Solution to high magazine capacity...pass law limiting criminals to 10 round mags...

[2aguy]

If you run around a corner you keep running.

Unless you run into corridor or room with no exit....

If everyone is being shot at you wouldn't pause for anything.

Except if your wife or children are in a different aisle of the store or part of the building...

 

[2aguy]

Every criminal is law abiding right up until they commit their first crime and we have no way to know which ones are going to cross that line.

Felons are not allowed to own, carry or use guns...at all...by law...ever...and we know who they are...

 

[boedicca]

We have been having a discussion over several threads about the need of law abiding citizens to own standard capacity magazines...of course the gun grabbers want to limit magazines to 10 rounds...as if this would solve the problem...

But....I have come up with the solution...and it will be just as if not more effective than banning 30 round and 19 round magazines for law abiding citizens...

Let's pass a law that allows criminals to only have 10 round magazines...the answer was right there in front of us all along...no need to bother the law abiding citizens...you could give them a million round magazines and it wouldn't affect the crime rate....

However...limit criminals to 10 round magazines...now that solves all the problems with guns...

Comments?

Why don't we just pass laws that make it illegal for criminals to commit crimes in the first place?

Oh wait....we've already done that.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Wait... you actually support the state requiring a license before someone can exercise a right? To what end?

Yes, absolutely. To the end of having fewer accidental shootings.

How does a license reduce accidental shootings and how does the number of acicdental shootings justify such a heinous restriction on the exercise of a right?

Actually, not everywhere

Where is is legal to carry a gun while drunk?
Where is it legal to hunt while intoxicated?

Right, that's why I think we need to do better on that front.

By 'doing better on that front", you mean you want medical professions, rather than the legal system, to determine if people should have their rights removed?
How does that not violate due process?

For example, requiring people to keep their guns locked up when they're not around.

How do you enforce this?

To the end of reducing the number of incidents of kids or others getting their hands on a gun somebody left out and shooting somebody or themselves.

How many times does this happen and how does this number justify this restriction on the exercise of a right?

Shooting a gun in a crowded place is nearly always a bad idea.

People legally carry guns into crowded places all the time.
How often does this result in an innocent bystander being shot?

 

[Brain357]

If you run around a corner you keep running.

Unless you run into corridor or room with no exit....

If everyone is being shot at you wouldn't pause for anything.

Except if your wife or children are in a different aisle of the store or part of the building...

Yet still some will escape. You want as few as possible to escape. Why is that?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Restricting guns in crowded places? Great,now the gunman has a target rich environment and nobody shooting back....what could go wrong?

That's the argument that led to school teachers having guns in many red states... Any guesses how that is working out?

Hmm. These teachers are trained and licensed.
So much for the argument that training and licenses prevent accidental discharges.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Restricting guns in crowded places? Great,now

Yeah...just like those killed in in the mall shooting in Kenya,the clock tower shootings in Austin.
I could go......

Why do gunners always provide examples that support my view?
From clock tower shooting:
When Charlotte Darehshori, a young secretary, ran to help Boyer and Huffman, she came under fire. She crouched beneath the concrete base of a flagpole for an hour and a half, shielding herself from Whitman's view.

Nope..It proves people will hide. Had the shooter been mobile she would have been toast.

It shows people can escape. You lose again.

Nobody said there was no escape you dipshit.
I've been in a real life situation where a 15 or 30 round mag would have been very welcome.
You haven't...you lose.

Yes actually you have been saying nobody escapes. You seem to think victims all stand still and wait to be shot. Shooters are never close enough to be tackled, but close enough to kill anyone hiding. Quite the fantasy you have. Sorry but your arguments aren't in reality.

So you've now resorted to lying? I think we're done here.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Restricting guns in crowded places? Great,now the gunman has a target rich environment and nobody shooting back....what could go wrong?

That's the argument that led to school teachers having guns in many red states... Any guesses how that is working out?

