Perfect example for 2nd amendment rights.

[Skull Pilot]

Police forces aren't even mentioned in the Constitution, and no where does it refer to "the People" as anything but the individual citizen.


.

What’s your definition of a well regulated militia ?

I define it as irrelevant to the right of "the People to keep and bear arms, just like the supreme court did.


.

How do you define the “well regulated” part

Can you not read, it's irrelevant to the discussion of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Everything after the comma in the 2nd can stand alone. It's a right of the people, not the government, not the State and not any militia. The founders said the people can't be disarmed and the supreme court agreed. Deal with it.


.

I agree. The people have a right to bare arms. Now can you answer my question on what “well regulated” means?

It means ordered or disciplined which does not necessarily mean government controlled,

And that applies to the militia the right to keep and bear arms is clearly stated as belonging to the people.

 

[Slade3200]

Are you really not getting it or are you just trying to be difficult?

He brought a gun with some magazines. If his magazines would have held 30 rounds instead of 10 there would have been more shots and more dead. You said yourself he had a shitty gun that locked up that cut him short and prevented more from dying. Same concept

You don't know that. Why are you pretending to know what was going through that wack job's mind

I don't know how many magazines he had but if had 30 round mags he may have brought less of them

Most likely he bough x number of rounds and filled as many magazines as he could with the ammo he bought if that was 3 30 round mags or 9 10 round mags it makes no difference

It makes a huge difference. It means carrying the 9 magazines in a backpack versus the 3 in his pockets. It means reloading 9 times instead of three, it means purchasing 9 magazines instead of three.

You don't seem to understand how fast a magazine can be changed. And it's easy when no one is shooting back. And magazines are pretty cheap

How many shots did he get off before his rifle jammed? Had had to change magazines at least once maybe more it's not really the issue you seem to think it is

I don’t know what point you are trying to make but it’s not landing. Common sense tells us that high capacity magazines, and weapons with high rates of fire contain more damage potential. It’s a simple point

A semiautomatic has a rate of fire of one round per trigger pull. It matters not if that semiautomatic is a rifle or a handgun. It matters not if that semiautomatic has pistol grips or barrel shrouds. It matters not if that semiautomatic has a plastic or a wooden stock.

Is one round per trigger pull a "high rate of fire"? It's the same rate of fire as a revolver or a lever action rifle or a shot gun for that matter

And I posted a very good video that basically proves that larger capacity magazines do not equate to more shots being fired

Machine guns have much higher rates of fire and you still haven’t answered whether you support the regulations in automatic weapons.

High capacity magazines are definately a grey area and a good subject for debate.

 

[OKTexas]

Police forces aren't even mentioned in the Constitution, and no where does it refer to "the People" as anything but the individual citizen.


.

What’s your definition of a well regulated militia ?

I define it as irrelevant to the right of "the People to keep and bear arms, just like the supreme court did.


.

How do you define the “well regulated” part

Can you not read, it's irrelevant to the discussion of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Everything after the comma in the 2nd can stand alone. It's a right of the people, not the government, not the State and not any militia. The founders said the people can't be disarmed and the supreme court agreed. Deal with it.


.

I agree. The people have a right to bare arms. Now can you answer my question on what “well regulated” means?

I chose not to because it's nothing but a deflection from the topic at hand. You can deal with that too. BTW the people have a right to KEEP and bear arms, not just bear arms at the whim of the government.


.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You don't know that. Why are you pretending to know what was going through that wack job's mind

I don't know how many magazines he had but if had 30 round mags he may have brought less of them

Most likely he bough x number of rounds and filled as many magazines as he could with the ammo he bought if that was 3 30 round mags or 9 10 round mags it makes no difference

It makes a huge difference. It means carrying the 9 magazines in a backpack versus the 3 in his pockets. It means reloading 9 times instead of three, it means purchasing 9 magazines instead of three.

You don't seem to understand how fast a magazine can be changed. And it's easy when no one is shooting back. And magazines are pretty cheap

How many shots did he get off before his rifle jammed? Had had to change magazines at least once maybe more it's not really the issue you seem to think it is

I don’t know what point you are trying to make but it’s not landing. Common sense tells us that high capacity magazines, and weapons with high rates of fire contain more damage potential. It’s a simple point

A semiautomatic has a rate of fire of one round per trigger pull. It matters not if that semiautomatic is a rifle or a handgun. It matters not if that semiautomatic has pistol grips or barrel shrouds. It matters not if that semiautomatic has a plastic or a wooden stock.

