Plenty of "Good Guys with Guns" But 6 Injured Anyway

[Brain357]

Because there is ample evidence that accidents have happened when people were unaware that someone was turning.

My point has always been that you are going after someone else's choice without any real evidence that their choice does any harm.

And, as I said before, if the capacity is legally set at 10, and no change in the murder rates is seen, then there will be a push to reduce it to 7. If there IS a change shown, then why not reduce it further, so make it 7.

If 2 rounds is enough, then why not limit all guns to 3 rounds?

I am fighting against blaming the law abiding gun owner for the crimes of felons and the mentally ill. That is our fundamental disagreement. You see guns and gun owners as the danger. I see the criminals as the danger.

I can point to every mass shooting involving a semi auto. That's pretty good evidence. I'm sure I can dig up plenty of gang bangers who fire 15 rounds and hit some poor kid sleeping in his room with a stray bullet. You have given one example of a woman fending off 3 thugs and not needing a hi cap magazine. That's all pretty good support for me.

As I said, the gangbangers are not shopping at the local gun store. They are also using fully automatic weapons, which are illegal. Most of them have felony convictions, which means they cannot buy a gun anyway, right?

Oh, and I did offer a link. Something you have yet to do concerning you claim. Or would you prefer to admit you made the numbers up?

Show me proof they are using full auto weapons. Every stat I have seen show full auto weapons are almost never used in crime.

Yes your link supported my claims. Of course it was made up. It's just a common sense stat. So far people needing a hi cap magazine for defense is at 0. And every mass shooting involving a hi cap magazine says they should be limited. Match the mass shooting numbers with your defenses, then we'll go from there.

 

[WinterBorn]

Well then they will just reload fast like you have already said. It doesn't matter right? You can't have both sides of the argument, that's dishonest.

I am not arguing both sides. The fact that someone can, with practice, reload fast enough that the capacity does not matter was an illustration of the futility of banning hi cap magazines. The fact that a magazine ban will do little or nothing is clearly evident.

In the Giffords shooting the guy fired 31 times and then was stopped when he tried to reload. Your saying lives wouldn't have been saved if he only shot 6 times and then was stopped? That's just silly.

There were 6 deaths. And since you want to ban all magazines with a capacity greater than 10, he would have had 10 rounds. No, I am not saying that lives would definitally not have been saved. I am saying that there is no way to know if they would or not. If he knew he had 10 rounds instead of 31, he could have been more careful to aim instead of just firing wildly. In which case he could have actually killed more people.

Also, it was not the actual delay from reloading that allowed him to be grabbed. He dropped the full magazine and someone kicked it away. It is only because he fumbled the reload that he was able to be stopped by unarmed citizens.

 

[WinterBorn]

Well then they will just reload fast like you have already said. It doesn't matter right? You can't have both sides of the argument, that's dishonest.

I am not arguing both sides. The fact that someone can, with practice, reload fast enough that the capacity does not matter was an illustration of the futility of banning hi cap magazines. The fact that a magazine ban will do little or nothing is clearly evident.

In the Giffords shooting the guy fired 31 times and then was stopped when he tried to reload. Your saying lives wouldn't have been saved if he only shot 6 times and then was stopped? That's just silly.

Perhaps you can clear something up, since I can't find any information on it. The 6 people killed, were they killed with the first 10 shots, the second 10 shots or the third 10 shots? If you have a link I would be interested.

 

[Brain357]

I am not arguing both sides. The fact that someone can, with practice, reload fast enough that the capacity does not matter was an illustration of the futility of banning hi cap magazines. The fact that a magazine ban will do little or nothing is clearly evident.

In the Giffords shooting the guy fired 31 times and then was stopped when he tried to reload. Your saying lives wouldn't have been saved if he only shot 6 times and then was stopped? That's just silly.

There were 6 deaths. And since you want to ban all magazines with a capacity greater than 10, he would have had 10 rounds. No, I am not saying that lives would definitally not have been saved. I am saying that there is no way to know if they would or not. If he knew he had 10 rounds instead of 31, he could have been more careful to aim instead of just firing wildly. In which case he could have actually killed more people.

