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

[M14 Shooter]

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.

You are aware that there is a legal process for removing the right to arms from those judged mentally infirm -- right?
So, where is the problem?

 

[AtticusF]

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?

I don't think gun cultists are particularly good at math or logic.

They think the odds of a mob of scary "thugs" cornering them is much higher than it is.

 

[2aguy]

the interesting thing
.the anti gunners have declared so many areas gun free zones that the only option left to the majority of the people caught in a mass shooting is to run, hide or charge the attacker....because they are banned by law from returning fire and suppressing the attacker...

keep in mind...at Sandy Hook, the first person killed was the principal...who charged the killer...and was shot and killed....

 

[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.

You are aware that there is a legal process for removing the right to arms from those judged mentally infirm -- right?
So, where is the problem?

It would be easier to just be honest -- any yahoo who wants to buy a so-called "assault" rifle or strap a gun to their body to go to Chuck E Cheese and run errands is too mentally off to own or carry a gun. If they have a bunch of gunz, they need to be institutionalized. It might be a Catch 22, but it's the truth.

 

[2aguy]

the principal at Sandy Hook took your advice Brain 357...because she had no other option...

Sandy Hook principal died lunging at gunman - WFSB 3 Connecticut

WTOWN, CT (AP) -
Newtown town officials said the principal who died in the rampage at an elementary school was killed while lunging at the gunman as she tried to overtake him.

Dawn Hochsprung was gunned down in Friday's massacre in Newtown. Board of Education chairwoman Debbie Liedlien says administrators were coming out of a meeting when the gunman forced his way into the school and ran toward him.

 

[tuhaybey]

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

Everybody is far, far, more likely to shoot themselves than to shoot a bad guy. The whole "I need me some guns for all the bad guy shootin I do" argument is one of the most ridiculous ones... If somebody really is just super worried about their safety, they should carry around things like a first aid kit, drinking water, blankets, etc., way before a gun. It isn't really about that at all.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

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?

I don't think gun cultists are particularly good at math or logic.

They think the odds of a mob of scary "thugs" cornering them is much higher than it is.

I had the misfortune of being in just such a situation. So yes it does happen.

 

[AtticusF]

the interesting thing
.the anti gunners have declared so many areas gun free zones that the only option left to the majority of the people caught in a mass shooting is to run, hide or charge the attacker....because they are banned by law from returning fire and suppressing the attacker...

keep in mind...at Sandy Hook, the first person killed was the principal...who charged the killer...and was shot and killed....

So glad to have our gun toting right wingers to save us from mass shootings and crime with their gunz.

First, I'd rather depend on old, frail ladies like stopped the Giffords' gun nut, than a bunch of yahoo cowboys accessing the situation, pulling their gunz and firing away.

Second, all these gun fondling yahoos are just putting more gunz in the system -- over 100 million a decade -- that we will have to deal with when we finally bite the bullet and pass gun laws like Australia did in 1996.

 

[Brain357]

the principal at Sandy Hook took your advice Brain 357...because she had no other option...

Sandy Hook principal died lunging at gunman - WFSB 3 Connecticut

WTOWN, CT (AP) -
Newtown town officials said the principal who died in the rampage at an elementary school was killed while lunging at the gunman as she tried to overtake him.

Dawn Hochsprung was gunned down in Friday's massacre in Newtown. Board of Education chairwoman Debbie Liedlien says administrators were coming out of a meeting when the gunman forced his way into the school and ran toward him.

What does that have to do with banning hi cap mags? That shooter had them and massacred children. Does that make you happy? Do you enjoy fighting for the right of mass shooters to be so well armed? If he didn't have hi cap mags he might have been empty when she went after him.

 

[AtticusF]

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

Everybody is far, far, more likely to shoot themselves than to shoot a bad guy. The whole "I need me some guns for all the bad guy shootin I do" argument is one of the most ridiculous ones... If somebody really is just super worried about their safety, they should carry around things like a first aid kit, drinking water, blankets, etc., way before a gun. It isn't really about that at all.

Exactly, these folks are far more likely to need a defibrillator, but that is not sexy enough for cowboys.

 

[AtticusF]

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?

Glad you got out, but most of these scary situation could be handled without a gun. Without a gun, Zimmerman would have sat in his car playing with himself. Sans gun, Michael Dunn and Curtis Reeves would have done the same.
I don't think gun cultists are particularly good at math or logic.

They think the odds of a mob of scary "thugs" cornering them is much higher than it is.

I had the misfortune of being in just such a situation. So yes it does happen.

Glad you got out, but most of these situation could be handled without a gun. Without a gun, Zimmerman would have stayed in his car fondling himself. Sans guns, Michael Dunn and Curtis Reeves would have done the same.

 

[DriftingSand]

I say we take it a step farther. From now on all criminals are limited to single shot .22 rim-fire, bolt action rifles. It's the law and all criminals must abide by that law.

 

[DriftingSand]

 

[asaratis]

The giffords shooting was pure luck...

The shooter dropped his loaded mag on the ground, allowing someone to act.
To the anti-gun loons, this is exactly the same thing as a pause to reload.

