Magazine Capasity Bans

[JLee1977]

Ever since the sun-setting of the 1994-2004 federal assault weapons ban I still hear pro gun control politicians campaigning for more bans on "high capacity" magazines that can hold over ten rounds. Lets assume for a moment that these politicians have a logical reason for this restriction, a side from the fact they hate guns. Where did they come up with the limit of ten rounds? Did they draw that number from a hat, and that is what they went with? If there logic is based on prevented innocent people from getting shot, "if we can save just one life!" , why is a five round limit to little, and twelve round limit to much? As a public servant, what makes me unrestricted as a police officer, but the law abiding civilians can't be trusted with them?

 

[beerftw]

Ever since the sun-setting of the 1994-2004 federal assault weapons ban I still hear pro gun control politicians campaigning for more bans on "high capacity" magazines that can hold over ten rounds. Lets assume for a moment that these politicians have a logical reason for this restriction, a side from the fact they hate guns. Where did they come up with the limit of ten rounds? Did they draw that number from a hat, and that is what they went with? If there logic is based on prevented innocent people from getting shot, "if we can save just one life!" , why is a five round limit to little, and twelve round limit to much? As a public servant, what makes me unrestricted as a police officer, but the law abiding civilians can't be trusted with them?


View attachment 67218203

Magazine limits never affect anything anyways, it is more about restricting rights than it is about preventing shootings or even mass shootings. Lets face it, a magazine takes almost no time at all to change unless you use a 50 or 100 round drum, which military will not use due to high failure rates, and instead tend to cap off at 30 and use belt feed for anything greater.

Heck even with let's say an old m1 or an sks unmodified or even a bolt action, all with fixed magazines, they can be reloaded extremely quick with a stripper clip, putting downtime at a minimum anyways.

 

[ttwtt78640]

The number of fingers (counting thumbs) on a typical politician's paws is the likely answer for picking the number 10 as being a "standard" magazine capacity.

My Taurus PT638 pistol came with two 15-round (high capacity?) magazines and is hardly what any reasonable person would call an assault weapon.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2012/1/9/the-taurus-pt638-pro-sa-380-acp/

 

[calamity]

Capacity


I'm not sure any capacity ban serves a purpose. But, I can understand why people would like to limit the capacity of clips and magazines available out on the street.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Capacity


I'm not sure any capacity ban serves a purpose. But, I can understand why people would like to limit the capacity of clips and magazines available out on the street.

Why would allowing three 10-round magazines be better than allowing two 15-round magazines "out on the street"? Are you going to trust someone shooting at you "out on the street" to obey that law and attempt to rush them after 10 rounds have been fired?

 

[calamity]

Why would allowing three 10-round magazines be better than allowing two 15-round magazines "out on the street"? Are you going to trust someone shooting at you "out on the street" to obey that law and attempt to rush them after 10 rounds have been fired?

I guess you missed the part where I said such a ban wouldn't serve any purpose except appeasing those who want it.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I guess you missed the part where I said such a ban wouldn't serve any purpose except appeasing those who want it.

Nope, and had you stooped at that I would never have questioned your meaning. I still question why you can understand why people would like to limit magazine capacity "out on the street".

 

[calamity]

Nope, and had you stooped at that I would never have questioned your meaning. I still question why you can understand why people would like to limit magazine capacity "out on the street".

Well, I can understand why people do a lot of things that make no sense, including vote for Donald Trump.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Well, I can understand why people do a lot of things that make no sense, including vote for Donald Trump.

I vote for Trump does not put anyone in jail or take away their private property.

 

[ludin]

the 10 round magazine thing is nothing more than an appeal to emotion argument.
the people that promote this already know that it does nothing to limit anything.

however they guise it in the realm of public safety. the problem is that criminals don't care.
people that are going to commit such crimes really don't care what the law says.

they will find a way to do it anyway.

look at the boston marathon, sure they could have used large capacity magazines instead they
used pressure cookers and ball bearings.

 

[ttwtt78640]

the 10 round magazine thing is nothing more than an appeal to emotion argument.
the people that promote this already know that it does nothing to limit anything.

however they guise it in the realm of public safety. the problem is that criminals don't care.
people that are going to commit such crimes really don't care what the law says.

they will find a way to do it anyway.

look at the boston marathon, sure they could have used large capacity magazines instead they
used pressure cookers and ball bearings.

