High Capacity Magazines

[RedNeck Jim]

I'm a newcomer to this forum & to the world of the MP15-22, but I am a convert. Love to shoot my Stag 2T but danged if that ammo is just too expensive to play around with. I love the AR platform but find, especially lately, that I spend a lot of time defending my "need" to have an AR.

First of all, why do I have to explain to anyone my "need"? Do they have to explain their need for fast cars, liquor, 200 pairs of shoes, expensive jewelry, etc.? However, all this discussion has made me think about this whole issue. Why do I love the AR platform? I can come up with lots of reasons. Most "outsiders" don't understand the importance & usefulness of the military standard specifications which allow us to swap out parts cheaply, in order to build our own custom gun to fit our specific "needs". Most have no clue the buffer in an AR keeps the gun from kicking you hard. They have no clue that even someone such as me, with little mechanical skills, can break down the gun to its smallest component parts... and actually put it back together again. I try to explain that having an AR is most similar to folks tinkering with cars in years past... back when parts were simple & everyone liked to customize their own car to fit their "needs".

However, I do personally have a much harder time discussing the "need" for extended capacity magazines... especially the ones much larger than 20 rounds. I use the 20 something sized magazines myself, but have no "need" for anything bigger. Actually, with my bipod attached, anything bigger than 10 rounds becomes a nuisance.

So my question is, how do you use your large capacity magazines? PLEASE, this is NOT a political discussion but per the rules of this forum, we can undertake to study & understand all things MP15-22. Do you use them just to limit magazine changes? Do you get a big thrill out of quickly dumping as many rounds downrange as fast as possible? Do you compete where they give you an advantage?

For some unexplained reason, I do enjoy emptying a full magazine into a pumpkin, as fast as I can pull the trigger. That is fun to me but then as I think about this whole debate, I wonder if that is sufficient "need". I could achieve most of the same satisfaction from using multiple 10 round magazines & actually that would be better training. So I am conflicted.

How do you use your extended capacity magazines? How about after a certain size they be treated as a class 3 weapon, where there is no ban but just increased control/restriction? PLEASE act as an adult & discuss without putting down anyone's opinion.

 

[Jyezahn]

Simple, they absolve me of the need to carry more loose ammo. They allow me to fire at my attacker(s) with the knowledge that they do not necessarily know when I will run out of bullets to greet them. They are standard capacity magazines, and just like my manhood, should not be subject to being shortened. Be they 30 rd, 10 rd, whatever, they will not help keep deranged killers from doing their ill-will. But the limit on capacity MAY keep me from keeping my family as safe as I normally could.

 

[telero]

How about after a certain size they be treated as a class 3 weapon, where there is no ban but just increased control/restriction?

Class 3 is a tax. Title II weapon is what you mean.

 

[Jyezahn]

Originally Posted by RedNeck Jim
How about after a certain size they be treated as a class 3 weapon, where there is no ban but just increased control/restriction?

How about, NO? Instead, increase penalties for criminals who use guns? Use a gun in a crime against the innocent, we send your *** to the Sun. That will have more impact on gun crime than any ban.

 

[Majorlk]

Originally Posted by RedNeck Jim
How about after a certain size they be treated as a class 3 weapon, where there is no ban but just increased control/restriction?

How about, NO? Instead, increase penalties for criminals who use guns? Use a gun in a crime against the innocent, we send your *** to the Sun. That will have more impact on gun crime than any ban.

Amen, brother. People who want to make such compromises are the anti-gunner's delight.

 

[Daniel Cox]

How do you use your extended capacity magazines?
I use them to target shoot and defend myself. If we have another Hurricane Katrina, a large earth quake, or riots like they had in LA I feel that a 10 round mag may give the upper hand to the Zombies coming to get my ****. I do not want to be limited on my magazine capacity. These are events that have happened in my lifetime and I saw all the looting and fighting that went on. The high capacity mags will give me the ability to defend me and my family from the Zombies. Everyone says you will never need it until you need it.

How about after a certain size they be treated as a class 3 weapon, where there is no ban but just increased control/restriction?
The government has enough control and they can not control that. Class 3 means a tax to me and then I can not afford to buy magazines anymore. Not for this one at all.

 

[RedNeck Jim]

Simple, they absolve me of the need to carry more loose ammo. They allow me to fire at my attacker(s) with the knowledge that they do not necessarily know when I will run out of bullets to greet them. They are standard capacity magazines, and just like my manhood, should not be subject to being shortened. Be they 30 rd, 10 rd, whatever, they will not help keep deranged killers from doing their ill-will. But the limit on capacity MAY keep me from keeping my family as safe as I normally could.

