General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat is then need for a 100 round bullet magazine other than war?
Thank you in advance for your informative input.
Regards
onehandle
(51,122 posts)But, like Viagra, you can buy it on the Internet.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)....Gifford have a high round drum or clip also?
Regards
doc03
(35,442 posts)on some of the gun nuts I know.
OneTenthofOnePercent
(6,268 posts)I think viagra is somthing like $15/ea... a 100rnd beta mag costs about $250/ea
Your post is idiotic, then again this does not surprise me.
Evasporque
(2,133 posts)Chuuku Davis
(565 posts)Same reason many folks like a 400 horsepower car instead of a 150 HP car.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...the question isn't about what people "like" to do
It's about the practicality of having something that can reek so much havoc on society as a whole
Regards
doc03
(35,442 posts)a nut case with a 100 round magazine shooting me.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...rifle any longer
justanidea
(291 posts)Who used a fully automatic pistol???
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)Iggy
(1,418 posts)I agree...
But since I know congress is NOT going to get off their lazy dead asses and do something about this,
I'm considering concealed carry while I'm out in public-- to protect myself and family.
I've had enough of psychos being allowed to run amok among us.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)do squat about any of this. I don't know what the right solution is, but I doubt any bright ideas will be coming from congress than to try to gain votes.
Iggy
(1,418 posts)we're going right down the toilet if this crap continues much longer.
doc03
(35,442 posts)The M1 Garand won WWII and it carried a maximum of 8 cartridges.
Remmah2
(3,291 posts)nt
deaniac21
(6,747 posts)PavePusher
(15,374 posts)Not sure what your point is...?
doc03
(35,442 posts)for over a century. But in the last couple decades with the civilian arms race promoted by the NRA and the arms industry they now have to carry a semi-auto with a 20 round capacity or be outgunned. It's just like with the millitary arms race, when is enough enough?
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)we should freeze all technology, everywhere, maybe even revert back to 1940's level.
Sure. You first.
doc03
(35,442 posts)military style weapons and 100 round magazines. It's the NRA and the arms industry that have promoted that stuff
and created a civilian arms race. Nobody ever shot 72 people in less than a minute with any S&W revolver. What do you need to feel adequate a nuke? As far as freezing all technology everywhere and reverting back to 1940's level may not be a such a bad idea.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)People hunted and target shot for centuries without 5-8 round magazines. So what? Again, technology progresses. By the way, those 100-round mags? Not legal for hunting anywhere I know of. in fact, the only place I know of where it's legal to hunt deer with anything over a 5 round mag is.... California.
Weird, huh?
doc03
(35,442 posts)attempts to put any restrictions on guns the NRA and the pro gun people claim they need it for hunting and target shooting. Tell me why anyone needs to have a 100 round magazine other than a mass murderer. I live near a Cabela's
go to the store every week or so. What items are selling like hot cakes? military style weapons and equipment. I have a friend that works at the gun counter, last weekend guess what the hot seller was? high capacity magazines AR-15s and Glocks. I'll bet my SS check the NRA has already sent out the word that Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama are going to take your guns, even though Mitt Romney is the only one that has enacted any kind of gun control.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)as it was the fire-power employed by the drug gangs in the cocaine ' 80s. They had obtained uzis and macs and such. I think your average street criminal still had revolvers and .22 semi handguns.
doc03
(35,442 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)doc03
(35,442 posts)upon the criminal enterprise with a S&W 38 say hey this isn't fair let me drive back to the building and get my M-16.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)That it wasn't street thugs or an armed drunk at a domestic disturbance that caused the police to upgrade weapons... it was the increase in firepower by organized gangs.
doc03
(35,442 posts)your point in the least. The COPs had to acquire increased firepower or be killed because of the easy
availability of guns with high capacity.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)I'm pretty sure it was bolt action. The M-16 was introduced because of the military need for a light automatic weapon. Sometimes tactics call for throwing a lot of lead in the air making the enemy take cover and preventing them from returning fire. The M-1 was not capable of this unless you had a whole lot of soldiers. Automatics are innacurate and wasteful of ammunition, which is why the M-16 has select fire.
doc03
(35,442 posts)anything more is more or less a waste of ammo. I once saw the figures on how many rounds of ammo that was fired in Vietnam per enemy casualty it was like into the thousands. The M1 was a semi-auto. It's predecessor the Springfield was a bolt action.
democrat_patriot
(2,774 posts)Might come in handy there...