It does establish legal precedent that setting such a limit does not "infringe" on our 2A rights. If a "capacity" limit of 10 rounds is OK (constitutional) then so is a limit of 2 rounds or even 1 round. Look at all of the goofy laws that apply to bladed "weapons" - carrying "assault" box cutters and multi-tools is now illegal in many places.

 

[ludin]

It does establish legal precedent that setting such a limit does not "infringe" on our 2A rights. If a "capacity" limit of 10 rounds is OK (constitutional) then so is a limit of 2 rounds or even 1 round. Look at all of the goofy laws that apply to bladed "weapons" - carrying "assault" box cutters and multi-tools is now illegal in many places.

i agree. it tries to set that precedent which is why these laws need to be fought with a court that actually follows the constitution.

 

[Renae]

I guess you missed the part where I said such a ban wouldn't serve any purpose except appeasing those who want it.

 

[Rucker61]

She fought for magazine capacity restrictions in Congress for 15 years without realizing this simple fact.

 

[Renae]

She fought for magazine capacity restrictions in Congress for 15 years without realizing this simple fact.

She's one of the dumbest people ever elected... wait, I would hope she's one of the dumbest people ever elected to office.

 

[Renae]

She fought for magazine capacity restrictions in Congress for 15 years without realizing this simple fact.

Woah, she's still in office? After that level of stupid?

 

[Slingshot Bob]

People do realize magazines are only folded sheet metal and a spring? Hell, I have made a few guns from scratch.

 

[TurtleDude]

Capacity


I'm not sure any capacity ban serves a purpose. But, I can understand why people would like to limit the capacity of clips and magazines available out on the street.

that logic suggests complete bans are what they want. and its true, the bannerrhoid movement is using magazine limits as an incremental method. the government doesn't suddenly get the power to ban based on an arbitrary number of rounds.

 

[TurtleDude]

I vote for Trump does not put anyone in jail or take away their private property.

it did cause massive laundry bills for many who couldn't remain able to control their bowels and bladders after their beloved Hillary lost. but anything cops can carry on duty in terms of firearms, other civilians ought to be able to at least own and keep in their homes or use on firing ranges

 

[TurtleDude]

if stupidity and idiocy was a felony offense, that twit would be doing 500 years

 

[calamity]

that logic suggests complete bans are what they want. and its true, the bannerrhoid movement is using magazine limits as an incremental method. the government doesn't suddenly get the power to ban based on an arbitrary number of rounds.

Like Trump likes to say, everything is a negotiation. IMO, people will usually settle for a fraction of what they originally asked for.

 

[TurtleDude]

Like Trump likes to say, everything is a negotiation. IMO, people will usually settle for a fraction of what they originally asked for.

as I said, the real negotiation was set forth by the founders

government leaves the people alone and the people won't overthrow the government

you aren't being honest in your argument and we all know that

 

[calamity]

as I said, the real negotiation was set forth by the founders

government leaves the people alone and the people won't overthrow the government

you aren't being honest in your argument and we all know that

I don't have a dog in the fight. I'm simply calling it as I see it. You, OTOH, are too biased to see anything but your way.

 

[jamesrage]

Ever since the sun-setting of the 1994-2004 federal assault weapons ban I still hear pro gun control politicians campaigning for more bans on "high capacity" magazines that can hold over ten rounds. Lets assume for a moment that these politicians have a logical reason for this restriction, a side from the fact they hate guns. Where did they come up with the limit of ten rounds? Did they draw that number from a hat, and that is what they went with? If there logic is based on prevented innocent people from getting shot, "if we can save just one life!" , why is a five round limit to little, and twelve round limit to much? As a public servant, what makes me unrestricted as a police officer, but the law abiding civilians can't be trusted with them?


View attachment 67218203

Most of the anti-2nd amendment side does in regard to gun control is incremental. Today its ten they are pushing for as the max and if they are successful then tomorrow it will be 5.And when that is successful they will push for a ban on magazine fed firearms.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Why would allowing three 10-round magazines be better than allowing two 15-round magazines "out on the street"? Are you going to trust someone shooting at you "out on the street" to obey that law and attempt to rush them after 10 rounds have been fired?

With politicians it is more about making rules and laws than actually solving a problem. They make another law to add to the gazillion laws they have already made pat themselves on the back at the political convention while all the sheep clap and pretend the problem is fixed.