Is one round per trigger pull a "high rate of fire"? It's the same rate of fire as a revolver or a lever action rifle or a shot gun for that matter

And I posted a very good video that basically proves that larger capacity magazines do not equate to more shots being fired

Machine guns have much higher rates of fire and you still haven’t answered whether you support the regulations in automatic weapons.

High capacity magazines are definately a grey area and a good subject for debate.

You never asked me about fully automatic weapons.

FYI they are not illegal.

And "high capacity" is just another catch phrase

For decades 20 and 30 round magazines were standard sizes. My Ruger came with a 20 round magazine when i bought it

And I posted a very good video that explains why magazine size isn't really a factor

 

[Slade3200]

It makes a huge difference. It means carrying the 9 magazines in a backpack versus the 3 in his pockets. It means reloading 9 times instead of three, it means purchasing 9 magazines instead of three.

You realize that you can not carry 3 30 round magazines in your pockets right? Retard?

Are 3 30 round magazines easier to carry than 9 10 round magazines? Yes, so please STFU

Depends on how you carry them.

It's not hard to figure out.

I don't know how many times you need to be told that magazine size is not the defining variable as to how many shots you can get off

If somebody goes into a store and buys a gun with two extra magazines they can have 30 shots or 90 shots. Simple point. If they want 90 shots then yes they can buy 9 magazines so you think that makes it a non factor, I disagree.

It's not a factor because a person will buy as many as he thinks he needs or as many as he wants

I happen to have 5 10 round magazines for my carry pistol so what?

So some people would buy that because they want to carry 50 shots and some will buy that because they want 5 magazines for their gun.

In my opinion somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines shooting a crowd is more dangerous than somebody somebody walking around with 5 10 round magazines. Somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines is more dangerous than 15 10 round magazines. They either have to carry the magazines in a vest or a backpack and have to go through the process of retrieving the magazine and reloading, which creates opportunity to disarm or escape.

It has an effect whether you like to admit it or not. The debate is whether that effect is enough to make a law regulating the high cap mags.

 

[Slade3200]

What’s your definition of a well regulated militia ?

I define it as irrelevant to the right of "the People to keep and bear arms, just like the supreme court did.


.

How do you define the “well regulated” part

Can you not read, it's irrelevant to the discussion of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Everything after the comma in the 2nd can stand alone. It's a right of the people, not the government, not the State and not any militia. The founders said the people can't be disarmed and the supreme court agreed. Deal with it.


.

I agree. The people have a right to bare arms. Now can you answer my question on what “well regulated” means?

It means ordered or disciplined which does not necessarily mean government controlled,

And that applies to the militia the right to keep and bear arms is clearly stated as belonging to the people.

How is order and discipline measured and enforced?

 

[Slade3200]

What’s your definition of a well regulated militia ?

I define it as irrelevant to the right of "the People to keep and bear arms, just like the supreme court did.


.

How do you define the “well regulated” part

Can you not read, it's irrelevant to the discussion of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Everything after the comma in the 2nd can stand alone. It's a right of the people, not the government, not the State and not any militia. The founders said the people can't be disarmed and the supreme court agreed. Deal with it.


.

I agree. The people have a right to bare arms. Now can you answer my question on what “well regulated” means?

I chose not to because it's nothing but a deflection from the topic at hand. You can deal with that too. BTW the people have a right to KEEP and bear arms, not just bear arms at the whim of the government.


.

I already agreed that the people have the right to bare arms, if you don’t want to further engage in understanding our laws when it comes to the second amendment then that’s your call but it is a rather lazy move

 

[Skull Pilot]

You realize that you can not carry 3 30 round magazines in your pockets right? Retard?

Are 3 30 round magazines easier to carry than 9 10 round magazines? Yes, so please STFU

Depends on how you carry them.

It's not hard to figure out.

I don't know how many times you need to be told that magazine size is not the defining variable as to how many shots you can get off

If somebody goes into a store and buys a gun with two extra magazines they can have 30 shots or 90 shots. Simple point. If they want 90 shots then yes they can buy 9 magazines so you think that makes it a non factor, I disagree.

It's not a factor because a person will buy as many as he thinks he needs or as many as he wants

I happen to have 5 10 round magazines for my carry pistol so what?

So some people would buy that because they want to carry 50 shots and some will buy that because they want 5 magazines for their gun.

