{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/21/2013 1:54:39 PM
13
Also the magazines part is bullshit
The VA tech shooter had multiple 10 round mags on him
English
-
It is math, this is data found. Anecdotal evidence doesn't hold up. And he would have killed more had he had magazines with a 20 bullet capacity.
-
What the hell does the ammo capacity of a mag have to do with anything? Don't have 5 20 round mags? Take 10 round 10 round mags and tape them together Boom you have the same count of ammo
-
Because of reloading time. It takes a few seconds for the average person to reload. That is time someone isn't shooting. How the -blam!- does no one get this?
-
It can reload a AR-15 in about 3 seconds flat. If I taped 2 mags together it can be even less. Lowering ammo capacity does nothing, those 3 seconds won't delay anything
-
I didn't say they made a massive difference but it does make a small difference that can be the difference between a room of people getting killed or not.
-
And with that small of a difference you want to affect the many because the actions if the few?
-
I never advocated a ban. And nobody is going to have their life saved by being allowed to own a 30 round mag for a rifle. People use handguns for personal defense.
-
Hmm but people use rifles for home defense and a 30 round mag is ideal for home defense during a home invasion. Having a low capacity mag in a home invasion is a risk for the defender as he/she is going to be afraid and this going to miss more often. [url=http://www.pointshooting.com/sop9.htm]"In 1992 the overall Police hit potential was 17%. Where distances could be determined, the hit percentages at distances under 15 yards were: Less than 3 yards ..... 28%" [/url] . This is why 30 round mags are a necessary for home invasion defense
-
Even [b]IF[/b] you wanted to take the isolated american view on this ... how is this any different (your many affect the few) than any other facit of life in which a measurable? America made major changes to airline travel (both within and into the country) because the "[i]actions of the few[/i]" ... and (without being dismissive) that incident had less than 10% of the deaths that guns caused last year. America also controls the use of seatbelts and other vehicle safety equipment, and yet [url=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-19/american-gun-deaths-to-exceed-traffic-fatalities-by-2015.html]gun deaths are yet to be addressed[/url]. And I doubt anyone would argue that a gun is required more than a motor car, and yet which is more regulated.
-
But why are you comparing a privilege to a constitutional right?
-
That doesn't mean anything. As far as we both know, he could have killed more if the magazines carried more than 10 rounds each. The study is just making a suggestion based on trends.
-
Now your pulling things out your ass He carried 10 round mags and killed many students there in my state. If my state had a ammo capacity ban on 10 round mags he would have just carried more ammo.Hell it would have been lighter for him too
-
As other people have pointed out: There's a difference in reloading time. 3 seconds could mean the difference between someone dying and getting around a corner.