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)democrat_patriot
(2,774 posts)As if I would survive long anyways....
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)...that he can run faster then me.
democrat_patriot
(2,774 posts)It's a good strategy I suppose.....not for family of course.
HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)uponit7771
(90,371 posts)I needed that.
obamanut2012
(26,181 posts)It is unreliable. They usually jam, like his did.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)obamanut2012
(26,181 posts)I don't know any gun owner who would ever use one. The military has special high-capacity magazines for assault rifles and what we call machine guns, but the public aren't allowed to own either of those.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)obamanut2012
(26,181 posts)I answered your question honestly and you just keep baiting and poking. I do not understand it.
Trunk Monkey
(950 posts)I was a unit armorer, how come I never saw any of these special magazines?
gregoire
(192 posts)Wouldn't the sensible thing be to outlaw the normal capacity 30 round magazines and only allow the unreliable 100 round ones? If your ridiculous claim was true, then 100 round magazines are the only ones that should be legal.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)Tejas
(4,759 posts)PavePusher
(15,374 posts)obamanut2012
(26,181 posts)They have high-capacity mags and belts made just for them and their weapons.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)That's what the Beta Mags are.
Buns_of_Fire
(17,213 posts)And I WUVV wabbit stew! Heh, heh, heh, heh, heh, heh, heh, heh...
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)Or a conversation starter.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)what is the justification for banning such a device?
Can it be statistically shown that with a smaller clip (say 10-15 like the VT shooter used) we are safer than with a 100 round magazine (like the CO shooter used that jammed and ended his spree).
100 round clips are for hobbyists. And if idiotic shooters get them as well, great. They're more prone to jam. Our chances are better dealing with someone with 1 hundred round magazine rather than 10 10 round clips.
Magazine jams; shooting ends.
Clip jams: put in the next one, shooting continues.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...them.
The question you ask is easy in the light of the CO shootings no?
It's logical to see that a person with a 100 round clip and doesn't need to be concerned with reloading can pepper an area longer
Regards
rrneck
(17,671 posts)uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...clip is higher because it's easier not have to go through the mental disciple to do what this person did.
I'd like to make it harder for mass killers to mass kill...
rrneck
(17,671 posts)and I can switch mags in two seconds. Magazine fed firearms are designed to be reloaded quickly. It's just not that hard.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Standard Hoyt Horseshit
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)....they feel under threat
rrneck
(17,671 posts)somebody shoots at you. Or do you plan to dodge bullets waiting for your chance to rush him?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppressive_fire
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...over the chance of no seconds and 80 rounds coming out before a jam.
Jus seems logical and due diligence NOT to allow for HVMs....
If the police aint using it why is Frank next door?
Regards
rrneck
(17,671 posts)By the time you get the legislation pushed through how much political capital do you think you'll burn?
And the next lunatic will side step it before the ink is dry.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)than jamming. That's why the military doesn't usually bother with these 100+ round magazines on their rifles.
It's logical to see that a person with a 100 round clip and doesn't need to be concerned with reloading can pepper an area longer
Let's instead look at reality: VT shooter used smaller clips, dumped and reloaded at need. He killed 32.
CO shooter used 100 round magazine. It jammed. He was forced to stop at 12 despite having more ammo and time to kill more people.
The time it takes to reload is negligible. The time it takes to clear a jam isn't necessarily.
Odd as it sounds it was a blessing he went with a 100 round magazine rather than multiple 10-15 round clips.
Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)So it's okay to have 100 round clips, because they might jam. Got it.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...more gun control not against it.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Unfortunately, it didn't happen this time.