In my opinion somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines shooting a crowd is more dangerous than somebody somebody walking around with 5 10 round magazines. Somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines is more dangerous than 15 10 round magazines. They either have to carry the magazines in a vest or a backpack and have to go through the process of retrieving the magazine and reloading, which creates opportunity to disarm or escape.

It has an effect whether you like to admit it or not. The debate is whether that effect is enough to make a law regulating the high cap mags.

It really doesn't because if I wanted to carry 150 round I could just as easily carry 15 10 round magazines or 10 15 round magazines

And the fact that 1% of all murders occur in the scenarios you are fixated on adds to the fact that magazine size isn't really a factor

 

[Slade3200]

It makes a huge difference. It means carrying the 9 magazines in a backpack versus the 3 in his pockets. It means reloading 9 times instead of three, it means purchasing 9 magazines instead of three.

You don't seem to understand how fast a magazine can be changed. And it's easy when no one is shooting back. And magazines are pretty cheap

How many shots did he get off before his rifle jammed? Had had to change magazines at least once maybe more it's not really the issue you seem to think it is

I don’t know what point you are trying to make but it’s not landing. Common sense tells us that high capacity magazines, and weapons with high rates of fire contain more damage potential. It’s a simple point

A semiautomatic has a rate of fire of one round per trigger pull. It matters not if that semiautomatic is a rifle or a handgun. It matters not if that semiautomatic has pistol grips or barrel shrouds. It matters not if that semiautomatic has a plastic or a wooden stock.

Is one round per trigger pull a "high rate of fire"? It's the same rate of fire as a revolver or a lever action rifle or a shot gun for that matter

And I posted a very good video that basically proves that larger capacity magazines do not equate to more shots being fired

Machine guns have much higher rates of fire and you still haven’t answered whether you support the regulations in automatic weapons.

High capacity magazines are definately a grey area and a good subject for debate.

You never asked me about fully automatic weapons.

FYI they are not illegal.

And "high capacity" is just another catch phrase

For decades 20 and 30 round magazines were standard sizes. My Ruger came with a 20 round magazine when i bought it

And I posted a very good video that explains why magazine size isn't really a factor

I’ve posted at least 10 times asking whether y’all support the regulations of machine guns. I know they aren’t illegal, but do you think it a good thing that they are so highly regulated?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I define it as irrelevant to the right of "the People to keep and bear arms, just like the supreme court did.


.

How do you define the “well regulated” part

Can you not read, it's irrelevant to the discussion of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Everything after the comma in the 2nd can stand alone. It's a right of the people, not the government, not the State and not any militia. The founders said the people can't be disarmed and the supreme court agreed. Deal with it.


.

I agree. The people have a right to bare arms. Now can you answer my question on what “well regulated” means?

It means ordered or disciplined which does not necessarily mean government controlled,

And that applies to the militia the right to keep and bear arms is clearly stated as belonging to the people.

How is order and discipline measured and enforced?

By anyone.

You don't need a government bureaucrat to be discplined

 

[Skull Pilot]

You don't seem to understand how fast a magazine can be changed. And it's easy when no one is shooting back. And magazines are pretty cheap

How many shots did he get off before his rifle jammed? Had had to change magazines at least once maybe more it's not really the issue you seem to think it is

I don’t know what point you are trying to make but it’s not landing. Common sense tells us that high capacity magazines, and weapons with high rates of fire contain more damage potential. It’s a simple point

A semiautomatic has a rate of fire of one round per trigger pull. It matters not if that semiautomatic is a rifle or a handgun. It matters not if that semiautomatic has pistol grips or barrel shrouds. It matters not if that semiautomatic has a plastic or a wooden stock.

Is one round per trigger pull a "high rate of fire"? It's the same rate of fire as a revolver or a lever action rifle or a shot gun for that matter

And I posted a very good video that basically proves that larger capacity magazines do not equate to more shots being fired

Machine guns have much higher rates of fire and you still haven’t answered whether you support the regulations in automatic weapons.

High capacity magazines are definately a grey area and a good subject for debate.

You never asked me about fully automatic weapons.

FYI they are not illegal.

And "high capacity" is just another catch phrase

For decades 20 and 30 round magazines were standard sizes. My Ruger came with a 20 round magazine when i bought it

And I posted a very good video that explains why magazine size isn't really a factor

I’ve posted at least 10 times asking whether y’all support the regulations of machine guns. I know they aren’t illegal, but do you think it a good thing that they are so highly regulated?