But even like your manhood, can't they get too big?

But seriously, I would think very large magazines would become unwieldy when used in close combat situations. Otherwise, how come our soldiers don't carry 50 or 100 round magazines at all times. I sure don't claim to know as I have no experience in such matters. Yes, I was in The Air Force but all they gave us missile officers was a 38 revolver. Guess they didn't think we needed M16s underground.

 

[Jyezahn]

But even like your manhood, can't they get too big?

But seriously, I would think very large magazines would become unwieldy when used in close combat situations. Otherwise, how come our soldiers don't carry 50 or 100 round magazines at all times. I sure don't claim to know as I have no experience in such matters. Yes, I was in The Air Force but all they gave us missile officers was a 38 revolver. Guess they didn't think we needed M16s underground.

If you're talking about straight-feed magazines, sure, longer can be more unwieldy. 30 rd mags are just right for CQB and light armament. Our military men and women who provide suppressing fire in a squad, either carry ammo belts for their belt-fed machine guns, or in the case of the M249 SAW, a 200rd magazine or belt.

In regard to your missile officer sidearm, I believe that was to ensure you and the other officer either followed orders, or didn't go off the deep end.

 

[RedNeck Jim]

Amen, brother. People who want to make such compromises are the anti-gunner's delight.

I personally have no problem with compromise & don't see it as an ugly option. I mean, our guns are already restricted, aren't they? Surely we don't want to live in a society without restrictions. Even free speech is restricted. We don't want crazy folks buying guns. do we? We don't want 12 years olds buying guns, do we?

I am awaiting my stamp for my 22Sparrow & have no problem with paying the tax & going thru enhanced background checks. Actually I find it odd I need to do so for something as simple as a suppressor yet can buy huge capacity magazines with no restriction whatsoever. What logic is that?

Still hope to hear how y'all use them. Having them to kill zombies does not help me make an argument.

 

[Jyezahn]

Actually I find it odd I need to do so for something as simple as a suppressor yet can buy huge capacity magazines with no restriction whatsoever. What logic is that?

Because the suppressor can be used for silent havoc. Standard capacity magazine restrictions will protect no one, but MAY endanger myself in a self-defense situation. So to me, it makes zero sense to have a restriction on them.

People willing to do mass harm to others, have nothing to lose. At least that's their mindset when they do it. Me, defending myself or my family, I have a lot to lose, so I want as much of an advantage as I can get. We all know the killer will have his own advantages.

 

[joenuclear]

My 25 round magazine is a "standard" capacity magazine. I consider my 32 round magazines "extended" capacity.

IMO the people who live in states where they have to use capacity restricted magazines have lost something valuable.

I don't believe in compromising on my gun rights and I do consider you a troll.

 

[nomobux]

You give Wa a inch and it will become a mile. The only thing the last ban did was make a lot of money for a lot of people. You could aquire any amount of any magazine and the only qualification was "how much do you want to spend". The same applied to the "evil black gun" as long as it was not one totally banned.

How about we deal with criminals and the ones that should not have firearms due to mental health probs, and not the general law abiding citizen.

 

[ballistictoyz]

this guy sounds like somebody gathering information on what we're willing to compromise-----NOTHING-NADDA--ZIP!

 

[RedNeck Jim]

Because the suppressor can be used for silent havoc. Standard capacity magazine restrictions will protect no one, but MAY endanger myself in a self-defense situation. So to me, it makes zero sense to have a restriction on them.

Makes sense. Thanks!

People willing to do mass harm to others, have nothing to lose. At least that's their mindset when they do it. Me, defending myself or my family, I have a lot to lose, so I want as much of an advantage as I can get. We all know the killer will have his own advantages.

I do agree but am curious at what point we have "enough" advantage. Once again, I claim absolutely no knowledge & only ask to be better informed & how best to respond to good folks that just don't understand what we do. The thread about taking someone shooting with you is pure genius.

However, this talk of maximum rounds available to kill hoards of attackers doesn't help me. I doubt too many of us would ever face such a situation. Seems to me even our military has learned that just throwing out masses of lead is not always the best choice. From what I've read, our heroes in uniform are being trained to take advantage of their superior optics to slow down & take aimed shots. I know from personal experience, when I'm shooting & know I've got lots of ammo in the magazine, I go kinda crazy & just pull the trigger as fast as possible & lose proper shooting discipline. Not the best for accuracy but it sure is fun!

 

[zload]

"Most have no clue the buffer in an AR keeps the gun from kicking you hard."