Also, it was not the actual delay from reloading that allowed him to be grabbed. He dropped the full magazine and someone kicked it away. It is only because he fumbled the reload that he was able to be stopped by unarmed citizens.

Well I haven't stated what I would limit it to. But since 10 has been done before I guess that would be the easy number.

So he fumbled the magazine and that saved lives, but you don't think capacity is an issue? Wouldn't loading 3 10 rd magazines give more chances for fumbling?

 

[WinterBorn]

I can point to every mass shooting involving a semi auto. That's pretty good evidence. I'm sure I can dig up plenty of gang bangers who fire 15 rounds and hit some poor kid sleeping in his room with a stray bullet. You have given one example of a woman fending off 3 thugs and not needing a hi cap magazine. That's all pretty good support for me.

As I said, the gangbangers are not shopping at the local gun store. They are also using fully automatic weapons, which are illegal. Most of them have felony convictions, which means they cannot buy a gun anyway, right?

Oh, and I did offer a link. Something you have yet to do concerning you claim. Or would you prefer to admit you made the numbers up?

Show me proof they are using full auto weapons. Every stat I have seen show full auto weapons are almost never used in crime.

Yes your link supported my claims. Of course it was made up. It's just a common sense stat. So far people needing a hi cap magazine for defense is at 0. And every mass shooting involving a hi cap magazine says they should be limited. Match the mass shooting numbers with your defenses, then we'll go from there.

Since the gangbangers are almost all felons or underage, they are not buying their guns via legal means. If there are no fully automatic weapons used, then I was mistaken. That does not change the fact that a ban on high capacity magazines would not be obeyed by these thugs.

As for the number of high capacity magazines in law abiding citizens hands, you need to show more than just your opinion that banning them would make a big difference.

 

[Brain357]

I am not arguing both sides. The fact that someone can, with practice, reload fast enough that the capacity does not matter was an illustration of the futility of banning hi cap magazines. The fact that a magazine ban will do little or nothing is clearly evident.

In the Giffords shooting the guy fired 31 times and then was stopped when he tried to reload. Your saying lives wouldn't have been saved if he only shot 6 times and then was stopped? That's just silly.

Perhaps you can clear something up, since I can't find any information on it. The 6 people killed, were they killed with the first 10 shots, the second 10 shots or the third 10 shots? If you have a link I would be interested.

I will look around, but I doubt anyone knows. It was a shot person who does tackle him though, that's an interesting fact. The first shot was Giffords obviously. And in total 18 people were shot.

 

[Brain357]

As I said, the gangbangers are not shopping at the local gun store. They are also using fully automatic weapons, which are illegal. Most of them have felony convictions, which means they cannot buy a gun anyway, right?

Oh, and I did offer a link. Something you have yet to do concerning you claim. Or would you prefer to admit you made the numbers up?

Show me proof they are using full auto weapons. Every stat I have seen show full auto weapons are almost never used in crime.

Yes your link supported my claims. Of course it was made up. It's just a common sense stat. So far people needing a hi cap magazine for defense is at 0. And every mass shooting involving a hi cap magazine says they should be limited. Match the mass shooting numbers with your defenses, then we'll go from there.

Since the gangbangers are almost all felons or underage, they are not buying their guns via legal means. If there are no fully automatic weapons used, then I was mistaken. That does not change the fact that a ban on high capacity magazines would not be obeyed by these thugs.

As for the number of high capacity magazines in law abiding citizens hands, you need to show more than just your opinion that banning them would make a big difference.

All the mass shootings involving hi cap magazines is not just my opinion.

 

[WinterBorn]

In the Giffords shooting the guy fired 31 times and then was stopped when he tried to reload. Your saying lives wouldn't have been saved if he only shot 6 times and then was stopped? That's just silly.