They aren't really that highly regulated.

All you need is a permit that any law abiding person can get and to pay the tax involved.

Fully automatic weapons are however extremely expensive

Who Can Own a Full-Auto Machine Gun? – RocketFFL

 

[Slade3200]

Are 3 30 round magazines easier to carry than 9 10 round magazines? Yes, so please STFU

Depends on how you carry them.

It's not hard to figure out.

I don't know how many times you need to be told that magazine size is not the defining variable as to how many shots you can get off

If somebody goes into a store and buys a gun with two extra magazines they can have 30 shots or 90 shots. Simple point. If they want 90 shots then yes they can buy 9 magazines so you think that makes it a non factor, I disagree.

It's not a factor because a person will buy as many as he thinks he needs or as many as he wants

I happen to have 5 10 round magazines for my carry pistol so what?

So some people would buy that because they want to carry 50 shots and some will buy that because they want 5 magazines for their gun.

In my opinion somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines shooting a crowd is more dangerous than somebody somebody walking around with 5 10 round magazines. Somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines is more dangerous than 15 10 round magazines. They either have to carry the magazines in a vest or a backpack and have to go through the process of retrieving the magazine and reloading, which creates opportunity to disarm or escape.

It has an effect whether you like to admit it or not. The debate is whether that effect is enough to make a law regulating the high cap mags.

It really doesn't because if I wanted to carry 150 round I could just as easily carry 15 10 round magazines or 10 15 round magazines

And the fact that 1% of all murders occur in the scenarios you are fixated on adds to the fact that magazine size isn't really a factor

You’re right, you could... if I was hiding under a table while some nutjob was walking around shooting up the joint I’d much rather he had the 15 10 round mags instead of the 5 30 round mags, wouldn’t you? id be looking very closely during each reload when the guys gotta go to the bag to get another mag, to try and take him out. But hey if you don’t see a difference then there’s nothin I can say to convince you otherwise.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Depends on how you carry them.

It's not hard to figure out.

I don't know how many times you need to be told that magazine size is not the defining variable as to how many shots you can get off

If somebody goes into a store and buys a gun with two extra magazines they can have 30 shots or 90 shots. Simple point. If they want 90 shots then yes they can buy 9 magazines so you think that makes it a non factor, I disagree.

It's not a factor because a person will buy as many as he thinks he needs or as many as he wants

I happen to have 5 10 round magazines for my carry pistol so what?

So some people would buy that because they want to carry 50 shots and some will buy that because they want 5 magazines for their gun.

In my opinion somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines shooting a crowd is more dangerous than somebody somebody walking around with 5 10 round magazines. Somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines is more dangerous than 15 10 round magazines. They either have to carry the magazines in a vest or a backpack and have to go through the process of retrieving the magazine and reloading, which creates opportunity to disarm or escape.

It has an effect whether you like to admit it or not. The debate is whether that effect is enough to make a law regulating the high cap mags.

It really doesn't because if I wanted to carry 150 round I could just as easily carry 15 10 round magazines or 10 15 round magazines

And the fact that 1% of all murders occur in the scenarios you are fixated on adds to the fact that magazine size isn't really a factor

You’re right, you could... if I was hiding under a table while some nutjob was walking around shooting up the joint I’d much rather he had the 15 10 round mags instead of the 5 30 round mags, wouldn’t you? id be looking very closely during each reload when the guys gotta go to the bag to get another mag, to try and take him out. But hey if you don’t see a difference then there’s nothin I can say to convince you otherwise.

Funny how that never happens during a mass shooting isn't it?

And in all honesty I don't worry abut getting killed in a mass shooting as the odds are pretty thin

 

[Slade3200]

How do you define the “well regulated” part

Can you not read, it's irrelevant to the discussion of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Everything after the comma in the 2nd can stand alone. It's a right of the people, not the government, not the State and not any militia. The founders said the people can't be disarmed and the supreme court agreed. Deal with it.


.

I agree. The people have a right to bare arms. Now can you answer my question on what “well regulated” means?

It means ordered or disciplined which does not necessarily mean government controlled,

And that applies to the militia the right to keep and bear arms is clearly stated as belonging to the people.

How is order and discipline measured and enforced?

By anyone.

You don't need a government bureaucrat to be discplined

I never said anything about government bureaucrats, I just asked a question... when the constitution says a well regulated militia you’re saying that the founders meant to say that people should be ordered and disciplined and held accountable by just anyone who feels like holding them accountable? That’s how you think it’s intended?

