• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Magazine limits

Do magazine limits reduce gun violence?

  • Yes to mass shootings, no to general gun crime

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No to mass shootings, yes to general gun crime

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Yes to both

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No to both

    Votes: 34 100.0%
  • Total voters
    34
Phys251 said:
You're making the same mistake that I see most anti-gun-controllers make, and that is to assume that I am considering gun control at the point of purchase.

You can't purchase what's not available for sale legally or illegally.
Click to expand...

How would contraband not be for sale illegally?
 
TurtleDude said:
there are millions upon millions of magazines in the USA. soldiers and cops will always have easy access to them. Soldiers "lose" thousands of them a year. tell me how you are going to stop the illegal supply of items that have no serial numbers and are easily smuggled.
Click to expand...

Are we talking about smuggling from an army base or from a battlefield?

what exactly are you considering? did you even vote in your poll?
Click to expand...

What do you think? Why haven't I voted in my own poll yet? Could it be that I'm simply curious about this matter and want to learn a bit about it?
 
Phys251 said:
Are we talking about smuggling from an army base or from a battlefield?



What do you think? Why haven't I voted in my own poll yet? Could it be that I'm simply curious about this matter and want to learn a bit about it?
Click to expand...


any place soldiers are.
 
Phys251 said:
You're making the same mistake that I see most anti-gun-controllers make, and that is to assume that I am considering gun control at the point of purchase.

You can't purchase what's not available for sale legally or illegally.
Click to expand...

So you're plan is to wave a magic wand and make all the guns and accessories disappear from the whole world? That's a great idea but, frankly, just a tad unrealistic.
 
Phys251 said:
Are we talking about smuggling from an army base or from a battlefield?
Click to expand...

Really? Believe me when I tell you that if there is a demand for a banned product there will be a manufacturer for that product and a distribution network to get it to the people who want it. That has ALWAYS been the case and always will be the case.
 
Phys251 said:
Again, that seems to be the "arms race" argument in favor of mag limits. Hell, one could just duct tape two mags together.
Click to expand...

No, I'm actually calling it pointless. While it's not the easiest thing to make your own magazines, it's still very doable. In fact, if you look around the internet even a little bit you will find a good amount of people telling people how to do it.
 
Lutherf said:
Really? Believe me when I tell you that if there is a demand for a banned product there will be a manufacturer for that product and a distribution network to get it to the people who want it. That has ALWAYS been the case and always will be the case.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me, then, like the task is to get a better hand on the underground market. Something we've LONG needed to do anyway.
 
Phys251 said:
Sounds to me, then, like the task is to get a better hand on the underground market. Something we've LONG needed to do anyway.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that. How are you going to stop Jim Bob from making and selling magazines? Hint: You're not.
 
Phys251 said:
Sounds to me, then, like the task is to get a better hand on the underground market. Something we've LONG needed to do anyway.
Click to expand...

Maybe we need a War on Magazines. It's worked to solve poverty and drugs sales.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
You can change out a magazine very quickly so I don't know that limits would reduce the number of mass shootings. The only way you could do that is somehow get all pistols and semi automatic rifles off the market and out of private ownership leaving on revolvers, bolt action, lever action, pump, and so on.

Then again, I don't even think that would make much of a difference even if it were somehow possible, much less constitutional.

I mean hell look at what Chuck Connors could do with an old Winchester 1892 ;)

Click to expand...


Is that an assault weapon?:lamo

Than man needs to be locked up.:lamo

I can tell by the look on his face he is a far right wing republican and a member of the NRA.:lamo

How can there ever be law and order with people like that on the streets.

Do you have any idea how many children he turned into gun nuts.
 
Phys251 said:
Sounds to me, then, like the task is to get a better hand on the underground market. Something we've LONG needed to do anyway.
Click to expand...

its worked REALLY well with Crack and smack!!
 
natsb said:
So... The bad guy is about to open the door, enter the room and start murdering people. But he stops in his tracks and says "rats, these 30 round magazines are illegal". I don't think so.

Sent from my LG-V930 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Oh so that is the logic behind the law. I think we should have 29 round magazines. That would save 1 life anyway.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
Oh so that is the logic behind the law. I think we should have 29 round magazines. That would save 1 life anyway.
Click to expand...

that destroys the anti gun argument in this area; they say that someone with 15 rounds can kill too many people. So I guess they are ok with a few les victims? of course not-those who want to limit magazine sizes are ultimately gun banners pure and simple
 
Phys251 said:
Sounds to me, then, like the task is to get a better hand on the underground market. Something we've LONG needed to do anyway.
Click to expand...

