In the world of magazine capacity, 30 is the new 10

[derby378]

Maybe we should blame Mikhail Kalashnikov and Eugene Stoner for this. And maybe John Moses Browning. But somehow, the idea of Carolyn McCarthy banning any gun magazine holding more than 10 rounds sounds kind of like a legislator banning any modem with a speed faster than 1200 baud.

New developments in gun technology have continued at a steady pace in America, and will likely continue to do so for the forseeable future. What McCarthy is suggesting our nation do is to turn back the clock to a time that never really existed, a time where no decent American civilian would be caught dead with an 11-round magazine. But just as Leave It To Beaver failed to prevent the Tate-LaBianca-Hinman murders by the Manson Family, so will a new magazine ban fail to prevent the next gun-related massacre.

So we are left trying to find a way to prevent that next massacre from happening in the first place. Gun control won't do it. Magazine control won't do it (re: Columbine). Time to evolve new ideas instead of trying to renovate the Edsel.

[beevul]

1. Calling everything over ten rounds "high capacity" is dishonest in the extreme.

Ten rounds is limited capacity for most handguns.


30 rounds is extended capacity.


What any given handgun holds with a flush fit magazine, is standard capacity.



Our friends on the other side of the issue will NEVER accept those terms, however.


And of course, they aren't interested in applying this only to handguns, either.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

2. The "10 rounds is reasonable" has always been a bad lie

And never supported in the technology.

[spin]

3. K&R (n/t)

[applegrove]

4. 10 rounds seems like a reasonable number to me.

[PavePusher]

6. What is reasonable about it? What is unreasonable about 15 or 20? n/t

[krispos42]

8. People engaged in legitimate self-defense only shoot as many times as necessary

Now, the choosing of a gun for self-defense is a personal matter. Many people choose Model 1911 .45 automatics with 7 or 8 rounds of capacity; there are more companies that make 1911's than I have fingers and toes. They're expensive, too. Average price is probably about $900, a Glock is around $700.

But many people choose guns similar to Glocks: double-stacked magazines holding up to 17 rounds of ammunition.

Now, since guns like a Glock carry up to 17 rounds with conventional, standard magazines, isn't using the pistol with its full standard load reasonable? I mean, if the gun can hold 17 rounds but you only load 10 in the magazine, wouldn't leaving out the other 7 rounds be unreasonable?

Assuming what I put in the subject line is true, then carrying the extra ammunition would not increase the number of shots fired. It would, however, give you the ability to deal with situations that would require more shooting.

Hollywood and head shots aside, death via pistol is not instant. Attackers, pumped up by rage and adrenaline and fear, can shake off multiple hits for enough time to seriously hurt or kill you. Hitting a moving target in bad lighting when scared is also difficult and results in lots of misses.

Remember, rapper 50 Cent was shot 9 times and has survived quite nicely.

[benEzra]

10. If 10-round magazines were reasonable, police would issue them

instead of 15 to 17 round magazines for 9mm pistols and 20 or 30 round magazines for patrol carbines.

Around 15 to 17 rounds has been the standard capacity for a full-sized 9mm pistol since the 1970's, both LEO and civilian.

[shadowrider]

5. And if we aren't careful, 5 will become the new 10 n/t

[immoderate]

7. Loughner might have killed more people with standard magazines.

I have an extended magazine for my Browning P-35. I only used it once.

It makes the gun hard to aim and shoot. Without an extended magazine, Loughner might have been able to head-shot 10-15 people and then swap magazines for more. Of course this can't be known but I would not assume the extended magazine increased the body count.


--imm

[benEzra]

9. When was 10 rounds *ever* common, though? I'm thinking circa 1896?

Other than the concealed-carry guns designed around the cheap, stubby 10-round magazines in the late '90s, the last time 10 rounds was the de facto pistol capacity was 1896.


Mauser C96 (1896), 7.65x21mm, capacity 10+1 (6+1 for concealed carry model)

Luger P08 (1908), 9x19mm, capacity 8+1 (first common 9mm)

Browning P35 (1935), 9x19mm, capacity 13+1 (this gun pretty much defined the modern 9mm)

Beretta 92 (1972), 9x19mm, capacity 15+1

Smith & Wesson Model 59 (1973), capacity 14+1

Glock 17 (1984), 9x19mm, capacity 17+1

Ruger P-85 (1985), 9x19mm, capacity 15+1

Glock 19 (1988), 9x19mm, capacity 15+1

Springfield XD/HS 2000 (1999), 9x19mm, capacity 16+1

Springfield XDM (2008), 9x19mm, capacity 19+1


As far as rifles, go, 10 rounds was never the predominant common capacity for repeating rifles; the only ones I can think of off the top of my head are the British Lee-Enfield and the Ruger 10/22. Rifles split the power/capacity tradeoff so many different ways that to list them all would take hours, but some key rifles in the lower-power, higher-capacity niche are the following:


Girandoni air rifle (1779), .51 caliber, capacity 20 (powered by compressed air, power similar to .45 ACP)

Spencer Repeating Rifle (1860), .52 caliber (56-56 Spencer), capacity 7+1

Henry Repeating Rifle (1861), .44 rimfire, capacity 16+1 (dominated the repeating rifle market in the 1860's)

Winchester Model 1873 (1873), .44-40/.38-40/.32-20/.22 rimfire, capacity 15+1 (dominated the market in the 1870's)

Evans Repeating Rifle (1873), .44 Evans, capacity 34 (or 28 in the carbine variant)

Colt AR-15 (1961), .223 Remington, capacity 20/30 (initially introduced with 20's; 30's became predominant in the '70s/'80s)


So basically, I don't know where in the heck advocates of a 10-round limit get the idea that 10 rounds is the "normal" capacity for civilian firearms. 13 to 17 round pistols and 15+ round rifles have been popular since the 1930's and 1860's, respectively.

[Euromutt]

11. Just about never

Prior to the advent of the "Wonder nines" (e.g. S&W Model 59, CZ75, Beretta 92 and of course, the Glock 17) the most common mag capacity in a semi-auto pistol in 9x19mm appears to have been eight; the Luger P08, the FN Browning model 1922, the Walther P38/P1, the Beretta 51... The Browning Hi-Power was exceptional for four decades in holding 13 rounds, which helps explain why a shitload of armies world-wide adopted it, and didn't replace it until fairly recently.

The advent of the "Wonder nines" in the late 1970s/early 1980s set 15 as the new standard magazine capacity for 9x19mm pistols.

Pistols chambered for smaller rounds (e.g. .32 ACP/7.65x17mm, .380 ACP/9x17mm) generally didn't have larger capacities, because they were usually made to be lightweight and comparatively small. The Walther PP and PPK, the Mauser HSc, the Sauer 38H, the CZ vz.50 and vz.70, the Beretta models 82, 85 & 86, all with mag capacities of 6-8 rounds. The major exceptions being the Beretta 81 (12+1 rounds 7.65x17mm) and 84 (13+1 rounds 9x17mm).

Ten has simply never been a common magazine capacity except as a result of the 1994-2004 restrictions.