It comes down to what you said, they're more useful against tyranny than for actual self defense.

Is an effective defense against our own government even a remote possibility even with these items?

Yes. Look at Vietnam, Iraq 2.0, Afghanistan for the Soviets and for the US. They used tanks, airplanes, in the case of the US in Afghanistan you can add drones to that. Not exactly the most successful wars there have ever been.

 

This is a logical extension of the argument that says that the 2A was meant to support hunting (only). Lets take this one a step further. Possession of armor peircing and similar ammunition is also prohibited. As the recent Colorado incident shows the criminals are adapting and a normal bullet may not get the job done. Why shouldn't more effective forms of ammuntion be made available for defensive use?

I fully expect that the day will come when we will have to stand up to tyranny in this country. Whether or not that day will come in the remainder of my lifetime is another question, but I have no doubt that the day will come. I think that many people feel this way and see the 2A as a reset switch for this day. So yes, this is about more than stopping ordinary crime.

 

Let's not even bother to give them any more ammunition so to speak. We live in a country of rights not permissions

The logical extension of this conversation is banning 32 ounce big gulps.

Sorry not playing.

 

It won't be "our" government. It will be blue helmeted folks driving up.

A.

 

Red Dawn.

Game, set, match!

 

Once again this why would you penalize the 99.999 percent of the law abiding people because .0001 use an item to commit a crime. Its a fallacy of logic period. And on top of that is does not to prevent crime or less the effect of crimes committed.

Does anything else need to be said really:

America is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. It exist only to serve us, not to rule us. They don't give us our rights. Our rights are ours. Anyone who would take away our freedoms and liberties is committing treason to the Constitution and is an enemy of the people and an enemy of our nation

"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security". Ben Franklin

 

Well those blue helmets will make for easy targets.

 

I guess we also need to delineate "high capacity". 'Pistolically' speaking, would high capacity be the magic number of 10 as the United Socialist Republic of California has decided? Would it be 15 like the military issued M9? Would it be those dreaded 30+ round stick mags (which would preclude concealed carry)?

In my training with Tom Givens from Rangemaster in Memphis, he shared some statics with us regarding personal defensive shootings. He is the only one who keeps a database of such events because there are no statistical databases available for this category. When I attended his course in March of this year, he had statistics from over 50 of his students who had been involved in defensive shootings and the average round count expended was 11. I'd love to dive into all the numbers and see the average capacity weapon carried becuase I believe that would drive the average number of rounds fired. The take home message was would you rather be shooting back or reloading while being shot at?

 

I understand the premise of "it's a free country, it's not about what I 'need' ", except that sometimes it is. If that wasn't the case we could all buy nuclear weapons. There has to be a compromise between ultimate freedom and reasonable safeguards of massively powerful weapons.

The 2a didn't reference ships of war, canons, etc.... It was about the personal weapons an individual could "keep and bear"

I don't see how an individual would be able to bear his own apache helicopter. However, I DO think common people (US) should be able to arm ourselves with at LEAST the same small arms that the police are using. So, yes, that includes automatic weapons, suppressors, SBRs, etc.

If we let the argument turn into "legitimate hunting needs" or "typical home defense needs" we have abandoned the principles of the 2A and ceded the high ground....

GEORGE WASHINGTON (First President)
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." (Address to 1st session of Congress)

 

Well those blue helmets will make for easy targets.

Yep

 

Once again this why would you penalize the 99.999 percent of the law abiding people because .0001 use an item to commit a crime. Its a fallacy of logic period. And on top of that is does not to prevent crime or less the effect of crimes committed.

You're preaching to the choir here. I find it sad that so many people who call themselves Americans are ready to throw away their right/ability to defend against tyranny just because some jack off kills several people at once in this country every year or so. Way more people than that died last week in automobile accidents. More people drown in swimming pools than die in these mass shootings each year, but the media plays up the carnage as if it's the biggest problem we face when it's in fact a relative grain of sand.

The point I'm trying to make is that this discussion (the "need" for high capacity magazines) is coming in a big way and going to be the pivotal question regarding whether or not we have a new AWB. It might help if we can come up with clear and effective ways to state why these items should remain available. It's up to us to frame the discussion in a way that triggers understanding of the importance of defending against tyranny. Catchy phrases? Intriguing anecdotes? Compelling true stories from our past? I dunno.

 

You just need to look at some of those police shootouts where they fire LOTS of rounds at 1 or 2 individuals in order to stop the threat. Then you can get into multiple attacker scenario's like flash mobs or home invasions. Then you can add handicap people who may not necessarily be able to reload a firearm quickly enough be effective.

 

In my training with Tom Givens from Rangemaster in Memphis, he shared some statics with us regarding personal defensive shootings. He is the only one who keeps a database of such events because there are no statistical databases available for this category. When I attended his course in March of this year, he had statistics from over 50 of his students who had been involved in defensive shootings and the average round count expended was 11.