There were 6 deaths. And since you want to ban all magazines with a capacity greater than 10, he would have had 10 rounds. No, I am not saying that lives would definitally not have been saved. I am saying that there is no way to know if they would or not. If he knew he had 10 rounds instead of 31, he could have been more careful to aim instead of just firing wildly. In which case he could have actually killed more people.

Also, it was not the actual delay from reloading that allowed him to be grabbed. He dropped the full magazine and someone kicked it away. It is only because he fumbled the reload that he was able to be stopped by unarmed citizens.

Well I haven't stated what I would limit it to. But since 10 has been done before I guess that would be the easy number.

So he fumbled the magazine and that saved lives, but you don't think capacity is an issue? Wouldn't loading 3 10 rd magazines give more chances for fumbling?

Would it? I think the fumbled magazine was a stroke of luck for the people there. Betting on it happening to save lives doesn't make much sense.

But if the mental health system had not been gutted, the shooter would have been in an institution instead of killing people.

The problem is Loughner's mental state, not the number of bullets in his gun.

You are ignoring the root cause of the problem.

 

[WinterBorn]

Show me proof they are using full auto weapons. Every stat I have seen show full auto weapons are almost never used in crime.

Yes your link supported my claims. Of course it was made up. It's just a common sense stat. So far people needing a hi cap magazine for defense is at 0. And every mass shooting involving a hi cap magazine says they should be limited. Match the mass shooting numbers with your defenses, then we'll go from there.

Since the gangbangers are almost all felons or underage, they are not buying their guns via legal means. If there are no fully automatic weapons used, then I was mistaken. That does not change the fact that a ban on high capacity magazines would not be obeyed by these thugs.

As for the number of high capacity magazines in law abiding citizens hands, you need to show more than just your opinion that banning them would make a big difference.

All the mass shootings involving hi cap magazines is not just my opinion.

The one about which this thread is based did not involve a high capacity magazine.

 

[Brain357]

There were 6 deaths. And since you want to ban all magazines with a capacity greater than 10, he would have had 10 rounds. No, I am not saying that lives would definitally not have been saved. I am saying that there is no way to know if they would or not. If he knew he had 10 rounds instead of 31, he could have been more careful to aim instead of just firing wildly. In which case he could have actually killed more people.

Also, it was not the actual delay from reloading that allowed him to be grabbed. He dropped the full magazine and someone kicked it away. It is only because he fumbled the reload that he was able to be stopped by unarmed citizens.

Well I haven't stated what I would limit it to. But since 10 has been done before I guess that would be the easy number.

So he fumbled the magazine and that saved lives, but you don't think capacity is an issue? Wouldn't loading 3 10 rd magazines give more chances for fumbling?

Would it? I think the fumbled magazine was a stroke of luck for the people there. Betting on it happening to save lives doesn't make much sense.

But if the mental health system had not been gutted, the shooter would have been in an institution instead of killing people.

The problem is Loughner's mental state, not the number of bullets in his gun.

You are ignoring the root cause of the problem.

I agree he never should have been there. But if he had 10 rd magazines he would have killed and injured far fewer. I don't think we can take every crazy off the street, why not limit the damage they can do?

 

[Brain357]

Since the gangbangers are almost all felons or underage, they are not buying their guns via legal means. If there are no fully automatic weapons used, then I was mistaken. That does not change the fact that a ban on high capacity magazines would not be obeyed by these thugs.

As for the number of high capacity magazines in law abiding citizens hands, you need to show more than just your opinion that banning them would make a big difference.

All the mass shootings involving hi cap magazines is not just my opinion.

The one about which this thread is based did not involve a high capacity magazine.

Nope. I guess we got on this discussion when I clearly stated what gun control I think we need. In this case it wouldn't have made a difference. But if he had a semi auto with a hi cap magazines maybe there would be 6 dead rather than wounded. At least based on previous shootings there would be more dead.

 

[WinterBorn]

Show me proof they are using full auto weapons. Every stat I have seen show full auto weapons are almost never used in crime.

