Gun Control

[GMan 3,569]

Had he been using 10 round magazines Loughner would have had to reload 3 times to fire the same amount of rounds.

 

Reload??? No. Change mags??? Yes. Which would take about 2 seconds to do each time...

[parsons 178]

Reload??? No. Change mags??? Yes.

Ok, you reload the weapon by changing the magazine. Duh. In this case we're not talking about reloading the magazine.....

Which would take about 2 seconds to do each time... .

Not necessarily….a number of factors including the gunman’s anxiety, where he stores his replacement magazines, and his proximity to potential victims could come into play. It is possible to screw up while reloading (see above) and any break in semi-automatic fire could mean the difference between life and death for some victims. Most of you choose to ignore that I’ve pointed out at least one instance in which a killer was taken down while trying to change magazines. Would someone please explain to me how eliminating high capacity magazines actually hurts anyone?

Edited December 26, 2012 by parsons

[ISOaPBR 15]

Tell that to the 6 people killed and 14 who were wounded in Tucson. Jared Loughner used a Glock 19 with a 33 round magazine and was not wrestled to the ground until he had emptied the magazine and was trying to reload. Ask any of the witnesses to that shooting if a smaller capacity magazine would have made a difference. Had he been using 10 round magazines Loughner would have had to reload 3 times to fire the same amount of rounds.

 

Tuscon was a rare exception to what usually happens – the shooter takes as many lives as he can until confronted, then turns the gun on himself.

[com74bsslc 10]

The answer to this question is not an easy one. We have the far left that want to ban everything more dangerous than an air soft gun, and the far right who thinks everyone needs an AK with a 50 round clip in it or the government will turn us into slaves. A Texas Senator said if the principle had access to a gun locker she could have saved some kids, a gun locker or two in each school that a few specially trained staff members had a key to is a wonderful idea. Making it harder for people to have access to certain weapons or high copacity clip would help also.

The sad truth is that people always have and always will kill each other, take away guns they will use knives, sticks, spears, and rocks. We just have to be reasonable. Some people like to drive 100 mph, which is fine on a track, but on the road out in town I dont want the drive by him with my family. This issue is like most "political " issues 90% of folks are reasonable and will compromise but the fools on the far right and left force the issue to the extreme.

[parsons 178]

Tuscon was a rare exception to what usually happens – the shooter takes as many lives as he can until confronted, then turns the gun on himself.

 

I don't think accepting what usually happens is a good plan of defense. Anyway, forcing someone to reload more often at least increases the potential opportunities for someone to mount a defense against an armed assailant .....and possibly provides time for some victims to run away...

Edited December 26, 2012 by parsons

[parsons 178]

This issue is like most "political " issues 90% of folks are reasonable and will compromise but the fools on the far right and left force the issue to the extreme.

 

I'm in complete agreement.

[Popeye 32]

My issue with compromise on "Gun Control" is that its never enough for Gun Control advocates. Give a little now, have another tragic shooting and give a little more, so on and so on. Doesn't take much thought to forsee the ultimate outcome.

 

I personally do not see a need for long magazines but support the right to legally own them. I do not own or need an "Assualt Rifle"(which is inaccurate of the true definition) but support the right to legally own one.Rational people should understand that banning them does not reduce the availability to criminals. Therefore it only affects law abiding citizens.

 

No one can factually state that if these shooters did not have extended magazines that the outcome would have been different. We can only issue a SWAG that it "might" have been.

 

I do know this. I have not had many conversations on this issue that did not become heated and sometimes hostile.

[BHS03 99]

NBC's David Gregory inadvertently proved that gun control doesn't work just his past week.

[thundercloud 179]

99.999% of the mag and weapons out there will never be a problem.

Its how you target the .001% and it's probaly far less than that.

There are millions of mags out there how are you going to get those out of circulation? I wouldn't want that job.

Most of these fellows were packing two or three weapons if each had 10 round clips you still have 30 rounds and could go from one to the other instanctly.

 

It's good to see people wanting to solve this problem but have to question how much more regulations will help when the ones we have now can't be enforced.

 

I think you have to target the high risk individual type. Type them. Loners, mental issues, mental meds, outcasts flag their licenses and anybody in the household of their address, make the process much more diffcult if not impossible if can not prove stable. Yeah I know more regs.

How bout look around you, you know who they are outcasts, people belittled with few friends, people who feel their alone, kids where their parents are so busy or absent they are not there to influence them, how bout do un to others as you would have them do to you. Don't treat them like the palque, friend them show them there is better things in this world with your light oh I forgot we regulate that now too. It's really hard to find hope.