• 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!

Absurdity Of Magazine Bans

noonereal said:
Why on earth would anyone ever need a clip larger than 10?

That is far to large as it is.

Seriously, what is the need, I literally do not know. (except to slaughter innocent people of course)

I'd limit a magazine at 3. MAX.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you would. Luckily you aren't on charge, although this is the type of thinking we continuously see from GCAs. Damn the Constitution, full speed ahead.
 
noonereal said:
Absurdity of magazines, period.

Ban all magazines makes the best sense.
Click to expand...

In what way is a complete ban on magazines the best sense? It cannot happen, it could not be enforced and its totally unconstitutional. There's not one bit of sense in the idea.
 
Last edited:
noonereal said:
Why on earth would anyone ever need a clip larger than 10?

That is far to large as it is.

Seriously, what is the need, I literally do not know. (except to slaughter innocent people of course)

I'd limit a magazine at 3. MAX.
Click to expand...

Why do police need clips larger than 10? As is often the case whenever there's a ban on magazines over a certain capacity police are usually exempt from the ban as they are in California. If police can have magazines that hold over ten rounds they should be available to everybody else.
 
Debate Challenged, are you capable of actual debate, where you make an argument that isn't just copy and pasting some stupid youtube post?
 
noonereal said:
Why on earth would anyone ever need a clip larger than 10?

That is far to large as it is.

Seriously, what is the need, I literally do not know. (except to slaughter innocent people of course)

I'd limit a magazine at 3. MAX.
Click to expand...

Yes, we know you want criminals to win violent encounters with honest people. And your idiotic arguments are exactly why none of us are willing to accept any magazine limits because people like you want to make the limits idiotically small. ANY capacity magazine civilian police can use should be easily available to other civilians.
 
Rucker61 said:
In what way is a complete ban on magazines the best sense? It cannot happen, it could not be enforced and its totally unconstitutional. There's not one bit of sense in the idea.
Click to expand...

He hates the politics of gun owners and wants to pass laws designed to harass us as much as possible. Just look at some of his other posts and some of the anti gun threads he started.
 
uptower said:
Personally I like those rock in thirty round banana clips they use on AKs. "When you absolutely have to kill everyone in the room..."
Click to expand...

That's really stupid. But you knew that. Do you actually have something relevant to add to a conversation about why magazine bans are stupid?
 
Actually yes I agree they're stupid. If they're going to sell automatic weapons anyway then a 10-round clip only makes them slightly less dangerous in the hands of a practised shooter.
 
uptower said:
Actually yes I agree they're stupid. If they're going to sell automatic weapons anyway then a 10-round clip only makes them slightly less dangerous in the hands of a practised shooter.
Click to expand...

Who is selling automatic weapons?
 
Rucker61 said:
Who is selling automatic weapons?
Click to expand...

Gun sellers? Oh wait did I forget to tack 'semi-' onto that?

See i don't get excited over terminology, especially when looking at the bigger picture.

A trained shooter with a semi-automatic rifle and a 30-round magazine is more dangerous than spray-and pray on full auto anyway. One with a 20 or a 10 round magazine, isn't that much less harmful. Maybe at five rounds the reload times start to dent the ability to wreak havoc, but personally I've never tried quick reloads with small capacity magazines.
 
=ryzorsden;1069693149]There's actually some real logical benefits to banning high capacity magazines.
Click to expand...
Yeah until your the one holding the bag with a 5-10 magazine wishing you had a thirty like the bad guy.
In a firefight, one of the keys to winning the firefight that is longer than most (30+ seconds) is to wait for your opponent to reload. If he has an AR-15 with a 100-round drum (like in Aurora), you're gunna have to wait longer, and he has more of a chance to shoot you.
Click to expand...
And when his 100 rounder jammed why wasn't he rushed? Isn't reloading the point?He also had to clear it.
Microseconds make a different in a firefight. Most cops don't want to face off against and opponent that has more than 10 rounds per magazine.
Click to expand...
Microseconds didn't make much difference. And most cops don't want to go up against anything,regardless of 5 or 100.
It's logical. But clearly beyond conservative thinking....
Click to expand...
Conservative= holding on to what you have. Your info says very liberal which can have other meanings,but the other meaning I take is Progressive.IE.govt.lackey.
I wouldn't have a magazine like that(100 round) since they are prone to jamming and taking longer to clear before he said fu*k it and transitioned. Fun on the range but stick to thirty's for a firefight.
 
