Should civilians be allowed to own high capacity magazines?
A high capacity magazine is considered to be one that contains more than 10-20 rounds in it depending on where you are in America. Should civilians be allowed to own a drum magazine or should the government limit the amount as a away to protect the people from mass shooters?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
The police are civilians.
Nah, these are the best high capacity clips there is, just a little strip of metal. Drums are largely worthless and unreliable.
Well I'm not sure if the legislation to ban large clips really applies to them but I'm talking more about the average gun owning American right now.
So should 10 rounds be the legal limit or should we allow people to use clips that have 20 to 30 rounds? After all is it necessary to own a gun that can shoot that many bullets?
You said civilians.
It's either equal justice under the law or anarchy by arbitrary rule.
First off, there have been maybe 2 drum mags in the history of guns that haven't been shitty
Second. Shall not be infringed
Yes, they should.
Also nice album.
Gun bans don't stop gun crime. The moment you ban something all it does it hurt those who don't want to commit crimes but rather protect themselves.
In scenarios like these a well armed populace and police force, coupled with measures to help those in poverty or mental disabilites are the only sure fire way to lower the chance of mass shootings.
Just look at the amount of mass shootings in the last 20 years, despite how high profile they are it is actually on a downtrend. Knowledge eliminates violence not making the tools harder to come by.
That's great user, now do you think we should be allowed to fire guns that have 30 bullets in them or should be have a legal limit?
>Should civilians be allowed to own high capacity mags?
Yes.
>A high cap mag could be over 10 or over 20.
It should be over whatever the mag that comes standard with a gun is, if a gun comes with a 20 round mag then then only a mag that holds more than 20 rounds should be considered "high capacity".
>Should civvies be allowed to own a higher cap mag or drum mags?
Yes.
>Should the government limit the mag size to protect people from mass shooters?
No, because this is an infringement upon the constitutionally guaranteed rights of law abiding citizens who will never do anyone any harm. Not to mention civilians kill more violent criminals than cops do, and I believe (this is off the top of my head) have cut more mass shootings short by either wounding or killing the shooter than cops have.
>Should we arbitrarily limit peoples rights?
Nah, if a person wants to have an ammo belt so long that they are physically incapable of lifting it, I think that would be just fine if they have the money to pay for it. I also think it's OK for people to have huge expensive pools, Ferraris, gigantic houses, ten thousand dollar suits, and a huge number of other things which are completely unnecessary for anyone ever. People should be free to do as they please as long as it doesn't harm anyone, and when someone does harm someone else, the individual should be punished, not some huge group of people who didn't do anything harmful.
Restricting freedoms to try and make it harder for criminals to get their hands on weapons does vastly more harm to law abiding citizens then it does good. If you banned all guns murderers would murder people with something else and spree killers would just switch to motor vehicles or bombs which kill far more efficiently even than guns.
Prohibition does not fucking work.
Shall not be infringed, capacity is largely irelevant, unless you just want to pass laws that sound good and don't really do anything.
The left created the definition of high capacity magazines.
Standard ar magazines hold 30 rounds.
Most shootings happen with handguns.
Also, let's not forget that criminals don't care about the law, and will use whatever magazine they want.
Lawful citizens will be neutered.
In revolutionary times there was an air rifle that could hold a "high capacity" 20 round feed system and the founding fathers knew of this rifle when they made the 2nd so yes, yes we are allowed to own them.
30 bullets in a magazine is useless.
30 rounds would be more effective.
yeah this one.
Do the bodyguards of politicians who vote in favor of these restrictions have to adhere to them?
If not, why is defending their life more important than defending my family?
should a civilian be allowed to tape 2 15 Round mags together to quickly change them?
What did he mean by this?
What was the ORIGINAL INTENT?
Bullet = projectile
Round = case w/powder w/projectile
I don't know what to say to that.
I don't have it on me but I once saw a story about some gungrabber politician who happened to also be selling small arms and explosives/ordinance to drug cartels on the side. Maybe this is another case of protesting too much, just like the hardcore social conservatives who turn out to be massive sexual degenerates.
Of course. The justification used by gun grabbers to ban "hi cap" mags is that they allow mass killers to shoot many more people. With a little training anyone can change 10rd mags quickly enough that it would make no difference.
It didn't hit harder than a musket though. It was a bit slower and fired a bit lighter projectile than muskets did.
Leland Yee. Gun control, just like other forms of prohibition will just make an even bigger black market, while putting law abiding citizens in greater danger from criminals.
