[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]b89 wrote:
I don’t think Obama would come right out and try to outlaw firearms, that’s something done over a period of time and is chipped away at. I really can’t see him trying to push anything too restrictive through, not when Fast and Furious can be brought up. That could shift support pretty quickly when the average person hears “If you want strict gun control why did you force firearm dealers to sell weapons to criminal organizations?”, then you really are only left with your loyal supporters that side with Democrats no matter what. Realistically, I think mag capacity is the biggest issue. It’s an easy target, it’ll be easier to reach a deal on than banning firearms that generate a lot of revenue for gun manufacturers and it’s been getting negative attention for awhile now. [/quote]
I agree about magazine capacity , I also think the cat is out of the bag. There are a lot a 30 to 50 round clips out there .[/quote]
Agreed. Only banning magazine capacity won’t do fuck-all regarding crime or mass shootings or anything else. I posted this elsewhere, but here’s the quotes again:
[quote]Iâ??ve seen this one pop up a lot. It sounds good to the ear and really satisfies that weâ??ve got to do something need. It sounds simple. Bad guys shoot a lot of people in a mass shooting. So if he has magazines that hold fewer rounds, ergo then heâ??ll not be able to shoot as many people.
Wrong. And Iâ??ll break it down, first why my side wants more rounds in our gun, second why tactically it doesnâ??t really stop the problem, and third, why stopping them is a logistical impossibility.
First off, why do gun owners want magazines that hold more rounds? Because sometimes you miss. Because usuallyâ??contrary to the moviesâ??you have to hit an opponent multiple times in order to make them stop. Because sometimes you may have multiple assailants. We donâ??t have more rounds in the magazine so we can shoot more, we have more rounds in the magazine so we are forced to manipulate our gun less if we have to shoot more.
The last assault weapons ban capped capacities at ten rounds. You quickly realize ten rounds sucks when you take a wound ballistics class like I have and go over case after case after case after case of enraged, drug addled, prison hardened, perpetrators who soaked up five, seven, nine, even fifteen bullets and still walked under their own power to the ambulance. That isnâ??t uncommon at all. Legally, you can shoot them until they cease to be a threat, and keep in mind that what normally causes a person to stop is loss of blood pressure, so I used to tell my students that anybody worth shooting once was worth shooting five or seven times. You shoot them until they leave you alone.
Also, youâ??re going to miss. It is going to happen. If you can shoot pretty little groups at the range, those groups are going to expand dramatically under the stress and adrenalin. The more you train, the better you will do, but you can still may miss, or the bad guy may end up hiding behind something which your bullets donâ??t penetrate. Nobody has ever survived a gunfight and then said afterwards, â??Darn, I wish I hadnâ??t brought all that extra ammo.â??
So having more rounds in the gun is a good thing for self-defense use.
Now tactically, letâ??s say a mass shooter is on a rampage in a school. Unless his brain has turned to mush and heâ??s a complete idiot, heâ??s not going to walk up right next to you while he reloads anyway. Unlike the CCW holder who gets attacked and has to defend himself in whatever crappy situation he finds himself in, the mass shooter is the aggressor. Heâ??s picked the engagement range. They are cowards who are murdering running and hiding children, but donâ??t for a second make the mistake of thinking they are dumb. Many of these scumbags are actually very intelligent. Theyâ??re just broken and evil.
In the cases that Iâ??m aware of where the shooter had guns that held fewer rounds they just positioned themselves back a bit while firing or they brought more guns, and simply switched guns and kept on shooting, and then reloaded before they moved to the next planned firing position. Unless you are a fumble fingered idiot, anybody who practices in front of a mirror a few dozen times can get to where they can insert a new magazine into a gun in a few seconds.
A good friend of mine (who happens to be a very reasonable democrat) was very hung up on this, sure that he would be able to take advantage of the time in which it took for the bad guy to reload his gun. Thatâ??s a bad assumption, and hereâ??s yet another article that addresses that sort of misconception that I wrote several years ago which has sort of made the rounds on firearmâ??s forums. My Gunfight â?? â??Thinking Outside Your Boxâ?? So thatâ??s awesome if it happens, but good luck with that.
Finally, letâ??s look at the logistical ramifications of another magazine ban. The AWB banned the production of all magazines over ten rounds except those marked for military or law enforcement use, and it was a felony to possess those.
Over the ten years of the ban, we never ran out. Not even close. Magazines are cheap and basic. Most of them are pieces of sheet metal with some wire. Thatâ??s it. Magazines are considered disposable so most gun people accumulate a ton of them. All it did was make magazines more expensive, ticked off law abiding citizens, and didnâ??t so much as inconvenience a single criminal.
Meanwhile, bad guys didnâ??t run out either. And if they did, like I said, they are cheap and basic, so you just get or make more. If you can cook meth, you can make a functioning magazine. My old company designed a rifle magazine once, and Iâ??m no engineer. I paid a CAD guy, spent $20,000 and churned out several thousand 20 round Saiga .308 mags. This couldâ??ve been done out of my garage.
Ten years. No difference. Meanwhile, we had bad guys turning up all the time committing crimes, and guess what was marked on the mags found in their guns? MILITARY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT USE ONLY. Because once again, if youâ??re already breaking a bunch of laws, they can only hang you once. Criminals simply donâ??t care.
Once the AWB timed out, because every politician involved looked at the mess which had been passed in the heat of the moment, the fact it did nothing, and the fact that every single one of them from a red state would lose their job if they voted for a new one, it expired and went away. Immediately every single gun person in America went out and bought a couple guns which had been banned and a bucket of new magazines, because nothing makes an American want to do something more than telling them they canâ??t. Weâ??ve been stocking up ever since. If the last ban did literally nothing at all over a decade, and since then weâ??ve purchased another hundred million magazines since then, another ban will do even less. (except just make the law abiding that much angrier, and Iâ??ll get to that below).
I bought $600 worth of magazines for my competition pistol this morning. Iâ??ve already got a shelf full for my rifles. Gun and magazine sales skyrocket every time a democrat politician starts to vulture in on a tragedy.[/quote]