Yes your link supported my claims. Of course it was made up. It's just a common sense stat. So far people needing a hi cap magazine for defense is at 0. And every mass shooting involving a hi cap magazine says they should be limited. Match the mass shooting numbers with your defenses, then we'll go from there.

Since the gangbangers are almost all felons or underage, they are not buying their guns via legal means. If there are no fully automatic weapons used, then I was mistaken. That does not change the fact that a ban on high capacity magazines would not be obeyed by these thugs.

As for the number of high capacity magazines in law abiding citizens hands, you need to show more than just your opinion that banning them would make a big difference.

All the mass shootings involving hi cap magazines is not just my opinion.

And how many of these shootings with high capacity magazines had people within close range to stop the shooter as he reloaded? Or are you planning on all future mass shooters dropping a magazine as well?

 

[Star]

Apparently this strange person thinks that if a guy is robbing my store, and I pull out a gun that has an eight-round magazine, the guy will run away or surrender. But if I pull out a gun that has a twelve-round mag, they guy will apparently stop, count the rounds in the mag, and then go right on robbing the store. Because a gun with a twelve-round mag isn't a defensive weapon.

Boy, when these liberals lose a debate, they start coming up with the screwiest "facts" imaginable. And they actually think they DON'T look ridiculous to normal people.

You're right! We should surrender tothe gun nuts! They have NO CONCERN FORPUBLIC SAFETY. Only a list for all things that go Bang! Like little boys who have become bored by firecrackers or constantly want to play Army, the gun nuts offer no solutions to gun violence.

They rationalize the deaths of of school children by citing constitutional rights to bear arms. They forget the lost lives and advocate slathering on MORE GUNS as a solution.

Their obscene action movie heroes have obliterated any sense of responsibility toward keeping our nation safe from gun violence. I surrender! Let's all get guns, gather on a hot summer night, get pissed drunk and shoot each other. In one last orgy of gun violence!

You idiots offer no solutions. But escalated violence for violence sake and some death wish by constitutional fiat.

Oh please, enough with the "you offer no solutions!" nonsense.

I have offered a solution that would do far more to curb gun violence than the bans of high capacity magazines.

Keep the violent felons locked up. I posted a link to an article that shows that 75% of gun related murders are committed by convicted felons. If they were not on the street you have reduced the gun violence by 75%.

You are staying focused on the mass shootings which only account for 1% of the gun related murders every year.

Now who is it that is not offering solutions??

Are you saying your "solution" is, we should round up all the Cliven Bundy allies that were a part of the show of force against Federal Agents in Bunkerville?
.

 

[bucs90]

If any of those gun toting rednecks were nearby, they would've run away anyway; Or shot and missed.

 

[WinterBorn]

Show me proof they are using full auto weapons. Every stat I have seen show full auto weapons are almost never used in crime.

Yes your link supported my claims. Of course it was made up. It's just a common sense stat. So far people needing a hi cap magazine for defense is at 0. And every mass shooting involving a hi cap magazine says they should be limited. Match the mass shooting numbers with your defenses, then we'll go from there.

Since the gangbangers are almost all felons or underage, they are not buying their guns via legal means. If there are no fully automatic weapons used, then I was mistaken. That does not change the fact that a ban on high capacity magazines would not be obeyed by these thugs.

As for the number of high capacity magazines in law abiding citizens hands, you need to show more than just your opinion that banning them would make a big difference.

All the mass shootings involving hi cap magazines is not just my opinion.

A quick look at the details of the Columbine shooting and the VaTech shooting shows that both involved reloading their handguns.

There are also several mass shooting that had fewer than 10 fatalities.

Would you care to share the link to where you found the info that all the mass shooting involved high capacity magazines?

The shooting at Chardon High school was done with a Ruger MkII .2 pistol. They come standard with a 10 round magazine.

The shooting at the Pinelake Health & rehab Nursing home was accomplished with a .357 revolver, an unnamed .22 pistol, and a Winchester 1300 shotgun. No mention of a high capacity magazine at all.