At least I don't think it did. The details of the shooting haven't been fully released. At some point, Holmes may have switched to his backup handguns. Whether because his drum magazine jammed or was empty (or if he switched at all) hasn't been made public.
I wouldn't miss 100-round drum mags if they were eliminated. They're silly. But people shouldn't pretend that eliminating them will have any real impact on safety, either.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...running out of too many bullets over a given time span.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)It just doesn't take that much time to swap magazines.
obamanut2012
(26,181 posts)We know that detail. I have no idea how many rounds he fired before then.
obamanut2012
(26,181 posts)I am betting, when details are released, that is where most of the deaths will come from, especially since the Glocks were larger calibers. I've read both 9mm and .40. The rifle was a .223.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)like the one the VT shooter used (since that totally stopped him).
Or the kind our military favors (since they don't really know how to kill people or anything).
Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)I'm gonna answer that argument with the fact that it didn't jam until 71 people had been shot.
Obviously, I'm in favor of people having extremely limited access to anything stronger than a musket. So you can list all the hardware every mass shooter in the history of mass shootings has used, and I'll be against it.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)I've noticed that when discussing any of these things with gun grabbers the chance of them intentionally mis-assigning words to you approaches 100%.
Trunk Monkey
(950 posts)he emptied his shotgun then went to the rifle, the rifle jammed so he went to a pistol
Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)The idea that this guy was able to clank around with three or four guns, body armor, and all those clips or rounds or whatever on his person, is freaking scary. And if he was the only one, and this was the only time it happened, it would be unacceptable.
But it happens all. The. Time. And I'm sick of it.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)what's the difference between a magazine and a clip? I thought they were just different words for the same thing.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)and therefore can't express an opinion about gun laws, gun violence in society, etc.
I think they are wrong and quite full of it. I don't need to know everything about cancer, poisons, investment bankers, Tbaggers, or guns, to know they have undesirable consequences.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)"I don't need to know nuthing 'bout them . . . . to know that I hates 'em!"
Are you really proud of not knowing what you're talking about?
And given how often you hang out on gun threads one would think you would have picked up some knowledge by osmosis.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Mag vs. clip; semi vs. full auto; assault/tactical vs. stripped down version; etc., just doesn't mean squat to me. It's just crud to keep guns on the brains type occupied. However, knowing that majority of gun owners are right wingers and likely callous bigots, tells me a lot.
I know NRA advances gun causes AND other right wing causes and owns many in Congress. I know those who say they are opposed to NRA, love it when NRA helps get laws passed like Stand Your Ground, etc. I know a lot of gun owners think Zimmerman is cool. I know folks right here on DU who would shoot an unarmed teenager over property.
I understand a lot about gun owners, why they are obsessed with the dang things, and the issues they present for society.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)Are you pulling my leg?
Also I've seen many of your "facts" about gun owners and suffice it to say you don't understand gun owners as much as you feel that you do.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Maybe you are blinded by your guns, and need to have one close by.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)you're just having fun with us.
Good one.
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)...as a collection of bigoted stereotypes.
ileus
(15,396 posts)going down the drain at once. And let's not even think about the heat cycles that put's a barrel through.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)What is the 'need' for a Corvette?
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...a 1000 hp daily driver vette but I can sure lay a lot of rounds in a KZ with a reliable 100 round mag.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)semi-auto is semi-auto, one trigger pull = one bang.
As to "get to legal MPH faster", doing so will net you a ticket for "Excessive Acceleration".
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)pulls with bullets coming out of barrel.
As to "get to legal MPH faster", doing so will net you a ticket for "Excessive Acceleration".
Great, even that's regulated...time for more gun regulation then no?
So even withing legal limits I have more of a need for a vette than a person does for a 100 round clip?
thx in advance for input
Tejas
(4,759 posts)"time for more gun regulation then no?"
"Time"? Time, as in it's time to "do SOMETHING because OMG we need to do SOMETHING!!1!"? More gun regulation huh? 20,000+ gun laws on the books, how about enforcing the ones we already have?
Nahhhhhhh, we don't need no stinking heath care, just more gun laws!
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...the easy access of mass murder tools off the market no?
Regards
Tejas
(4,759 posts)uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...elaborate and I know people who have mental defects (like Romney and his constant lying about things he doesn't need to lie about) and don't go around killing a lot of people...
K, I don't trust romney with "the button"....wouldn't vote for the guy even if he were a dem
Tejas
(4,759 posts)Romney? He's a latent Fascist, signed a statewide AWB in Massachusetts.
This is a Ruger 10-22, it is okay under his ban. The second is the same exact gun but with pistol grip and sidefolding stock. It's SCARY so it's banned.
Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)uponit7771
(90,371 posts)Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)But a hell of a lot of people die every day from excessive speeds. Driving isn't protected by the constitution so why should you be allowed to own anything other than a 2 cylinder golf cart? If you need to move anything big around call a federally licensed truck driver.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)Driving a car isn't a right guaranteed in the constitution.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)That's why we have laws against it and he'll be punished for doing so.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)No need to have a nuke if I'm just gonna go to jail for using it....
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)Shoot C-Mags every day and don't hurt anyone.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)mean there's no need for speed limits.
Bottom line, the speed limit on a clip should be that of the security forces.
Recreational uses of these items could reak more havoc than necessary.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)The potential is there, and no-one really needs them.
Besides, 'vettes suck. If we get rid of them, my M5 will be worth more....
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)And also the Lotto numbers for next week?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)is the right to own an assault rifle ... Or the right to privacy, for that matter.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)The right to privacy should be and I would approve an amendment stating that.
samsingh
(17,604 posts)if there are no controls, people should be allowed to purchase machine guns, bazookas, anything that is handheld.
If controls are reasonable, they are not going far enough.
The 2nd amendment talks about arms without a definition. Aren't arms the things that your hands attached to? No one should infringe on that right.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...jail "if they're used".
This is a good conversation, I'm learning some of the counter arguments seemed to be canned and not thought through
samsingh
(17,604 posts)but sweeping statements such as:
gun regulations will lead to all my guns being taken away
the shooter would have killed using something else (a bat, car)
a machette attack in south africa is proof that gun control doesn't stop mass killings
are all considered to be 100% fact and brilliant in their structure.
here's the scary part - aside from a very few, most of us probably agree in many other areas.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)You can legally own a machine gun, the other gun laws were passed as a compromise and amazingly it never seems to be enough. If you wish to repeal the 2nd amendment then that's a position we'd have to debate you on, but quit trying to nibble at the apple in an attempt to accomplish the same goal.
samsingh
(17,604 posts)telling me to quite is against my first amendment rights.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)Wow, just when you think you've seen it all.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...people with an unreliable piece of equipment.
Yeah...
The irrational position is to have less regulation of firearms relative to the danger they pose to greater society no?
Regards
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)Is to understand that these are tragic but isolated events and try to figure out a way to possibly prevent them without infringing on a constitutional right.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)WE HAVE TO BAN SOMETHING, WE NEED MORE LAWS!!1!
The above is , I'm not siding with those here that are parroting the mantra of the Republicans at Brady Campaign and Violence Policy Center.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)owning guns make you less safe just because one psycho decided to use those tools? You seem very ready to condemn a great many people based on the actions of a lone nut. Would you use that same standard for all your other rights?
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)....clip than a maniac with a 10 round clip?
oversimplification .... of course...but it's not hyperbole for effect...there's a rational argument in the question.
Regards
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)My position is that I'm not willing to restrict the rights of the majority due to a maniac's actions.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)deaniac21
(6,747 posts)Tejas
(4,759 posts)uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...guns (trucks) as you want just don't loads those guns (trucks) with tons of explosives (bullets) and kill a lot of people ( don't need to go any further).
No?
Regards
Tejas
(4,759 posts)Let me guess, regulate feed stores out of existence? Triple-check driving records at truck rentals? I mean, after all it's for the children. On that note, I think you would be amazed at the amount of blasting components are missing from road crews and quarries. You're going to solve all of this how? By banning something that there's already tons of in the general population?