Seriously people. This armed teacher thing really might not work out.

So how many teachers have shot and killed students?

How many have shot bad guys?

Your a complete dumbass. When have they had the opportunity?

 

[tuhaybey]

How does a license reduce accidental shootings and how does the number of acicdental shootings justify such a heinous restriction on the exercise of a right?

No, no, I proposed requiring gun safety training to get a license. The training, not the license, is what would reduce accidental shootings.

Taking a gun safety training course isn't so heinous as you seem to think. Most people just do it voluntarily and many states already require it.

Where is is legal to carry a gun while drunk?
Where is it legal to hunt while intoxicated?

I forget. Somebody looked it up and posted it the other day. It was 10 or so states.

By 'doing better on that front", you mean you want medical professions, rather than the legal system, to determine if people should have their rights removed?
How does that not violate due process?

You'd certainly have to have due process. The constitution requires it. Some kind of appealable process where you could ultimately have it decide by a court if you contested the decision.

How do you enforce this?

One way things like that are often enforced is civilly. The victim could sue the owner that left their gun unlocked for negligence. If you break the law, there is a presumption of negligence. Also, many people just choose to obey the law and it could be a useful reminder to otherwise responsible people to be responsible about this too

How many times does this happen and how does this number justify this restriction on the exercise of a right?

People legally carry guns into crowded places all the time.
How often does this result in an innocent bystander being shot?

We lose around 1,000 lives a year, and around 30,000 people are injured a year from accidental shootings.

 

[M14 Shooter]

We have been having a discussion over several threads about the need of law abiding citizens to own standard capacity magazines...of course the gun grabbers want to limit magazines to 10 rounds...as if this would solve the problem...

But....I have come up with the solution...and it will be just as if not more effective than banning 30 round and 19 round magazines for law abiding citizens...

Let's pass a law that allows criminals to only have 10 round magazines...the answer was right there in front of us all along...no need to bother the law abiding citizens...you could give them a million round magazines and it wouldn't affect the crime rate....

However...limit criminals to 10 round magazines...now that solves all the problems with guns...

Comments?

Why don't we just pass laws that make it illegal for criminals to commit crimes in the first place?
Oh wait....we've already done that.

Anyone who believes that we can enact a law that will prevent people form breaking the law is, well, silly.

 

[Brain357]

Restricting guns in crowded places? Great,now

Why do gunners always provide examples that support my view?
From clock tower shooting:
When Charlotte Darehshori, a young secretary, ran to help Boyer and Huffman, she came under fire. She crouched beneath the concrete base of a flagpole for an hour and a half, shielding herself from Whitman's view.

Nope..It proves people will hide. Had the shooter been mobile she would have been toast.

It shows people can escape. You lose again.

Nobody said there was no escape you dipshit.
I've been in a real life situation where a 15 or 30 round mag would have been very welcome.
You haven't...you lose.

Yes actually you have been saying nobody escapes. You seem to think victims all stand still and wait to be shot. Shooters are never close enough to be tackled, but close enough to kill anyone hiding. Quite the fantasy you have. Sorry but your arguments aren't in reality.

So you've now resorted to lying? I think we're done here.

Yes you have lost. If you know people escape or hide, then you would know the shooter having to reload often would allow more to escape.

 

[2aguy]

We lose around 1,000 lives a year, and around 30,000 people are injured a year from accidental shootings.

Actually, the number of accidental gun deaths is around 600-700 a year...

also...I would recommend that people watch the documentary "Terror in the Mall," about the attack on the mall in Kenya...it would answer a lot of the comments about dealing with shooters in a public situation...and don't tell me that it couldn't happen here...

 

[Brain357]

• Restricting guns in crowded places? Great,now the gunman has a target rich environment and nobody shooting back....what could go wrong?

  
  That's the argument that led to school teachers having guns in many red states... Any guesses how that is working out?
  