Last edited:
I don't have a problem banning high capacity magazines. I do have a problem with idiots redefining the standard magazine the gun was designed to accept as high capacity.
 
noonereal said:
Why on earth would anyone ever need a clip larger than 10?

That is far to large as it is.

Seriously, what is the need, I literally do not know. (except to slaughter innocent people of course)

I'd limit a magazine at 3. MAX.
Click to expand...

There was a shooting in Aurora, Illinois. Cops responded to a call of a man with a gun. How many cops showed up with AR-15s and multiple 30 round magazines to face off against one guy?
 
=noonereal;1069693680]Why on earth would anyone ever need a clip larger than 10?
Click to expand...
So your "clip" holding 10 didn't seem to slow down Cruz.
That is far to large as it is.

Seriously, what is the need, I literally do not know. (except to slaughter innocent people of course)

I'd limit a magazine at 3. MAX.
Click to expand...
What's a limit of 3 going to do except make the shooter carry more. Remember they wouldn't be very big. Biggest hassle would be loading them in the well(extra.5 seconds) after the empty dropped out.
 
Rucker61 said:
There was a shooting in Aurora, Illinois. Cops responded to a call of a man with a gun. How many cops showed up with AR-15s and multiple 30 round magazines to face off against one guy?
Click to expand...

However many did according to noonereal they only needed 3 round magazines and probably suffered from poor egos because they had guns to begin with
 
uptower said:
Gun sellers? Oh wait did I forget to tack 'semi-' onto that?

See i don't get excited over terminology, especially when looking at the bigger picture.

A trained shooter with a semi-automatic rifle and a 30-round magazine is more dangerous than spray-and pray on full auto anyway. One with a 20 or a 10 round magazine, isn't that much less harmful. Maybe at five rounds the reload times start to dent the ability to wreak havoc, but personally I've never tried quick reloads with small capacity magazines.
Click to expand...
You do know that you validated that a bump stock wasn't needed in Vegas? You made reference to rocking in an AK mag? If that wasn't sarcasm and your "hi cap." ban went into effect do you plan on handing them in? If so practice reloading small cap. magazines.
 
zsu2357 said:
You do know that you validated that a bump stock wasn't needed in Vegas? You made reference to rocking in an AK mag? If that wasn't sarcasm and your "hi cap." ban went into effect do you plan on handing them in? If so practice reloading small cap. magazines.
Click to expand...

Actually bump stocks and full auto are also dangerous, especially when fired into a mass of people. But a reasonably skilled shooter picking his targets on controlled semi-auto can be more so, so they're not mutually exclusive. My point is again, that the terminology hardly matters - it's what people do with the weapon, not what we call it.

As for 'my' hi-cap ban, and 'my' plan to hand guns in, sorry I am not a California lawmaker. I don't have 'plans' for anyone's guns.
 
uptower said:
Actually bump stocks and full auto are also dangerous, especially when fired into a mass of people.
Click to expand...
It has to be dangerous in order to do its job. That's why the gun community has the 4 big rules and encourages as much training and practice as one can afford.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Here is a video on a proposal from the house to ban "high capacity" magazines, and how absurd it would be to do so.
YouTube
Click to expand...

The reason why it's absurd is because people can just buy them anyway. Kind of like what they do with pot, heroine, cocaine, car modifications that violate emissions regulations, and so forth.
 
zsu2357 said:
You do know that you validated that a bump stock wasn't needed in Vegas? You made reference to rocking in an AK mag? If that wasn't sarcasm and your "hi cap." ban went into effect do you plan on handing them in? If so practice reloading small cap. magazines.
Click to expand...

No matter how illegal bump stocks are made, it will not stop someone from using one. They are simple to make.
 
zsu2357 said:
So your "clip" holding 10 didn't seem to slow down Cruz.

What's a limit of 3 going to do except make the shooter carry more. Remember they wouldn't be very big. Biggest hassle would be loading them in the well(extra.5 seconds) after the empty dropped out.
Click to expand...

what these gun banners never seem to want to understand is this

1) most criminals are already committing a federal felony by merely being in possession of a gun

2) they certainly will be committing a felony if they use a gun to harm someone

Now if they can get a gun and they don't care about the legal consequences of both possessing and using said gun, HTF is a magazine ban going to affect them? there are MANY times more magazines in circulation than guns. In most states you can buy them mail order. You can buy them across state lines without paperwork-meaning they are all over the place
 
Into the Night said:
No matter how illegal bump stocks are made, it will not stop someone from using one. They are simple to make.
Click to expand...

You don't need one to bump-fire a semi-automatic rifle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom