User Panel
[#1]
Quoted:
Nysp have 10 round pistols and pump shotguns View Quote |
|
[#2]
Quoted:
It's a fundamental lack of understanding of terminal ballistics from too much TV, where hardened terrorists crumple instantaneously after being shot once in the lung with a pistol. In real life, however, the FBI says: "With the exceptions of hits to the brain or upper spinal cord, the concept of reliable and reproducible immediate incapacitation of the human target by gunshot wounds to the torso is a myth." "There is sufficient oxygen within the brain to support full, voluntary action for 10-15 seconds after the heart has been destroyed." Liberals think we want 10 bullets to just hit someone and we're spraying and praying, hence the oft-repeated moronic "If you need more than 10 rounds, you need to go back to the firing range!" In reality, after you've put a few rounds center mass in the guy, the rest of the mag is basically "suppressive fire" until he goes down. Restricting a mass shooter to 10 rounds would do nothing. Most choose confined, populated spaces that are difficult to escape. Despite the oft-repeated "but more mag changes means more opportunities to tackle the shooter," that very very rarely happens. Even then, shooters will simply pick targets less likely to do so: elderly people, children, etc. View Quote Meh doesn't matter. None of this is about anyone's safety. It never has been and never will be. It's called gun CONTROL not gun SAFETY for a reason. |
|
[#3]
The gunfight to save your life will only last as long as you have ammunition. When you run out, it's no longer a gunfight, you're just someone getting shot at.
-Awful paraphrase of Clint Smith |
|
[#4]
You will for sure be fucked
*posts video as example of someone not being fucked, 3v1 |
|
[#5]
|
|
[#6]
Human beings have been known to take way more than 10 rounds and still charge their victim. Now factor in Suzie Soccermom who isn't a good shot especially when in a panic situation who may only land 1 or 2 shots out of 10.
Sorry democrats, you do not get to dictate what level of protection is "permissible" for the rest of us. Meanwhile any psycho with a 3D printer could make 30 round mags in his house if they were banned. On top of that a ban would only fuel a black market for magazines leaving the good guys defenseless and the criminals armed. |
|
[#7]
Quoted:
Honestly the logical argument of the OP fails. If the school or mass attacker is not hampered in their efforts by having to take the time to reload, how is the private citizen overwhelmingly hampered by having to possibly reload? I'm not saying I agree with limitations, but one can't argue that it does not hinder criminals but does hinder honest folks. It may well hinder both or neither but not one and not the other. View Quote " I had to much ammo" said NO ONE that's ever been in a gun fight or combat. |
|
[#8]
Quoted:
Honestly the logical argument of the OP fails. If the school or mass attacker is not hampered in their efforts by having to take the time to reload, how is the private citizen overwhelmingly hampered by having to possibly reload? I'm not saying I agree with limitations, but one can't argue that it does not hinder criminals but does hinder honest folks. It may well hinder both or neither but not one and not the other. View Quote The good guy is going to be on the defensive, never knowing the time and place of an attack. Never knowing who the bad guy is until the attack has already begun. He will only be equipped with what he is carrying and his wits and training. The odds are stacked against him. Being able to concealed carry only offers him a slight advantage if the attacker has not noticed his gun. The good guy will need to then recognize the attack, and try to bring as much force and aggression to bear on the bad guy as possible in order to win the fight. By reducing the effectiveness of the weapons in general (magazine capacity limits), and assuming this dynamic would apply to everyone (a falicy, because you cannot just eliminate all high capacity magazines in existence), the effects would hamper the good guy more, because you are taking away one of the few assets he has at his disposal, whereas the bad guy still has several more advantages. |
|
[#9]
What if there is 11 attackers?
It is no one else job to tell me how to defend myself, except for instructors that I pay to do so. |
|
[#10]
|
|
[#11]
Quoted:
- Restricting a mass shooter to 10 rounds would do nothing. Most choose confined, populated spaces that are difficult to escape. Despite the oft-repeated "but more mag changes means more opportunities to tackle the shooter," that very very rarely happens. Even then, shooters will simply pick targets less likely to do so: elderly people, children, etc. View Quote |
|
[#12]
Quoted:
A better argument is pistols aren't that effective. Google the essay written by the cop who shot some guy two dozen times and now walks around with some ridiculous amount of mags View Quote I use this example a lot. |
|
[#13]
Quoted:
My AR is my home defense gun. It has a 40 round mag in it. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Sadly, I hear family members stating this argument. I do the math: average 'knockdown your door' group = 4. Average rounds in bad guy until 'stop' = 3. Average rounds on target = 1 out of 2. =24. In order to adequately defend myself & my home I require a minimum of 24 rounds. Which is one of the reasons for a full extra magazine on hand always. Along with an AR15 which affords me 30 rounds until reload. It has a 40 round mag in it. |
|
[#14]
|
|
[#15]
What makes you an expert?
How many times have you been attacked by a mob of more than 10 people wanting to kill you and how did you live through it? What is your plan when you get tired of running? |
|
[#16]
Quoted:
I love it when people who don't know Jack shit about guns want to tell me how many rounds is adequate to defend my life. View Quote |
|
[#17]
No one needs a car. No one needs a cell phone. No one needs.........
Just throw a list back at them of things no one needs, yet here they are owning them. Car's like theirs kill more people in this country then guns do. Yet out of all those things, only guns are listed in the constitution as a right for us to own. |
|
[#18]
Quoted:
Sadly, I hear family members stating this argument. I do the math: average 'knockdown your door' group = 4. Average rounds in bad guy until 'stop' = 3. Average rounds on target = 1 out of 2. =24. In order to adequately defend myself & my home I require a minimum of 24 rounds. Which is one of the reasons for a full extra magazine on hand always. Along with an AR15 which affords me 30 rounds until reload. View Quote |
|
[#19]
No one in a gunfight ever sat there and thought "gee, I wish I had less ammo."
|
|
[#20]
|
|
[#21]
Quoted:
Attempting to impugn someone's logic with an illogical argument. Strong move. View Quote That said, I oppose mag restrictions, but recognize that there could be some argument to them in some practical sense. My opposition to restrictions is more political and philosophical. The chances of a group of bad guys sticking around after the first one or three drop is moving towards pretty far fetched. |
|
[#22]
|
|
[#23]
You think that's bad.....I've seen several places where Libs are saying "you don't need a semi-auto anything for self defense"........so I guess bolt action is the way to go.
|
|
[#24]
Liberals/progressives say they don't trust the government or the police, but after they get their wish to ban guns only the police and military will have guns. Hmmmm.
|
|
[#25]
Quoted:
Honestly the logical argument of the OP fails. If the school or mass attacker is not hampered in their efforts by having to take the time to reload, how is the private citizen overwhelmingly hampered by having to possibly reload? I'm not saying I agree with limitations, but one can't argue that it does not hinder criminals but does hinder honest folks. It may well hinder both or neither but not one and not the other. View Quote The difference between those two things should be intuitive. |
|
[#26]
View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Sadly, I hear family members stating this argument. I do the math: average 'knockdown your door' group = 4. Average rounds in bad guy until 'stop' = 3. Average rounds on target = 1 out of 2. =24. In order to adequately defend myself & my home I require a minimum of 24 rounds. Which is one of the reasons for a full extra magazine on hand always. Along with an AR15 which affords me 30 rounds until reload. but you'd probably have to listen to their BS anyway. |
|
[#27]
Quoted:
My AR is my home defense gun. It has a 40 round mag in it. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Sadly, I hear family members stating this argument. I do the math: average 'knockdown your door' group = 4. Average rounds in bad guy until 'stop' = 3. Average rounds on target = 1 out of 2. =24. In order to adequately defend myself & my home I require a minimum of 24 rounds. Which is one of the reasons for a full extra magazine on hand always. Along with an AR15 which affords me 30 rounds until reload. It has a 40 round mag in it. |
|
[#28]
Quoted: You must have different cops out there then we do here. Here they have full capacity guns. And while they do have pump shotguns the are 14 inch barrels that we the plebs can't own. And while the patrol guys aren't running ARs they have them. Just not in the patrol cars normally. View Quote yes the 870s are shortened barrels but still stupid ass pump guns, very few NYSP have access to ARs. There was a small purchase of them so I guess they are out there |
|
[#29]
I will decide how many rounds I feel is acceptable to defend myself.
When I use them and a court examines my actions, either that court will deem the number of shots I fired acceptable, or not acceptable. But until I use them, the capacity of my gun or how many rounds I carry.......is meaningless. FWIW, I carry 50 rounds of 9mm when I carry. I've carried more when I was going through shittier places or liberal cesspools (just because I could and I know liberals HATE guns, so fuck them). And no, I'm not going to down-load or carry 10rd mags just because some libtard dumbocrat thinks I don't need those other 5/7 rounds. Only I can make that decision, and only I will make that decision. The other argument for spare mags is that the mag is the most likely to fail part of a semi-auto pistol. Carrying a spare mag should be the status quo here because the best/fastest way to fix a mag issue is to get rid of it and put a new one in. |
|
[#30]
Quoted: One can argue it if you understand the difference between surprise attacking a group of unarmed individuals with days and weeks to prepare and being caught defending yourself against an armed attacker with seconds to prepare. The difference between those two things should be intuitive. View Quote My point is that we can't argue the logic, it's an emotional issue therefore just saying No, we won't go along with this is more than enough rather than create mythical walter mitty fantasies of some long protracted gun battle engaged between home owner, parent, janitor etc and the attacker. |
|
[#31]
|
|
[#32]
Quoted:
A better argument is pistols aren't that effective. Google the essay written by the cop who shot some guy two dozen times and now walks around with some ridiculous amount of mags View Quote Now the cop carries a shitload of happy sticks in Uzi mag pouches. |
|
[#33]
Quoted:
You think that's bad.....I've seen several places where Libs are saying "you don't need a semi-auto anything for self defense"........so I guess bolt action is the way to go. View Quote |
|
[#34]
Quoted:
Yet, in many threads arguing AR vs Shotgun some members of GD have made this very argument. They claim the 30round AR capacity is irrelevant for home defense because everything will be over in a few shots. It's almost as if not every member of GD is a rootin, tootin pisterlaro after all. View Quote |
|
[#35]
MY opinion is the only opinion that matters when it comes to MY safety.
|
|
[#36]
It's very difficult to make an AR-15 safe enough to keep around kids and still be able to bring it into action quickly. I've seen some binary lock deals, but it didn't impress me. JMO.
I feel perfectly comfortable with 6 rounds of .357 magnum as a self defense vehicle. That's not to say I wouldn't turn down 16 out of my SIG or that I want to prevent you from carrying a high capacity gun. I guess you have to weigh what the pew pews are. |
|
[#37]
|
|
[#38]
Thread title causes excruciating pain to grammar Nazis.
No one needs more than X rounds to defend oneself*. |
|
[#39]
Quoted:
Sadly, I hear family members stating this argument. I do the math: average 'knockdown your door' group = 4. Average rounds in bad guy until 'stop' = 3. Average rounds on target = 1 out of 2. =24. In order to adequately defend myself & my home I require a minimum of 24 rounds. Which is one of the reasons for a full extra magazine on hand always. Along with an AR15 which affords me 30 rounds until reload. View Quote |
|
[#40]
Well at least if we limit the mags to 10rds we will all be safe, because a psychopath intent on killing lots of people would never break a magazine capacity limit law. Just common sense guns laws right there. I feel safer.
|
|
[#41]
Quoted:
I bet @Blitz_308 has a pretty strong opinion on this. Didn't he get off half a dozen or more shots with only one or two connecting (<--- that is NOT a criticism)? Thank god his attacker ran out of bullets first and took off or he would have needed all 10 plus some more. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Sadly, I hear family members stating this argument. I do the math: average 'knockdown your door' group = 4. Average rounds in bad guy until 'stop' = 3. Average rounds on target = 1 out of 2. =24. In order to adequately defend myself & my home I require a minimum of 24 rounds. Which is one of the reasons for a full extra magazine on hand always. Along with an AR15 which affords me 30 rounds until reload. I got 4 off, 1 on the floor that I ejected and 4 left in the mag/gun. You are correct about the 2 hits though, and although one went through his clothing at center mass, none were life threatening for him. My friends and I were fortunate that there was only one guy and yes, I absolutely think that the fact that he ran out of ammo before I did, was what stopped the fight. Still love my 1911s but now carry a G19. |
|
[#42]
Failed To Load Title |
|
[#43]
Former Asst. Sect. of Housing Catherine Austin Fitts puts it best when she argued for large capacity magazines: home invaders never come alone and you'll need more than ten rounds to defend yourself.
|
|
[#44]
Quoted: I wish my hands were working well enough,at the time, to get 6 or more off. I got 4 off, 1 on the floor that I ejected and 4 left in the mag/gun. You are correct about the 2 hits though, and although one went through his clothing at center mass, none were life threatening for him. My friends and I were fortunate that there was only one guy and yes, I absolutely think that the fact that he ran out of ammo before I did, was what stopped the fight. Still love my 1911s but now carry a G19. View Quote Shooting under stress is way different than shooting at a range. I think a lot of people overlook this because they have zero info or experience with gun fights. |
|
[#45]
Quoted: Yet Frank Hall got the opportunity to disrupt the Chardon killer while he was reloading his 10rd Ruger pistol. As I said, you can't argue against facts. Now, at home, I have my pistol, with a spare mag. Most school attackers oddly enough are well planned as mentioned, but have a low skill level. They can't change mags with the practiced icy skill of an arfcommer. The school attacker is gaining his weapons and tactics training from video games. Hitting the reload button on the controller is not the same as dropping a mag, manipulating the now one into position and continuing the attack. That said, I oppose mag restrictions, but recognize that there could be some argument to them in some practical sense. My opposition to restrictions is more political and philosophical. The chances of a group of bad guys sticking around after the first one or three drop is moving towards pretty far fetched. View Quote Here's another clue for you. Evil people intent on dieing in the process of committing their crime or act of terror. Don't care how many of the others get killed. In the case of some candy assed gang bangers it might be the case. You keep bringing the exception to this argument and not the rule.. |
|
[#47]
Quoted: Yet Frank Hall got the opportunity to disrupt the Chardon killer while he was reloading his 10rd Ruger pistol. As I said, you can't argue against facts. Now, at home, I have my pistol, with a spare mag. Most school attackers oddly enough are well planned as mentioned, but have a low skill level. They can't change mags with the practiced icy skill of an arfcommer. The school attacker is gaining his weapons and tactics training from video games. Hitting the reload button on the controller is not the same as dropping a mag, manipulating the now one into position and continuing the attack. That said, I oppose mag restrictions, but recognize that there could be some argument to them in some practical sense. My opposition to restrictions is more political and philosophical. The chances of a group of bad guys sticking around after the first one or three drop is moving towards pretty far fetched. View Quote I refuse, steadfastly, to accept mag capacity restrictions. The 2a is not about self defense against other citizens. It is about defense against the government. Ergo, if the military has it, the citizenry ought to be availed of the same level of weaponry, including capacity, etc. That means I believe people should be able to have belt feds (FA), DD's (like the mk19), etc. Because if we can't match weapon lethality to the forces our government possesses......the meaning and intent of the 2a is not being met. If the people cannot throw the government off their backs should it become untenable, the check/balance that the 2a is intended to provide ceases to exist and our government becomes all-powerful. |
|
[#48]
|
|
[#49]
Quoted:
Your argument only works if you are shooting to keep his head down rather than shooting to stop him. My guess , and it's a highly educated guess, is that no defender is going to be doing mag dumps to keep the dude off gaurd. They are going to shoot for hits, or wait till he's reloading just like every one of these things that has ever been stopped in the act by gunfire. My point is that we can't argue the logic, it's an emotional issue therefore just saying No, we won't go along with this is more than enough rather than create mythical walter mitty fantasies of some long protracted gun battle engaged between home owner, parent, janitor etc and the attacker. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: One can argue it if you understand the difference between surprise attacking a group of unarmed individuals with days and weeks to prepare and being caught defending yourself against an armed attacker with seconds to prepare. The difference between those two things should be intuitive. My point is that we can't argue the logic, it's an emotional issue therefore just saying No, we won't go along with this is more than enough rather than create mythical walter mitty fantasies of some long protracted gun battle engaged between home owner, parent, janitor etc and the attacker. You realise how long 10 rounds lasts in a gunfight? Not very damn long. |
|
[#50]
Quoted: Yet Frank Hall got the opportunity to disrupt the Chardon killer while he was reloading his 10rd Ruger pistol. As I said, you can't argue against facts. Now, at home, I have my pistol, with a spare mag. Most school attackers oddly enough are well planned as mentioned, but have a low skill level. They can't change mags with the practiced icy skill of an arfcommer. The school attacker is gaining his weapons and tactics training from video games. Hitting the reload button on the controller is not the same as dropping a mag, manipulating the now one into position and continuing the attack. That said, I oppose mag restrictions, but recognize that there could be some argument to them in some practical sense. My opposition to restrictions is more political and philosophical. The chances of a group of bad guys sticking around after the first one or three drop is moving towards pretty far fetched. View Quote |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.