 

[Slade3200]

I don’t know what point you are trying to make but it’s not landing. Common sense tells us that high capacity magazines, and weapons with high rates of fire contain more damage potential. It’s a simple point

A semiautomatic has a rate of fire of one round per trigger pull. It matters not if that semiautomatic is a rifle or a handgun. It matters not if that semiautomatic has pistol grips or barrel shrouds. It matters not if that semiautomatic has a plastic or a wooden stock.

Is one round per trigger pull a "high rate of fire"? It's the same rate of fire as a revolver or a lever action rifle or a shot gun for that matter

And I posted a very good video that basically proves that larger capacity magazines do not equate to more shots being fired

Machine guns have much higher rates of fire and you still haven’t answered whether you support the regulations in automatic weapons.

High capacity magazines are definately a grey area and a good subject for debate.

You never asked me about fully automatic weapons.

FYI they are not illegal.

And "high capacity" is just another catch phrase

For decades 20 and 30 round magazines were standard sizes. My Ruger came with a 20 round magazine when i bought it

And I posted a very good video that explains why magazine size isn't really a factor

I’ve posted at least 10 times asking whether y’all support the regulations of machine guns. I know they aren’t illegal, but do you think it a good thing that they are so highly regulated?

They aren't really that highly regulated.

All you need is a permit that any law abiding person can get and to pay the tax involved.

Fully automatic weapons are however extremely expensive

Who Can Own a Full-Auto Machine Gun? – RocketFFL

Just like the rest of the dupes, another dodge. Why can’t any of you answer a simple yes or no question? You are the 5th person who has dodged answering. P@triot is the one person with the balls enough to answer so far

 

[Skull Pilot]

Can you not read, it's irrelevant to the discussion of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Everything after the comma in the 2nd can stand alone. It's a right of the people, not the government, not the State and not any militia. The founders said the people can't be disarmed and the supreme court agreed. Deal with it.


.

I agree. The people have a right to bare arms. Now can you answer my question on what “well regulated” means?

It means ordered or disciplined which does not necessarily mean government controlled,

And that applies to the militia the right to keep and bear arms is clearly stated as belonging to the people.

How is order and discipline measured and enforced?

By anyone.

You don't need a government bureaucrat to be discplined

I never said anything about government bureaucrats, I just asked a question... when the constitution says a well regulated militia you’re saying that the founders meant to say that people should be ordered and disciplined and held accountable by just anyone who feels like holding them accountable? That’s how you think it’s intended?

The second says nothing about accountability.

If a group of people were to form a militia they could decide who their leader would be.
But you ignore the fact that the right to keep and bear arms belongs to the people whether they are serving in a militia or not.

 

[Slade3200]

If somebody goes into a store and buys a gun with two extra magazines they can have 30 shots or 90 shots. Simple point. If they want 90 shots then yes they can buy 9 magazines so you think that makes it a non factor, I disagree.

It's not a factor because a person will buy as many as he thinks he needs or as many as he wants

I happen to have 5 10 round magazines for my carry pistol so what?

So some people would buy that because they want to carry 50 shots and some will buy that because they want 5 magazines for their gun.

In my opinion somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines shooting a crowd is more dangerous than somebody somebody walking around with 5 10 round magazines. Somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines is more dangerous than 15 10 round magazines. They either have to carry the magazines in a vest or a backpack and have to go through the process of retrieving the magazine and reloading, which creates opportunity to disarm or escape.

It has an effect whether you like to admit it or not. The debate is whether that effect is enough to make a law regulating the high cap mags.

It really doesn't because if I wanted to carry 150 round I could just as easily carry 15 10 round magazines or 10 15 round magazines

And the fact that 1% of all murders occur in the scenarios you are fixated on adds to the fact that magazine size isn't really a factor

You’re right, you could... if I was hiding under a table while some nutjob was walking around shooting up the joint I’d much rather he had the 15 10 round mags instead of the 5 30 round mags, wouldn’t you? id be looking very closely during each reload when the guys gotta go to the bag to get another mag, to try and take him out. But hey if you don’t see a difference then there’s nothin I can say to convince you otherwise.

Funny how that never happens during a mass shooting isn't it?

And in all honesty I don't worry abut getting killed in a mass shooting as the odds are pretty thin

Yeah you’re right, fuck it. Those students who want safer schools are drama queens anyways, let’s not do shit.