It is what can happen to any mass shooter. And the more times he has to reload the more likely to happen.

But you idiotic anti-gun loons think that passing a law to limit magazines to 10 rounds will force the criminals to carry multiple 10 round mags. How stupid can you get here?

There're two things you should remember:
1...Criminals don't obey laws!
2...Corporations don't pay taxes!

 

[AtticusF]

Another kind of Stupid:

Moron Labe if you ask me.

 

[tuhaybey]

What compelling state interest do these restrictions serve and how are they the least restrictive means to achieve them?

Reducing accidental shootings is the compelling state interest. It certainly doesn't seem very restrictive at all to me, but the least restrictive means test doesn't really work well in a case where means are cumulative. For example, maybe there is a very non-restrictive way to reduce accidental shootings by 1,000 and this is a more restrictive way to reduce accidental shootings by 1,000, that doesn't mean you only do the first one. If doing both would reduce them by 2,000, then they both pass the least restrictive means test.

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

No, not really. The process is pretty problematic at present. Mental health professionals are bound by all kinds of confidentiality obligations that they can only get around in certain situations, there isn't really much of a process set up for them to use, etc. There are definitely lots of improvements that could be made there.

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

No, that is total accidental shootings, not all in crowded places. The CDC releases the numbers each year.

 

[AtticusF]

The giffords shooting was pure luck...

The shooter dropped his loaded mag on the ground, allowing someone to act.
To the anti-gun loons, this is exactly the same thing as a pause to reload.

It is what can happen to any mass shooter. And the more times he has to reload the more likely to happen.

But you idiotic anti-gun loons think that passing a law to limit magazines to 10 rounds will force the criminals to carry multiple 10 round mags. How stupid can you get here?

There're two things you should remember:
1...Criminals don't obey laws!
2...Corporations don't pay taxes!

Are they gonna make their own high cap magazines? I doubt it. Now, some of the racist militia types might, but they need to be institutionalized anyway.

 

[Brain357]

The giffords shooting was pure luck...

The shooter dropped his loaded mag on the ground, allowing someone to act.
To the anti-gun loons, this is exactly the same thing as a pause to reload.

It is what can happen to any mass shooter. And the more times he has to reload the more likely to happen.

But you idiotic anti-gun loons think that passing a law to limit magazines to 10 rounds will force the criminals to carry multiple 10 round mags. How stupid can you get here?

There're two things you should remember:
1...Criminals don't obey laws!
2...Corporations don't pay taxes!

Why would criminals bother getting hi cap mags? They use them now because they are the norm. They won't bother cause they don't need them. Banks have been robbed with a note saying they have a gun, but no gun.

 

[asaratis]

The giffords shooting was pure luck...

The shooter dropped his loaded mag on the ground, allowing someone to act.
To the anti-gun loons, this is exactly the same thing as a pause to reload.

It is what can happen to any mass shooter. And the more times he has to reload the more likely to happen.

But you idiotic anti-gun loons think that passing a law to limit magazines to 10 rounds will force the criminals to carry multiple 10 round mags. How stupid can you get here?

There're two things you should remember:
1...Criminals don't obey laws!
2...Corporations don't pay taxes!

Are they gonna make their own high cap magazines? I doubt it. Now, some of the racist militia types might, but they need to be institutionalized anyway.

You have got to be beyond stupid to think that magazines are not made in other countries and made available on the black market to anyone who has the cash to buy them. Passing a law in the US to ban high cap magazines would have little if any affect on the world market for high cap magazines. Criminals will acquire whatever they can buy from any source whatsoever. You can live in a utopian cloud of liberal thinking (that everybody will obey whatever restrictive laws you pass) if you wish, but the truth of the matter is....laws have NO EFFECT on criminals and terrorists.

Grow a beard and get back to me.

 

[Brain357]

The giffords shooting was pure luck...

The shooter dropped his loaded mag on the ground, allowing someone to act.
To the anti-gun loons, this is exactly the same thing as a pause to reload.

It is what can happen to any mass shooter. And the more times he has to reload the more likely to happen.

But you idiotic anti-gun loons think that passing a law to limit magazines to 10 rounds will force the criminals to carry multiple 10 round mags. How stupid can you get here?

There're two things you should remember:
1...Criminals don't obey laws!
2...Corporations don't pay taxes!

Are they gonna make their own high cap magazines? I doubt it. Now, some of the racist militia types might, but they need to be institutionalized anyway.

You have got to be beyond stupid to think that magazines are not made in other countries and made available on the black market to anyone who has the cash to buy them. Passing a law in the US to ban high cap magazines would have little if any affect on the world market for high cap magazines. Criminals will acquire whatever they can buy from any source whatsoever. You can live in a utopian cloud of liberal thinking (that everybody will obey whatever restrictive laws you pass) if you wish, but the truth of the matter is....laws have NO EFFECT on criminals and terrorists.

Grow a beard and get back to me.

Lots of other countries make machine guns, but few of our criminals are running around with them. It's because they don't need them just like they don't need hi cap magazines. They will get whatever guns are easy to get, those now are hi cap semi autos. If hi cap magazines become hard to get like machine guns, they will be used much less.