Colorado Gun Demand Jumps 41%

[jimson]

Well you are entitled to your opinion. I certainly don't understand the notion that quickly changing a magazine is some sort of accomplishment.

The only possible time this could be an impediment would be when there is someone within arms length who was still able and had the nerve to try to physically stop the shooter while reloading.

You are not going to even be able to cross 5 feet before even a novice will have the weapon loaded and you will die.

When shots are fired, people run. Fewer people would have died if the whole theater charged him right after he started shooting, but that's not realistic, some of the chargers would have been the "fewer people" and instinct is to try to escape.

The former situation is what happened in Tucson. The shooter went to change magazines and a woman intervened, but he was standing in the midst of people, not a short distance away aiming up into theater seats. According to reports I read, she grabbed the magazine while it was in his hand. It's quite possible the only reason she was able to was because it was long enough for her to get a hold of it.

Apparently after losing that magazine, no one was able to stop him from loading another standard length magazine, but luckily it malfunctioned.

I don't know and you don't know if not having a 30 round magazine would have lessened the carnage in this incident.

In the Aurora shooting, it appears that he chose the time to stop shooting, no one was able to attempt to stop him when his AR-15 finally jammed and he changed to another gun.

Therefore it seems to me likely that no one would have been able or willing to try to stop him while reloading and having to change magazines would have likely had no effect on how many people he was able to shoot.

I wasn't there, neither were you. No one really knows.

I need more than conjecture to start down the slippery slope of banning any firearms or accessories because it's possible it "might" do something.

[TonyJoey]

North Hollywood bank robbery: suspects had multiple 75 round drum mags,multiple weapons with "Hi-Cap" mags. 0 dead. these guys had more fire power in the trunk of their car then all the above

And this proves...they were bad shots?

Jim-Thanks for keeping it civil, I enjoyed the debate and respect your opinion. 

[jimson]

  TonyJoey

[Melvin]

And this proves...they were bad shots?

Indeed they were. The suspects fired ~1,100 rounds, wounding eleven police officers and seven civilians. The police fired ~650 rounds with ten landing as hits on each suspect*. Unfortunately for the Police they were outgunned. Luckily there was a gun store nearby that handed out AR-15's to the lawmen, thus allowing them to better deal with the situation.

^^^^ Fact


In this case the criminals would have had the weapons no matter what the law said, fortunately the law allowed legal sales of assault rifles. This legal trade in high cap weaponry saved numerous lives that day, due to the fact (I believe) that the Cops were able to up-gun in the middle of the firefight.

^^^^ Opinion



*Edited for "hit count".



 

[MarineUS]

One thing we're forgetting....why in the hell did it take police TWENTY minutes to get there?   

[VonMessa]

One thing we're forgetting....why in the hell did it take police TWENTY minutes to get there?   

Not sure.  Looks like closest station (which is HQ) is 1/2 mile away. 

[dunnrite]

When seconds count...

[VonMessa]

Never heard that he used a 33 round magazine. Must have been a lot of folks there not paying attention or minding their own business. Just like in aurora.

It amazes me that this guy was able to do what he did and no one even noticed him carrying the weapons.


In the theater incident I'm amazed someone there was not carrying... that is unless they were not because it is posted. In that case this mental midget was at least able to descern that he would be the only one armed. That would explain his relaxed state.

You would think that in that case the theater could be held partially responsible..... of course they could argue that you knew the rules and could have not entered the theater.

I don't know about Texas, but here, in PA...

“No Firearm” signs in Pennsylvania have no force of law unless they are posted on property that is
specifically mentioned in State Law as being off limits to those with a Permit/License to Carry.  If you are in
a place not specifically mentioned in the law that is posted and they ask you to leave, you must leave. If you
refuse to leave then you are breaking the law and can be charged. Even if the property is not posted and you
are asked to leave you must leave. Always be aware of the possibility that responding Police Officers who
may have been called without your knowledge and may not know the laws on trespass etc. could arrest you
even if you are within the law.

Places specifically mentioned in the PA laws are Federal/State buildings, schools and courthouses(but you can check-in your firearm with the Sherrifs at the entrance to the courthouse)  My wife and I have done it a few times.

[dunnrite]

I don't know about Texas, but here, in PA...

“No Firearm” signs in Pennsylvania have no force of law unless they are posted on property that is
specifically mentioned in State Law as being off limits to those with a Permit/License to Carry.  If you are in
a place not specifically mentioned in the law that is posted and they ask you to leave, you must leave. If you
refuse to leave then you are breaking the law and can be charged. Even if the property is not posted and you
are asked to leave you must leave. Always be aware of the possibility that responding Police Officers who
may have been called without your knowledge and may not know the laws on trespass etc. could arrest you
even if you are within the law.