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...up with practical means of protecting everyone and keeping rights for the few who want to go "ah shootin shit"...sry, I had to get that out of my system.
Allow me not to be a hypocrite, I have hobbies too and when the government was going to step in on them because of public safety the moaning was loud, long and noticeable...
But the tech of the day relative to the safety of the populous kept both sides at the table, I wish I could share but it's taboo...
Back to subject, I don't think outlawing HVM is going to far....having more arms than the overtly trained security forces that guard the nation seems to be going to far IMHO.
If the police don't need it neither does Frank next door.....jus sayin
Tejas
(4,759 posts)40yrs of gun laws and space travel.
okay!
Tejas
(4,759 posts)uponit7771
(90,371 posts)really?
Tejas
(4,759 posts)One death per wreck or ten, Corvettes are a menace to society so ban Corvettes..
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...retort is the likely hood of the body count going up with a 1000hp vette is a lot lower than with a reliable 100 round clip
Tejas
(4,759 posts)Are Vettes sacred or something? So how many deaths before stricter regs on Corvettes?
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...guarding the streets and our nation?
Thx in advance for your input...
I have not studied these positions, I truly would like to know what people think.
Regards
Tejas
(4,759 posts)I think you'll be surprised at how local leo's feel about armed citizens. Police chiefs on the other hand tend to look down on armed citizens, they feel their AUTHORITEH is "threatened".
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)And why should "the security forces guarding the streets and our nation" be more highly armed than lawful Citizens?
Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)A car is designed to get you from point A to point B. Can it be used to kill? Sure. Cars fall into the wrong hands all the time, and accidents happen. But most people just drive them.
The purpose of a gun is to shoot things, so it's not really a great comparison to make.
EX500rider
(10,891 posts)If 80 million American's go to the shooting range with their guns each year and shoot paper targets and 9,000 American's shoot somebody with theirs, which seems the primary purpose to you?
That's 80,000,000 vs 9,000...
Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)and not as weapons in part of humanity's ever-increasing technological race to wipe out other people.
My bad.
EX500rider
(10,891 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Those types of magazine aren't issued to soldiers for their M16s (the real military version...). They're prone to jamming, weigh enough to make the weapon clumsy, and encourage soldiers to waste ammunition by using the "spray and pray" tactic. When larger rates of fire from squad-level weapons are needed in war, you'll usually see something like a belt-fed system in use. The US M249 is a good example.
100 round magazines are for recreational shooting, really.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Even with the same rate of reliability as normal magazines, they'd still be heavy and clumsy, and people would still tend to stupidly waste ammunition. They really are for recreational shooting...and in the case of Aurora, for committing an atrocity.
I'd like to have something like that for a little .22LR carbine or something. Fun to mess around with under safe conditions, and affordable to "feed." Super-high-capacity mags for .22s seem to be more reliable, too...probably because they're dealing with a lot lower individual cartridge weight. I can't imagine wanting a 100-rounder for any other purpose or firearm, though.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)Iggy
(1,418 posts)we have 270 million guns in our nation.
WTF???
Congress must act regarding assault weapons, automatic and semi-automatic weapons possession by civilians.
but they are not going to.
CONGRESS = FAIL. TOTAL FAILURE
samsingh
(17,604 posts)i like something that can be used to kill people, but i don't care. i enjoy shooting hundreds of bullets, and i don't care if others kill lots of people.
If there are controls on what i like (guns), need, then no one should be able to do what they enjoy (e.g. drive a fancy car). Somehow they're related i guess.
e.g. if i can't eat french fries everyday, why should i eat vegetables. Afterall they're both food.
wow indeed.
Vox Moi
(546 posts)There is absolutely no need for large-capacity magazines outside of putting a lot of lead downrange in a big hurry.
What's a hunter going to do with 25 dead deer?
Target shooters would be firing at a shredded piece of paper.
Self-defense in the case of a Banzai Charge?