I smell a fish...

 

[Buckskinner]

As I tell my wife when she asks about a newly aquired gun and says "do you really need that?". I tell her "need is a funny word... Normally when on a bench or hunting with an AR I use a 20 round mag, and I do have a 5 rounder that came with my R-15, but it has never held ammo... All I have for the 15-22 are 25 rounders, but I will likely pick up a few short 10's when things settle down.

But do I "need" 25 and 30 round mags. Yes, just like I needed that second 15-22...

 

[richeyo2]

Originally Posted by RedNeck Jim
How about after a certain size they be treated as a class 3 weapon, where there is no ban but just increased control/restriction?

How about, NO? Instead, increase penalties for criminals who use guns? Use a gun in a crime against the innocent, we send your *** to the Sun. That will have more impact on gun crime than any ban.

+1 Agree....

Limiting magazine capacities will only keep the honest/normal person from getting them. You know the ones that are not going to anything wrong anyway. Criminals have & always will able to get their hands on whatever, it just takes $.

The same people wanting to limit mag cap are the same people who say the person that does wrong, kills somebody should get a fair trial & live on our dime the rest of his life...They give the BD rights & want to take ours! WTH, yeah that makes sense.

Also as far as class 3 to have one is BS IMO also, that just means a $250 stamp & that's still not going to affect BG, just law abiding citizens once again.

Oh yeah as far as your question as to what I do w/my mags, I shoot w/them. Range time less loading & also have for that just in case moment for SD.

I'm glad you'd be fine w/a limit but most of us would not. If they do that then what's next? It will never stop.

 

[RedNeck Jim]

this guy sounds like somebody gathering information on what we're willing to compromise-----NOTHING-NADDA--ZIP!

This "guy" is an American citizen who has proudly served in our military. I am a business owner that has paid taxes all my life & expects nothing from my government. I am a God fearing giver... not a taker. I have concerns that our government might fail to some extent in the future & that anarchy will be the result. That is why I arm myself & stock many thousands of rounds of ammo & why I live on 20 acres in the country & am "prepped" for the worst case situation.

This "guy" simply asked for info & feedback to be able to better communicate with non gun owners & be prepared to make my case. You know, there is nothing wrong with communication & compromise. If our founding fathers felt as you, that any compromise was not possible, you would now be paying for your guns with British pounds... assuming the queen would allow you to own one.

How come I knew I would receive such a response?

 

[Jyezahn]

I do agree but am curious at what point we have "enough" advantage. We're not asking for an increase in standard magazine capacity. Only that we be afforded the use of standard capacity magazines, which happen to be between 25-35 rds depending on what rifle you have. Same for handguns. Once again, I claim absolutely no knowledge & only ask to be better informed & how best to respond to good folks that just don't understand what we do. The thread about taking someone shooting with you is pure genius.

However, this talk of maximum rounds available to kill hoards of attackers doesn't help me. I doubt too many of us would ever face such a situation. Tell that to anyone who's had to defend their property in the aftermath of a natural disaster. Even without a natural disaster, government collapse, economic collapse, etc., multipl person on single person violence is easily a possibility Seems to me even our military has learned that just throwing out masses of lead is not always the best choice. Of course, spray 'n' pray isn't the best choice. I didn't say that. But if I'm in a situation that needs my rifle, I will want the most ammo that I can carry in order to give me the best chance of survival. From what I've read, our heroes in uniform are being trained to take advantage of their superior optics to slow down & take aimed shots.Yes, IF your opponent is a good distance away, that makes perfect sense. However, in a home invasion, or home perimeter defense, time is of the essence. I know from personal experience, when I'm shooting & know I've got lots of ammo in the magazine, I go kinda crazy & just pull the trigger as fast as possible & lose proper shooting discipline. Sure! I do too, but if my life or others depended on it, I also know how to aim small, miss small. Not the best for accuracy but it sure is fun!

Ammo capacity is like a condom, I'd rather have as many as I can if I need them, than need them and have too few.

 

[beemerphile]

I have not yet had to use my weapons to defend the security of a free state, but that is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment. Not plinking, or pumpkin spattering, or hunting. So while I have not yet had a "need" for a standard (aka "high by the banners) capacity magazine, I understand the "need" for it to remain available and unrestricted in case of future need.

Outlaw the crime and not the tool. When I lived in New York, a guy shot his girlfriend (with a .22) and threw her over a cliff. He got an extra five years for using a gun in a crime. He would have gotten off easier if he had tossed her alive over the several hundred foot tall cliff.