 

[OKTexas]

I define it as irrelevant to the right of "the People to keep and bear arms, just like the supreme court did.


.

How do you define the “well regulated” part

Can you not read, it's irrelevant to the discussion of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Everything after the comma in the 2nd can stand alone. It's a right of the people, not the government, not the State and not any militia. The founders said the people can't be disarmed and the supreme court agreed. Deal with it.


.

I agree. The people have a right to bare arms. Now can you answer my question on what “well regulated” means?

I chose not to because it's nothing but a deflection from the topic at hand. You can deal with that too. BTW the people have a right to KEEP and bear arms, not just bear arms at the whim of the government.


.

I already agreed that the people have the right to bare arms, if you don’t want to further engage in understanding our laws when it comes to the second amendment then that’s your call but it is a rather lazy move

Yet you can't seem to find the courage to include the word "keep", meaning to possess, you're being disingenuous. Also I understand our gun laws and how they infringe on the rights of the people. To anyone who says they want to further infringe on the peoples rights, I say go to hell, no more yielding, no more compromise.


.

 

[Skull Pilot]

A semiautomatic has a rate of fire of one round per trigger pull. It matters not if that semiautomatic is a rifle or a handgun. It matters not if that semiautomatic has pistol grips or barrel shrouds. It matters not if that semiautomatic has a plastic or a wooden stock.

Is one round per trigger pull a "high rate of fire"? It's the same rate of fire as a revolver or a lever action rifle or a shot gun for that matter

And I posted a very good video that basically proves that larger capacity magazines do not equate to more shots being fired

Machine guns have much higher rates of fire and you still haven’t answered whether you support the regulations in automatic weapons.

High capacity magazines are definately a grey area and a good subject for debate.

You never asked me about fully automatic weapons.

FYI they are not illegal.

And "high capacity" is just another catch phrase

For decades 20 and 30 round magazines were standard sizes. My Ruger came with a 20 round magazine when i bought it

And I posted a very good video that explains why magazine size isn't really a factor

I’ve posted at least 10 times asking whether y’all support the regulations of machine guns. I know they aren’t illegal, but do you think it a good thing that they are so highly regulated?

They aren't really that highly regulated.

All you need is a permit that any law abiding person can get and to pay the tax involved.

Fully automatic weapons are however extremely expensive

Who Can Own a Full-Auto Machine Gun? – RocketFFL

Just like the rest of the dupes, another dodge. Why can’t any of you answer a simple yes or no question? You are the 5th person who has dodged answering. P@triot is the one person with the balls enough to answer so far

My honest answer is I don't give a fuck about the regulation of machine guns because I never wanted one.

But they really are not that highly regulated as you say they are.

And what's point you're trying to make with that question?

That you have to be 21?

 

[Skull Pilot]

It's not a factor because a person will buy as many as he thinks he needs or as many as he wants

I happen to have 5 10 round magazines for my carry pistol so what?

So some people would buy that because they want to carry 50 shots and some will buy that because they want 5 magazines for their gun.

In my opinion somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines shooting a crowd is more dangerous than somebody somebody walking around with 5 10 round magazines. Somebody walking around with 5 30 round magazines is more dangerous than 15 10 round magazines. They either have to carry the magazines in a vest or a backpack and have to go through the process of retrieving the magazine and reloading, which creates opportunity to disarm or escape.

It has an effect whether you like to admit it or not. The debate is whether that effect is enough to make a law regulating the high cap mags.

It really doesn't because if I wanted to carry 150 round I could just as easily carry 15 10 round magazines or 10 15 round magazines

And the fact that 1% of all murders occur in the scenarios you are fixated on adds to the fact that magazine size isn't really a factor

You’re right, you could... if I was hiding under a table while some nutjob was walking around shooting up the joint I’d much rather he had the 15 10 round mags instead of the 5 30 round mags, wouldn’t you? id be looking very closely during each reload when the guys gotta go to the bag to get another mag, to try and take him out. But hey if you don’t see a difference then there’s nothin I can say to convince you otherwise.

Funny how that never happens during a mass shooting isn't it?

And in all honesty I don't worry abut getting killed in a mass shooting as the odds are pretty thin

Yeah you’re right, fuck it. Those students who want safer schools are drama queens anyways, let’s not do shit.

There are a lot better ways to secure schools than telling law abiding people they can't own certain guns.

Gee I don't know maybe we start by controlling who can walk onto the school grounds or into the school buildings

DUH