The average was 11? That's a lot higher than what I've heard elsewhere. You definitely want more than the average to defend yourself with in case your in the higher 50% so if that were true I think a strong case could be made for at least 15-20 rd pistol mags just for self defense.

 

Why would we even want to engage on a discussion of what is "necessary"?

Are bikes that can go 160mph necessary? Are Ferraris necessary? Are 6000sq.ft mansions necessary?

 

Makes me wonder if a person would not rather be in a gunfight against a 5 shot weapon or a 20 shot weapon. The problem as I see it is the day is coming where 100 rounds capability or more will be the norm, then what? More does not always represent security especially when the gun is pointed at you.

 

If we let the argument turn into "legitimate hunting needs" or "typical home defense needs" we have abandoned the principles of the 2A and ceded the high ground....

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

 

Why would we even want to engage on a discussion of what is "necessary"?

Are bikes that can go 160mph necessary? Are Ferraris necessary? Are 6000sq.ft mansions necessary?

I get where you're coming from, but the answer is because weapons are viewed differently. Can you go out and buy a grenade? Why not?

 

I get where you're coming from, but the answer is because weapons are viewed differently. Can you go out and buy a grenade? Why not?

Why are they different, people spend their money on stuff that they like and have fun with.
In some cases it is guns and others it is a 182mph super car.
There are more people killed every day in a car/truck/auto then by guns in the US. If they ban gun, ban mags then they can start the ban on anything else they want.
The 2nd is just behind the 1st, take away our gun then they take away our free speach.

And to you assault rifle guys.....

Can you please tell me what the flip an "Assault" Weapon is, or at least what you think it is.

They are sporting guns, hunting guns, the less we use that word the better it is.
Mine are not "Assault" Weapons, they are deer weapons, or target weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon
Assault weapon is a term, often used by gun control advocates, typically referring to firearms "designed for rapidly firing at human targets from close range," sometimes described as military-style features useful in combat.

The term was most notably used in the language of the now-expired Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994, more commonly known as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assault_rifles

An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle or carbine typically firing ammunition with muzzle energies and sizes intermediate between those of handgun and more traditional high-powered rifle ammunition. Assault rifles are categorized between light machine guns, intended more for sustained automatic fire in a support role, and submachine guns, which fire a handgun cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.

 

Can you go out and buy a grenade? Why not?

YES, with the tax stamp it is a DD.
I know people that have and do own them.
Use it and your tax stamp goes up in smoke.
Also people that shoot a 105 or 37mm, even 88mm as a DD.

 

I think all you need to do is ask the folks who were surrounded by looters in New Orleans after Katrina, or in the LA riots, or in any similar circumstance whether they thought they didn't need a "high capacity" magazine. When someone asked me why I thought I needed more than a 10 round capacity I said "What if there are eleven bad guys?"

 

I do not want to be known as some one to not have a little give or take.........
So I pay my taxes, don't fly much, don't drive fast, don't race, don't drink a bunch.....
But thinking.

Lets limit things like mags/drums to 100. Cut and dry.

Limit all cars to 100mph
all planes or anything in the air to 100mph
limit taxes to 100 a year, but give or take, would to 100 a month, even week.
Limit all bikes to 100 mph
All races, cars bikes trucks to 100mph
limit the days we work to 100

I think you get the point

Limits are dumb and don't work, they only set us back.

Yep the set a limit on the max time in jail for people like the Jack Ass in CO.

I say after the court case, let the family have their fun.....
Hell they can even use his toys to do it..... AND the rest of His ammo.

 

How about just the fact that I like to shoot. I like high cap because i spend less time loading mags. If all I had were 10 round mags, my fingers would be bleeding at the end of a long, extended session or a 600 round class.

So if anyone asks why I think i need an evil high capacity magazine, I can just show them my finger.

 

I want a "high cap" magazine for the same reason the police did...bad guys have them. If you outlaw them then you are forcing me to have a further disadvantage over those who break the law anyway.

If, heaven forbid, I am being shot at I want my pistol to be in the fight as long as possible before i have to take it apart and put it back together again. Pending that I have the frame of mind at that point to employ it at all, but I like knowing it is an option for me.

I would see banning high cap mags would have a positive effect on 1911 sales...as one reason I carry 9mm is capacity.

In my opinion, any gun control law is set up to burden law abiding citizens and be completely ignored by those they are supposed to be written for.

 

I'm not ready to concede that my 6 shot Ruger revolvers and my 7 shot 1911 are inadequate for SD.

Also regarding the famed blue helmets: Any foreign soldiers that are here will have the permission of the US Army, US Marine Corps, US Navy, US Air Force and the National Guard of the states and territories.

 

Guys, you are creating a classic straw man argument. You are assuming their is merit to the question, there is not.

Self limiting our rights to hunting or defense or whatever is self defeating. I have a 30 rd mag because I can (not a felon etc).

When asked about this kind of bunk ask the person to find a law abiding citizen that used one in a crime.