The shooting at the Louisianna technical College in Baton Rouge was done with a .357 revolver. No magazine at all.

The shooting at City Hall in Kirkwood Missouri was done with a .44 magnum revolver and a S&W .40 cal. (as far as I know, the only S&W in .40 cal was the M&P - the magazines hold 6 or 7 rounds)

The shooting at the Trolley Mall in Salt Lake City involved a Mossberg pump shotgun and a S&W revolver. No magazine involved in either.



So what was that you were saying about all the mass shooting involving high capacity magazines being not just your opinion???

I guess you don't mind playing it fast and loose with the facts, do you?

 

[WinterBorn]

You're right! We should surrender tothe gun nuts! They have NO CONCERN FORPUBLIC SAFETY. Only a list for all things that go Bang! Like little boys who have become bored by firecrackers or constantly want to play Army, the gun nuts offer no solutions to gun violence.

They rationalize the deaths of of school children by citing constitutional rights to bear arms. They forget the lost lives and advocate slathering on MORE GUNS as a solution.

Their obscene action movie heroes have obliterated any sense of responsibility toward keeping our nation safe from gun violence. I surrender! Let's all get guns, gather on a hot summer night, get pissed drunk and shoot each other. In one last orgy of gun violence!

You idiots offer no solutions. But escalated violence for violence sake and some death wish by constitutional fiat.

Oh please, enough with the "you offer no solutions!" nonsense.

I have offered a solution that would do far more to curb gun violence than the bans of high capacity magazines.

Keep the violent felons locked up. I posted a link to an article that shows that 75% of gun related murders are committed by convicted felons. If they were not on the street you have reduced the gun violence by 75%.

You are staying focused on the mass shootings which only account for 1% of the gun related murders every year.

Now who is it that is not offering solutions??

Are you saying your "solution" is, we should round up all the Cliven Bundy allies that were a part of the show of force against Federal Agents in Bunkerville?
.

WTF?? Are you saying that the Cliven Bundy allies are all violent felons??

I have no idea where you came in with the crap about a solution being rounding up those people.

 

[WinterBorn]

If any of those gun toting rednecks were nearby, they would've run away anyway; Or shot and missed.

I think you underestimate what a "gun-toting redneck" can do.

But it is obvious that discussions based on facts do not interest you.

 

[Pogo]

I find it funny that the Progressive bed-wetting nail-biter used this to attack Open Carry regions.

And you knew that...

You libtards just imploded every argument in favor of Gun Free Zones.

There is no issue of "gun free zones". You and your ilk made that up. It's a comic book fantasy myth, supported by absolutely nothing but wishful thinking, and already disproven as a fallacy by case histories (after which I notice the thread veered away nervously into tangents of calibers and other irrelevant bullshit). It's a red herring y'all like to bring in as a deflection. Didn't work then, doesn't work now.

Oh and I should add, won't work tomorrow either.

Wait hold on, I got it:

Whatever that's supposed to be, it isn't even remotely close to smelling like a hint of a shadow of an answer.

You know that, right?

 

[Star]

Oh please, enough with the "you offer no solutions!" nonsense.

I have offered a solution that would do far more to curb gun violence than the bans of high capacity magazines.

Keep the violent felons locked up. I posted a link to an article that shows that 75% of gun related murders are committed by convicted felons. If they were not on the street you have reduced the gun violence by 75%.

You are staying focused on the mass shootings which only account for 1% of the gun related murders every year.

Now who is it that is not offering solutions??

Are you saying your "solution" is, we should round up all the Cliven Bundy allies that were a part of the show of force against Federal Agents in Bunkerville?
.

WTF?? Are you saying that the Cliven Bundy allies are all violent felons??

I have no idea where you came in with the crap about a solution being rounding up those people.

You seem to be unaware that threatening a federal agent is a felony?
.

 

[koshergrl]

The feds threatened them. Not the other way around. They simply stood in the way.