  Seriously people. This armed teacher thing really might not work out.

  
  So how many teachers have shot and killed students?

  
  How many have shot bad guys?

  
  Your a complete dumbass. When have they had the opportunity?

  
  So I guess teachers are more likely to shoot themselves than a bad guy.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Restricting guns in crowded places? Great,now

Nope..It proves people will hide. Had the shooter been mobile she would have been toast.

It shows people can escape. You lose again.

Nobody said there was no escape you dipshit.
I've been in a real life situation where a 15 or 30 round mag would have been very welcome.
You haven't...you lose.

Yes actually you have been saying nobody escapes. You seem to think victims all stand still and wait to be shot. Shooters are never close enough to be tackled, but close enough to kill anyone hiding. Quite the fantasy you have. Sorry but your arguments aren't in reality.

So you've now resorted to lying? I think we're done here.

Yes you have lost. If you know people escape or hide, then you would know the shooter having to reload often would allow more to escape.

You continue to ignore the fact that the majority...make that the VAST majority of people would have no idea whether the shooter was reloading or pausing.
It appears all I'd have to do to put one in your dumbass would be to fire off six rounds and than wait for you to make a run for it. In the case of my pistol I'd still have ten left to put in your back.
I can only imagine your surprise .....

 

[M14 Shooter]

No, no, I proposed requiring gun safety training to get a license. The training, not the license, is what would reduce accidental shootings. Taking a gun safety training course isn't so heinous as you seem to think. Most people just do it voluntarily and many states already require it.

Requiring a license to exercise a right - ANY right - and requiring training/education to acquire that license are arbitrary and heinous restrictions on the exercise of same.
What compelling state interest do these restrictions serve and how are they the least restrictive means to achieve them?

I forget. Somebody looked it up and posted it the other day. It was 10 or so states

Ah, So, your claim is unsupported.

You'd certainly have to have due process. The constitution requires it. Some kind of appealable process where you could ultimately have it decide by a court if you contested the decision.

As this is effectively the process we have now, nothing changes - thus, your suggestion achieves nothing.

One way things like that are often enforced is civilly. The victim could sue the owner that left their gun unlocked for negligence.

IOW, you cannot enforce the law until after the fact.
And so, how does the law prevent people from finding a gun and accidentally shooting themselves?

People legally carry guns into crowded places all the time.
How often does this result in an innocent bystander being shot?

We lose around 1,000 lives a year, and around 30,000 people are injured a year from accidental shootings.

31,000 accidental shooting by people legally carrying guns in crowded places?
Prove this.

 

[Brain357]

It shows people can escape. You lose again.

Nobody said there was no escape you dipshit.
I've been in a real life situation where a 15 or 30 round mag would have been very welcome.
You haven't...you lose.

Yes actually you have been saying nobody escapes. You seem to think victims all stand still and wait to be shot. Shooters are never close enough to be tackled, but close enough to kill anyone hiding. Quite the fantasy you have. Sorry but your arguments aren't in reality.

So you've now resorted to lying? I think we're done here.

Yes you have lost. If you know people escape or hide, then you would know the shooter having to reload often would allow more to escape.

You continue to ignore the fact that the majority...make that the VAST majority of people would have no idea whether the shooter was reloading or pausing.
It appears all I'd have to do to put one in your dumbass would be to fire off six rounds and than wait for you to make a run for it. In the case of my pistol I'd still have ten left to put in your back.
I can only imagine your surprise .....

Again it doesn't matter. People are just running or hiding immediately. Why would they wait for him to pause or reload?

You seem to be stuck in shooter video game where targets pop out for the shooter. Ha

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Nobody said there was no escape you dipshit.
I've been in a real life situation where a 15 or 30 round mag would have been very welcome.
You haven't...you lose.

Yes actually you have been saying nobody escapes. You seem to think victims all stand still and wait to be shot. Shooters are never close enough to be tackled, but close enough to kill anyone hiding. Quite the fantasy you have. Sorry but your arguments aren't in reality.

