Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner

1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
945 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello,
GCO, In lite of the recent shooting of the congress woman, one of the big things was the perp had a 33rd magazine. What if he had two 17rd or 3 10rd would it had made a difference?
 

·
Old Time Member
Joined
·
2,647 Posts
No. There is a video out where a guy did a 1,000 round "torture" test on a GLOCK 19 with standard 15 round mags. The shooter shot nearly 180 rounds with 12 magazine changes in 2 minutes which was the reported time it took the Arizona shooter to kill and injure all of those innocent people.
 

·
Seasteading Aficionado
Joined
·
44,896 Posts
With practice, changing magazines only takes a very small amount of time. Hardly enough time to rush a shooter, which is an argument that some have used when they are trying to talk about limiting magazine capacity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
I would say no. High capacity mags dont make the gun more lethal. Any kind of practice and you can load mags in an auto very quickly. Their banned in California but it doesnt stop people from commiting crimes.I would be more worrried about the guy who is an excellent shot with a 10 rounder than a novice with a 33 round mag.
 

·
I'm kind of a big deal
Joined
·
5,243 Posts
NO.

Next question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
Khondker said:
Signal 69 said:
Should High Capacity Mags Be Banned
NO Sir
:righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton: :righton:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,148 Posts
"High capacity" isn't going to be just the 33-rounders, if the libtards have their way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,851 Posts
i always wondered why we call them high capacity? normal capacity seems more like it. 10rounds seems low capacity to me :righton:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,679 Posts
Should we make spoons smaller to curb obesity? Cigarettes shorter to cut down on lung cancer? Beer cans smaller to curb cirrhosis?

While I personally don't need a 33 round (or even 17 round) mag, the quantity of shells in the mag didn't dictate the result. The fact that this guy was a freaking whackjob hell-bent on killing people did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,247 Posts
TheLaw said:
No. There is a video out where a guy did a 1,000 round "torture" test on a GLOCK 19 with standard 15 round mags. The shooter shot nearly 180 rounds with 12 magazine changes in 2 minutes which was the reported time it took the Arizona shooter to kill and injure all of those innocent people.
Devil's advocate: If one can do shoot that efficiently, why the desire for 33 round mags and the like?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,974 Posts
"High-capacity" magazines are definately more dangerous. No, they should not be banned.
 

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
11,725 Posts
GooberTim said:
TheLaw said:
No. There is a video out where a guy did a 1,000 round "torture" test on a GLOCK 19 with standard 15 round mags. The shooter shot nearly 180 rounds with 12 magazine changes in 2 minutes which was the reported time it took the Arizona shooter to kill and injure all of those innocent people.
Devil's advocate: If one can do shoot that efficiently, why the desire for 33 round mags and the like?
Well, if you're talking about desire, it's the same desire one has for anything firearm related. Because it's cool, fun, gnarly, or whatever...

If you're talking about need, it could help a homeowner with the unpleasant task of defending his family against multiple attackers where precious time could be used up reloading smaller magazines.

Finally, as long as they're out there, criminals will always be able to obtain them. The good guys need to be just as dangerous to the criminals as they are to us.
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,109 Posts
I recall several mass-shootings where the gunman was jumped and taken down as he tried to reload his weapon.
All of them did not get counter-attacked as long as they remained in control of their working gun with some ammo left.
So I think YES, high-capacity magazines are more dangerous in the wrong hands.
A murderer can rack up a higher body count with them, and I'm sure there would have been fewer casualties out in Arizona if that crazy 22-year old grammar Nazi had been armed with a Glock and a few 10-round magazines. (I say "10 rounds" because that was the federal Assault Weapon Ban limit, 1994-2004).

Should high-capacity mags be banned? No. This would only help in a few odd and rare mass-shooting situations. Most murders and even mulitiple murders would be unaffected. And a "ban" would take years before it is felt in the marketplace as all the existing high-cap mags would remain in circulation (even if they were banned, too. Criminals will still get them). So with little good coming from a ban, and keeping in mind the loss of liberty and freedom that comes with any new gun control, I say NO to banning them. (Even though in this case a couple lives might have been saved.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
504 Posts
I currently live in Hawaii and we cannot have magazines greater than 10 rounds.

It is not the equipment, it is the person operating it.
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Top