Colorado Gun Demand Jumps 41%

[TonyJoey]

Jay, I would consider those high capacity. I'm sure there are other magazines for the Glock that hold less and would fit the 15 limit.

Wiley, you bring up a very good point, but I'm sure a solution could be worked out. Maybe block all production and further sales, and refund business owners who bought them and still have them for sale. No confiscations of current owners. 

[Wiley]

Jay, I would consider those high capacity. I'm sure there are other magazines for the Glock that hold less and would fit the 15 limit.

Wiley, you bring up a very good point, but I'm sure a solution could be worked out. Maybe block all production and further sales, and refund business owners who bought them and still have them for sale. No confiscations of current owners. 

I'm still hung up on 'effectiveness'.  I think you seriously underestimate the number of magazines that would fall outside that restriction in circulation.  Private sales would keep that going pretty much ad infinitum.  Between that and the fact that handguns which generally hold less than 18 rounds anyways, are most often used in crime, again, where's the improvement?

Wiley.

[TonyJoey]

I'm still hung up on 'effectiveness'.  I think you seriously underestimate the number of magazines that would fall outside that restriction in circulation.  Private sales would keep that going pretty much ad infinitum.  Between that and the fact that handguns which generally hold less than 18 rounds anyways, are most often used in crime, again, where's the improvement?

Wiley.

The improvement would be less damage in these mass shootings, for the loss of virtually no liberties. A simple law that would pay dividends in saved lives when people snap and go on rampages. My idea on enforcement is definately not set in stone, but the solution I offered would make further sale and production of such magazines for civilian use illegal. Businesses with them in stock would be refunded and the magazines would be taken off the market. Sales would be illegal and carry punishments just like any other illegal sale.

[TonyJoey]

You bring up the point of the millions already out there. Most who own them are responsible gun owners with no intentions to shoot others except in the case of protecting his family. However, they are still for sale at gun shops, and that is where the mass murderers get them from when they decide to go on a rampage. These people don't already own guns, and instead purchase them when their mind is made up. If they didn't have this point of access, the magazines would not be nearly as prevalent.

[jimson]

It kind of depends on whose definition of "loss of liberties" we use. I personally wouldn't care much if 100 round drums were not available. I would not like to have my magazines limited to 9 rounds.

There are numerous instances of large capacity mags being used. They've been used in Tucson,

You mention a shooter being subdued while reloading. That happened in Tucson when a woman grabbed the end of the magazine he was trying to load. That would have only been possible with an extended length magazine.

Just saying.

You seem to be OK with banning certain things on the principal that no one really needs them, rather than a true benefit analysis. I repeat..........Before banning a legal item, I would like to be assured that the result would be clearer than "There is some chance that it might possibly slow down a person intent on mass murder, maybe a little."

I notice you didn't address the concept that if he hadn't had a gun he could have detonated a bomb. Seems as though he had that ability.

[TonyJoey]

I did address your last line a few posts ago by simply saying he didn't choose that route, he went with guns. Obviously he could have used a bomb; he could have done any number of things, but he chose guns, as do many others. Let me refocus the benefit of the law: It would remove the point of access of large-capacity magazines that mass murderers utilize. They would not be able to walk into a store and purchase the magazines. I don't propose banning assault rifles or any type of gun; rather a law that prevents the sale of magazines with a capacity larger than 15.

[Wiley]

How many of the massacres that have occurred have involved high capacity magazines versus handguns?  VT guy was all handguns.  I'm not going to quibble about 3 rounds per magazine meaning a thing.

Secondly, in how many of those shootings did those magazines afford the shooter a substantial advantage?

Wiley.

[mtnman]

I notice you didn't address the concept that if he hadn't had a gun he could have detonated a bomb. Seems as though he had that ability.

Nobody cares about bomb control.

What "could" be done by a person with a bomb isn't nearly as exciting media-wise as what "could" be done with a gun.

A picture of a bomb is boring, too.  Nowhere near as emotionally exciting as a person with a "nasty" gun.

[TonyJoey]

Secondly, in how many of those shootings did those magazines afford the shooter a substantial advantage?

Wiley.

You'd have to ask them. I can tell you as a very inexperienced shooter, which almost all of these people are, I would much rather have a bigger clip if I were to be in a situation where I had to use a gun. 

[Jayhawk]

You'd have to ask them. I can tell you as a very inexperienced shooter, which almost all of these people are, I would much rather have a bigger clip if I were to be in a situation where I had to use a gun. 

I may not.  I certainly wouldn't choose a 100 round magazine because I know they are prone to jamming, I can reload my AR in a decent time.  I've also never been a big fan of the 33 rounders that Glock makes, throws off my balance and you've got this big stick out of the bottom, I'm faster and more accurate with my stock 15 round magazine.  I can switch out my Glock magazine in less than 2 seconds.

[TonyJoey]

I may not.  I certainly wouldn't choose a 100 round magazine because I know they are prone to jamming, I can reload my AR in a decent time.  I've also never been a big fan of the 33 rounders that Glock makes, throws off my balance and you've got this big stick out of the bottom, I'm faster and more accurate with my stock 15 round magazine.  I can switch out my Glock magazine in less than 2 seconds.

You'd have to ask them. I can tell you as a very inexperienced shooter, which almost all of these people are, I would much rather have a bigger clip if I were to be in a situation where I had to use a gun.  

[mtnman]

You'd have to ask them. I can tell you as a very inexperienced shooter, which almost all of these people are, I would much rather have a bigger clip if I were to be in a situation where I had to use a gun. 

And there-in also lies an issue with magazine capacity limits...

If you were ever in a situation where you "had to use a gun", you'd be limited (as a law-abiding citizen) to just a few government-allowed attempts to protect yourself.  After all, if you went over that number you'd be the criminal...

Meanwhile, the criminal (who's a criminal after all...) is only limited in ammo capacity by his conscience.  If he cares about the law, he'll limit his magazine size.  If he doesn't care about the legal restrictions imposed on him by the law, he won't.

How many rounds do we think is "fair" when it comes to an attempt to defend yourself or others?

[Wiley]

You'd have to ask them. I can tell you as a very inexperienced shooter, which almost all of these people are, I would much rather have a bigger clip if I were to be in a situation where I had to use a gun. 

In other words, you're just speculating that their magazine size had an effect on these crimes.

You seem to have this image that a magazine change is some kind of arduous task.  Most guns are built around the concept of making it as easy as possible.  Flock shooting a crowd I have no doubt in my mind I could go from empty back to shooting in under two seconds swapping magazines in a rifle or pistol.  And I am by NO means fast, nor am I particularly experienced in speed shooting.

You're talking about a very specific crime here.  One that generally involves someone sitting down and preparing for a while before they go and do it.  A guy that's doing something like this may not have a lot of practical experience, but he's thought about it for a fair bit of time, and he's going to have more than a passing familiarity with the weapon he's chosen.

Wiley.

[TonyJoey]

There is no doubt it had an effect. In Tucson, the gunman, with a 33-round clip, got off 31 shots in less than 15 seconds. An inexperienced shooter, that doesn't happen if he suddenly notices he isn't shooting and has to reload. In fact, like someone mentioned earlier, the Tucson shooter was also subdued while reloading.

[TonyJoey]

Smaller clips sizes means more reloading, which means less time firing and more time vulnerable to be subdued. Those factors are only amplified when the shooter is inexperienced, and should be reason enough to enact such a law.