It was tried under Bush and Obama and both failed miserably. They only thing our government accomplished was to put thousands of assault rifles in the hands of the worst drug cartel killers on the planet. Not to mention all the innocent people that were killed by these government provided weapons. That is the problem with our government. Our government wants to ban certain guns from law abiding citizens and then they give them to the worst criminals on the planet.

Hell our government leaders can't even handle e-mails competently. Maybe they should stick to cap guns for now.
 
TurtleDude said:
that destroys the anti gun argument in this area; they say that someone with 15 rounds can kill too many people. So I guess they are ok with a few les victims? of course not-those who want to limit magazine sizes are ultimately gun banners pure and simple
Click to expand...

In 2013 the Democrats brought a bunch of gun control laws to be passed, all of which were deemed necessary and immediate for the safety of Colorado. One was a magazine restriction of 10 rounds, which according to the bill was necessary to keep us safe. In a misguided effort at compromise, a Democrat, not the sponsor of the bill, suggested raising it to 15 rounds to make the Republicans happy, which of course didn't work. The Democrats all voted for it because the Republicans voted against. I call that new law the "Five more dead kids are okay with us" law.
 
Rucker61 said:
In 2013 the Democrats brought a bunch of gun control laws to be passed, all of which were deemed necessary and immediate for the safety of Colorado. One was a magazine restriction of 10 rounds, which according to the bill was necessary to keep us safe. In a misguided effort at compromise, a Democrat, not the sponsor of the bill, suggested raising it to 15 rounds to make the Republicans happy, which of course didn't work. The Democrats all voted for it because the Republicans voted against. I call that new law the "Five more dead kids are okay with us" law.
Click to expand...

anything civilian cops have other civilians ought to have access to in terms of firearms
 
TurtleDude said:
that destroys the anti gun argument in this area; they say that someone with 15 rounds can kill too many people. So I guess they are ok with a few les victims? of course not-those who want to limit magazine sizes are ultimately gun banners pure and simple
Click to expand...

The really sad part of this situation is they will never figure out that it is people who kill not guns. Plus there can never be a solution to the killings until you figure out who is the problem. Hint it is not the gun.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
The really sad part of this situation is they will never figure out that it is people who kill not guns. Plus there can never be a solution to the killings until you figure out who is the problem. Hint it is not the gun.
Click to expand...

you have to understand that most avid gun restrictionists only pretend to care about crime control. Their real goal is to harass and punish people who don't agree with their almost invariably leftwing agenda
 
The biggest mass murders in history have been accomplished with explosives, arson or vehicles.
 
Oh Jeez...it must be 15 past the hour.

Time for yet another gun thread.

And in another 15 minutes it will be another race-based thread.

Guns and race...debate politics specialties.

:roll:
 
the concept of "two in the torso & one in the head" does not require a high cap mag
 
TurtleDude said:
its worked REALLY well with Crack and smack!!
Click to expand...

PIPEWRENCH said:
It was tried under Bush and Obama and both failed miserably. They only thing our government accomplished was to put thousands of assault rifles in the hands of the worst drug cartel killers on the planet. Not to mention all the innocent people that were killed by these government provided weapons. That is the problem with our government. Our government wants to ban certain guns from law abiding citizens and then they give them to the worst criminals on the planet.

Hell our government leaders can't even handle e-mails competently. Maybe they should stick to cap guns for now.
Click to expand...

So we should just give up on the need to disrupt the black market? Come to think of it, why hasn't the NRA pushed harder for enforcement against straw purchases? Would gun manufacturers stand to make more profits if guns were more likely to be purchased brand-new than exchanged among others?
 
I like to use pro-gun control statistics to disprove things like bans on high cap magazines, waiting periods, etc. So I would reference you to Mother Jones.

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2017: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation | Mother Jones

What you find is th majority of mass shootings were conducted by relatively low caliber handguns with standard capacity magazines. Thats not to say there were no high cap mags...only that it doesnt make a difference.

On another note...if we take the 2nd Amendment as written, you would HAVE to agree that the purpose for the Amendment is to provide the citizens of the country the means to keep and bear military grade firearms. A high capacity magazine would certainly make sense in a military needs environment.
 
Phys251 said:
The "assault weapons" ban of 1994 criminalized, in part, the transfer and possession of guns that had a magazine of greater than ten rounds.

Do magazine limits such as these reduce gun violence in general? What about mass shootings, in particular the body count?
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no physical way doing anything to guns including banning them can make the slightest difference to any crime.

Of course that does not exclude the demented delusions of gun control advocates which have the power to achieve any objective imagined
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom