S&W 9mm guns all hold 17, my shotguns hold 10. All from the factory. BUT if I choose to install a larger magazine, drum, belt feed upper, that's my right under 2A. ALL of these magazine and weapon bans are unconstitutional.

I use these guns for fun, practice, and competition, and if I have to, for anything else the 2A allows me to use them for if the need arises.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4Js
The reason they want to limit magazine capacity has nothing to do with reducing crime or gun violence. Only people like Piers Morgan believe that silliness. The mag limit is born out of a need to "do something".

We all heard the president after Sandy Hook. He went on national TV and said, "We must do something!" Well, limiting mag capacity is something.

It's a politicians trick to garner votes from the ignorant. Come election time, they'll say, "See, I voted for the mag limit and therefore I made your streets safer." Then the lemmings will believe it even though the actual crime went up in areas where the ban went into effect.
 
The goal is one little chip at a time. There would be a full nation wide riot and revolt even from most liberals and sheep if they played every card on the table and just said we are after every single gun made and they have to be turned in by tomorrow even if its just a single barrel 410 shotgun!
 
Rastoff said:
...Only people like Piers Morgan believe that silliness....
Click to expand...
One of our members pointed out the other day that it is about TV ratings. I think this is likely true. I think the guy would say anything at all just to jack viewership up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

target tech
Something different with a Smith and Wesson connection
Replies
2
Views
222
mtgianni
M
S
Update on anti-2A proposed legislation in Virginia
Replies
1
Views
446
Jaco1234
J
Onomea
  • Locked
Reduced: Sig P365 Fuse with Mods/Extras
Replies
2
Views
965
s&wchad
s&wchad
C
Citadel Boss 25 CA Compliant 12 gauge
Replies
0
Views
425
Cartwright Jones
C
Glenn R. McMannly
The Last Bolt Fighter
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Phenix
P

Latest posts

Back
Top