Convincing argument for 30-rd magazines

[Quantum Windbag]

You have no right to own a 30 or 50 round magazine. If those magazines are being abused by mass Murderers, it is time to reassess their usefulness

If a mass murdered abuses Facebook the way Dorner did whould we reevaluate the 1st Amendment?

No, but we could discuss his 50 caliber weapons

Makes it easier to kill cops

The one he never used? Must have killed a lot of cops with it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

A 30 round clip in a machine gun would be useless.

The standard magazine in a BAR is 20 rounds.

About 3 seconds of sustained fire, which is useless.

You might want to ease back to the shallow end of the firearm knowledge pool, before you drown.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm sorry that every viewpoint that you're told to believe in doesn't hold up when facts and common sense are applied.

Ok, so you are liar who makes up positions for other people than demand that they defend something they never said.

I've met your type before.

They usually don't last long on a board because people stop trying to hold discussions with them.

I've been here since 2010, you've been here a month, but otherwise, solid point. Really.

Oh I think you'll find that Mr. Shroom has been here much longer, only under a different incarnation or two.

 

[NYcarbineer]

because in this country we still have the right to fight back. you haven't been able to take that away yet, hard as you try.

Fight back? Against the government? That's called treason. But good for you, I'm sure you're convinced that you're being a real american, comrade.

if we listened to you we'd still support the queen. why do you live here and not england?

If Southerners could fight, we'd still have slavery.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If a mass murdered abuses Facebook the way Dorner did whould we reevaluate the 1st Amendment?

No, but we could discuss his 50 caliber weapons

Makes it easier to kill cops

You did not suggest discussing my right to own 30 or 50 round magazines. Instead you point blank told me that I had no right to own such. In that, you sir are wrong.
I have rights insured by the Constitution and I have rights insured by my willingness to fight for them.

You are correct - 20/30rd magazines are standard for today's service rifles, and so they are protected by the 2nd as in integral part of the werapons themselves.

I openly laugh at those who beleive they are being clever by arguing that while we can't ban the guns, we can ban the magazines and the ammunition.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No, but we could discuss his 50 caliber weapons

Makes it easier to kill cops

You did not suggest discussing my right to own 30 or 50 round magazines. Instead you point blank told me that I had no right to own such. In that, you sir are wrong.
I have rights insured by the Constitution and I have rights insured by my willingness to fight for them.

You are correct - 20/30rd magazines are standard for today's service rifles, and so they are protected by the 2nd as in integral part of the werapons themselves.

I openly laugh at those who beleive they are being clever by arguing that while we can't ban the guns, we can ban the magazines and the ammunition.

So according to your position,

someone convicted of armed robbery, who gets out of prison today, who wishes to buy a fully automatic M4 carbine, equipped with a grenade launcher, and the grenades, and a 100 round magazine,

at any retailer who wishes to sell them,

no background check, no questions asked.

Is anything above inaccurate?