So you've now resorted to lying? I think we're done here.

Yes you have lost. If you know people escape or hide, then you would know the shooter having to reload often would allow more to escape.

You continue to ignore the fact that the majority...make that the VAST majority of people would have no idea whether the shooter was reloading or pausing.
It appears all I'd have to do to put one in your dumbass would be to fire off six rounds and than wait for you to make a run for it. In the case of my pistol I'd still have ten left to put in your back.
I can only imagine your surprise .....

Again it doesn't matter. People are just running or hiding immediately. Why would they wait for him to pause or reload?

You seem to be stuck in shooter video game where targets pop out for the shooter. Ha

Thats been your argument all along ya fucken moron.
And now you think you can outrun a bullet.

 

[Brain357]

It shows people can escape. You lose again.

Nobody said there was no escape you dipshit.
I've been in a real life situation where a 15 or 30 round mag would have been very welcome.
You haven't...you lose.

Yes actually you have been saying nobody escapes. You seem to think victims all stand still and wait to be shot. Shooters are never close enough to be tackled, but close enough to kill anyone hiding. Quite the fantasy you have. Sorry but your arguments aren't in reality.

So you've now resorted to lying? I think we're done here.

Yes you have lost. If you know people escape or hide, then you would know the shooter having to reload often would allow more to escape.

You continue to ignore the fact that the majority...make that the VAST majority of people would have no idea whether the shooter was reloading or pausing.
It appears all I'd have to do to put one in your dumbass would be to fire off six rounds and than wait for you to make a run for it. In the case of my pistol I'd still have ten left to put in your back.
I can only imagine your surprise .....

Let's try to make this simple for you. In Giffords shooting he was stopped while reloading. So let's say another shooter is stopped the same way. Now will more people be shot if he is stopped after 10 rds or stopped after 18 rds?

 

[AtticusF]

The giffords shooting was pure luck...remember, the guy at Sandy Hook reloaded as well...and that didn't stop him...the giffords shooter got too close to his victims before he started to shoot...that is why the Santa Barbara shooter wasn't tackled...he was in a car...

You really want to put your life on the line with the bet that someone can have the intestinal fortitude to charge a gunman as he reloads his weapon...you want to bet your life on someone doing that...really?

How many people have had a chance to run away while the shooter reloads? Why do you want to make it as easy as possible for the shooter?

That is a really good point

We lose around 1,000 lives a year, and around 30,000 people are injured a year from accidental shootings.

Actually, the number of accidental gun deaths is around 600-700 a year...

also...I would recommend that people watch the documentary "Terror in the Mall," about the attack on the mall in Kenya...it would answer a lot of the comments about dealing with shooters in a public situation...and don't tell me that it couldn't happen here...

Our biggest problem is that we let paranoid people own and tote gunz.

 

[Brain357]

Yes actually you have been saying nobody escapes. You seem to think victims all stand still and wait to be shot. Shooters are never close enough to be tackled, but close enough to kill anyone hiding. Quite the fantasy you have. Sorry but your arguments aren't in reality.

So you've now resorted to lying? I think we're done here.

Yes you have lost. If you know people escape or hide, then you would know the shooter having to reload often would allow more to escape.

You continue to ignore the fact that the majority...make that the VAST majority of people would have no idea whether the shooter was reloading or pausing.
It appears all I'd have to do to put one in your dumbass would be to fire off six rounds and than wait for you to make a run for it. In the case of my pistol I'd still have ten left to put in your back.
I can only imagine your surprise .....

Again it doesn't matter. People are just running or hiding immediately. Why would they wait for him to pause or reload?

You seem to be stuck in shooter video game where targets pop out for the shooter. Ha

Thats been your argument all along ya fucken moron.
And now you think you can outrun a bullet.

So again you are saying people can't escape. You fit moron well.