I wasn't thinking about police, bodyguards etc at the time of the OP I was thinking of how it would be affecting you and me.
Bullets aren't rounds.. They are a component..
You people are calling magazines 'clips'.
If you don't know the difference on either topic, you don't have enough information to think..
Just, damn...
This guy is right, he gets it...
That's because you're ignorant on the subject.
It was an example of how most people who think limiting the second amendment know very little about the subject.
OP. You're cucked in the head. The entire approach you have is backwards.
>Should civillians be allowed
is slave thinking.
Government in America starts with maximum freedom. You need to show a compelling state interest to restrict shit, rather than petition the government to allow shit. This applies to drugs, marriage, the internet, abortion and guns.
Remember, a magazine capacity limit, is essentially restricting the size of a metal box with springs in it.
And in any case, in places that DO have mag limits, the people who follow the law go with bigger bullets, so watch for unintended consequences..
Leeland Yee was running drugs to the Tong, which are aproximately the chinese equivalent of the mafia.
See also: Shrimp Boy Chow.
If you're going to have a strong opinion on restricting something, you should be educated on it. Otherwise you tend to sound like a complete retard, like the old dudes bitching about the internet and violent games.
Sage from I expect more from the OP in the future.
The effect is that gungrabbing/arbitrary gun restrictions further infringe upon our constitutional rights. Do you know about the speech restrictions in Germany, for example, where people can be thrown in prison for years simply for talking about Hitler and Nazism, Sieg Heiling, etc..
Whether or not you like Nazis, isn't it slightly uncomfortable to imagine a world in which you might be thrown in prison for wrongspeak/wrongthink?
If you don't like that prospect, then you shouldn't like the idea of throwing someone in jail for wrongmagazine either, or the prospect of labeling certain kinds of magazines the wrong kind. Restrictions of speech in Germany have lead to what most sane people should see as human rights infringements/violations. Restriction is often if not always the same thing as infringement.
civians should only be allowed to own .38 caliber pistols,double barrel shotguns, and lever action rifles.
no civilian needs a semi-automatic rifle
Nah.
That's a pretty good album desu
You meddlers are going to wish you had done something else with your evenings other than posting this bullshit over and over again.
Deluging Sup Forums with this crap is not going to change peoples minds.
We are not women that can be led around like a herd of cattle.
And when the time comes, we are coming for you.
There are things to be afraid of other than firearms.
The best way to stop mass shooters is to arm every civilian to the teeth. The reason an armed civilian has never stopped a mass shooter is that they've always managed to stop shootings before they became mass shootings. This record should be viewed the other way round: only the police have allowed a mass shooting to occur.
S H A L L
Well thanks for the guidance Sup Forums. I was never in favor of gun control to behin with but I wanted to see what other people had to say on the issue.
drum magazines aren't very reliable and have a greater tendency to jam or fail to feed. Honestly this large magazines have actually saved lives in mass shootings, typically mass shooters aren't very experienced with firearms, so where someone experienced with guns could quickly clear a jam or stovepipe someone inexperienced with guns panics and will fail to get the weapon back to firing capability.
If you want to go by statistics, people who are trained in firearms are much less likely to have firearm accidents or injure others with the weapon, clearly we need mandatory weapon training in the united states. Perhaps we could setup up something similar to the motorcycle safety program(completely voluntary, but gives you things like insurance discounts and you are tested for general knowledge along with hands on instruction). We are a nation founded on civilian gun ownership, its part of our heritage and the second amendment needs to be valued and loved just like the first amendment.
TRADING FREEDOM FOR SAFTEY IS THE MOST TERRIBLE THING YOU COULD DO PERIOD. YOU DESERVE NEITHER IF YOU IF YOU DO.
Absolutely. We should all carry guns with magazines that can carry 1 million rounds.
...
Go ahead, but there shall be a minimum weight of the gun to be allowed a gigantic magazine.
B.t.w. belt-fed is not a magazine.
Dank meme
I had a chuckle
wew good thing a high capacity mag is only 10-20...my 33 round one must be normal
Fucking liberals, ironically always operating from an authoritarian position.
The correct question to be asked is, "why shouldn't a law abiding citizen be allowed to own high capacity magazines?"
Best loss yet, waiting for the ancap one
>20 rounds
>high capacity
This is a joke, right?
Cho had a backpack full of 10 round magazines... The size if the individual magazine means nothing, just bring 2 guns learn how to count and never get caught empty
Does a 75 round belt count, because my mg likes to eat.
doesn't the projectile being lighter imply that it was faster?