There is no need whatsoever for this kind of firepower unless you are going to just leave the bodies on the ground and walk away.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)...studied the gun issue much but after people shoot congress persons (who were targeted by stupid ass'd people from Alaska) and this here with the HVM there should be something rational one could do about them.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)electrodes and if they get excited looking at "assault" weapons, hi cap mags, etc., they fail the test and have to live with the guns they have or seek care, pay for a gun toting bond, or whatever. Rechecks should be required periodically as well.
Alduin
(501 posts)maybe they want to put 100 holes in it and totally obliterate it?
That's the only reason I can think of, other than war.
In reality, there is no need for a 100 round magazine.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)standard mags for M4A1 are 30 rounds; anything requiring greater sustained fire is belt-fed (M249SAW, M2HB, etc). High capacity magazines are prone to feed jams and are too unreliable for use in a firefight.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)It isn't.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)To my knowledge, the military doesn't use large magazines... they are prone to jamming, add too much weight and bulk to the weapon, and standard magazines are easier to carry and simple and fast to change.
The extra large magazines are about appearance, not function. An equivilent would be a 3foot tall spoiler on a Honda Civic. In owner's mind, it looks "cool", but serves no useful function.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)IBEWVET
(217 posts)But can not think of any reason to own such a thing. I am not big on more laws, but it would not hurt my feelings to see these things off the market.
vanlandingham
(5 posts)Mitt Romney said no new gun laws would have changed anything in the deadly rampage in Colorado. He is wrong; the shooter would not have had his legal assault rifle if the assault rifle ban had been reinstated. The families of the victims of 50 odd bullets shot from that gum would not be grieving. We will continue to see people like this shooter obtain legal weapons as long as people like Romney bow to the vile NRA and its murderous policies.
JPZenger
(6,819 posts)It is simple, it is almost impossible to stop a shooter if they do not need to reload. Even if someone has a gun in their purse, how are they supposed to get up and take a well armed shot while there is a hail of gunfire? In many mass shooter cases, there was a person who was willing and able to stop the shooter, but they didn't get a chance until a gun jammed or the ammo clip was emptied.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)I am in favor of being able to own guns.
I am also in favor of regulating who can buy them and what types can be sold.
I wish the states would have the same, or close to the same laws, because right now it is downright confusing.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)JPZenger
(6,819 posts)Lint Head
(15,064 posts)Remmah2
(3,291 posts)nt
catbyte
(34,534 posts)That's what some POS actually said on TV last weekend trying to justify large clips.
Diane
Anishinaabe in MI & mom to Taz, Nigel, and new baby brother Sammy, members of Dogs Against Romney, Cat Division
"Dogs Arent Luggage--HISS!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Does not use it...due to what happened to the shooter. It has issues, still, with jamming.
Trunk Monkey
(950 posts)uponit7771
(90,371 posts)Trunk Monkey
(950 posts)Let me say this, if the magazine capacity limits built into the AWB had any beneficial effect they wouldn't have been done away with
Renew Deal
(81,897 posts)EX500rider
(10,891 posts)348
2009 FBI stats:
13,636 total murders
Murders with handguns 6452 (47.32%)
Murders with rifles 348 (2.55%)
Murders with shotguns 418 (3.07%)
Murders with unknown firearms 1928 (14.14%)
Murder with knives or cutting instruments 1825 (13.38%)
Murders with other weapons 1864 (13.67%)
Murders with hands, fists, feet etc.. 801 (5.87%)
Even rifles + shotguns kill less then hands and feet.
http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2010/09/14/2009-fbi-murder-statistics-by-state-and-type-of-weapon-used/
So rifles are by FAR the least used method of killing someone and doesn't even come close to cracking the top 50 list of causes of death with #50 being malnutrition @ 2,680 dead. I do see that poisonings killed over 31,000 (vs 348 for long guns), falls over 24,000 dead, drownings over 3,500 and fires over 2,500....
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/usa-cause-of-death-by-age-and-gender
michreject
(4,378 posts)They're growing in popularity every year.
gopiscrap
(23,767 posts)and many of the sheep in the USA believe it.