Places specifically mentioned in the PA laws are Federal/State buildings, schools and courthouses(but you can check-in your firearm with the Sherrifs at the entrance to the courthouse)  My wife and I have done it a few times.

Pretty much the same here.

[guncrasher]

I just came across this article and immediately thought of this thread. I'm not familiar with the site, but I do live about 70 miles from Kenesaw, Ga and it's reputation for gun ownership requirements is talked about quite often.

http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/07/the-most-pro-gun-low-crime-city-in-the-united-states/


Lambo

lambo on the other hand los angeles has a very high rate of gun ownership.  there's also a high rate of murders.  so my guess is that kenesaw's death rate is not related to the mandatory ownership of guns.  I remember when Kenesa's law was first  enacted many years ago, it was more to make a statement than to put a dent on crime as crime was really low there anyway.

now read this article

http://www.juancole.com/2011/01/over-9000-murders-by-gun-in-us-39-in-uk.html

we had 9000 murders in the usa while england had 39.

this is the other article in the BBC that it is refering to:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6960431.stm


which goes back to what I originally said.  is not the need for more or less gun laws, but the need for all of us to change our attitude towards guns.  and I say that as a country not as individual

you want more statistics?  sorry I dont do pie chars:  every year more police officers are murdered in the united states than in the past 100 years in england.

you have here two countries that have laws that are far apart.  it is easier to get a gun in the us that it is to get a license to drive.  while in England it is very hard to get one.  you can say that england has a very strict gun laws, but they still have a lot of guns out in the population.  there has been mass murders in england too, but I dont think it's tied to the lack of guns.  I am pretty sure you can buy guns there on the black market too.  just like here in the usa.


semp

[VonMessa]

lambo on the other hand los angeles has a very high rate of gun ownership.  there's also a high rate of murders.  so my guess is that kenesaw's death rate is not related to the mandatory ownership of guns.  I remember when Kenesa's law was first  enacted many years ago, it was more to make a statement than to put a dent on crime as crime was really low there anyway.

now read this article

http://www.juancole.com/2011/01/over-9000-murders-by-gun-in-us-39-in-uk.html

we had 9000 murders in the usa while england had 39.

this is the other article in the BBC that it is refering to:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6960431.stm


which goes back to what I originally said.  is not the need for more or less gun laws, but the need for all of us to change our attitude towards guns.  and I say that as a country not as individual

you want more statistics?  sorry I dont do pie chars:  every year more police officers are murdered in the united states than in the past 100 years in england.

you have here two countries that have laws that are far apart.  it is easier to get a gun in the us that it is to get a license to drive.  while in England it is very hard to get one.  you can say that england has a very strict gun laws, but they still have a lot of guns out in the population.  there has been mass murders in england too, but I dont think it's tied to the lack of guns.  I am pretty sure you can buy guns there on the black market too.  just like here in the usa.


semp

Those stats are so arbitrary and taken out of context that they are laughable.

How do they look, percentage-wise when based upon population difference or against total murders?

I'm sure there are plenty of other homicides in the UK from others methods.

The only difference in man's capacity to murder other men is the tools that they use, not the motivation.

[MiloMorai]

No comment, just to put this link up.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

[Shuffler]

Ok I think I've exhausted just about all of my arguments, but before I stop all together, let me just leave with a list of mass shootings that involved extended capacity magazines.

*Fort Hood-FN 5.7 with both standard 20-round magazines and 30-round extended magazines

*101 California street massacre-Tec-9 with 40 and 50-round extended mags.

*Tucson- Glock with 33-round extended magazine

*Aurora- Ar-15 with 100 round extended magazine

*Stockton school shooting- Ak-47 import with 75-round extended magazine.

*Hartford Distributors- 15 round Ruger SR-9. I'm under the understanding that 10 rounds is the standard capacity of the SR-9, so 15 would be extended.

Those are six mass shootings that I believe would have been positively affected by such a simple law as banning further sale of extended magazines. On the other hand, legal owners would not see any effect on hunting, collecting, or self-defense. Thanks for the lively debate.  Now time for someone else to suggest something and get put in the hot seat for a change.  

 

I feel they would have been positively impacted by not letting the mental types run loose. Quit lowering everyone to the weakest link. As long as they are a protected species folks will pay the price... guns or no guns.

[TheAssi]

Ban the car.

Too many senseless deaths are happening.

[Big Rat]

*Hartford Distributors- 15 round Ruger SR-9. I'm under the understanding that 10 rounds is the standard capacity of the SR-9, so 15 would be extended.


 

standard SR-9 actually carries 17 in the mag standard, 10 is only for states that have a magazine limit. Big brother SR-40 carries 15 standard (I own two of these, well ones the wife's).

 
BigRat