• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Should weapons of mass murder be so easily available?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
Beyond that, having to store multiple magazines like that is more bulky. Three 10 rounders will be more bulky than one 30 rounder. They have to be managed more.
You mean someone would need pockets? Ban pockets!

And beyond that, it takes training to reload quickly. Lots of practice. It isn't easy.
You've never fired a gun, have you. It's takes about 5 minutes of practicing to be able to drop an empty mag and load a fresh one.

Also, this thing about women being raped just ridiculous. It really is. It's just another crazy emotional argument used, bringing up ridiculous situations that have no bearing in fact.
D:
 

DLeRium

Lifer
Feb 19, 2001
20,161
20
81
I can change a magazine in a second or two.

30 round magazines are great for defense - think your wife with 4-5 bad guys coming in and that under stress most of her bullets won't hit the target. 10 rounds wouldn't be enough, 20 probably not either, 30 rounds and now she's got a chance.

All this gun grabber talk really harms legitimate self defense uses which is their end goal. They don't want you to be able to defend yourself or family.
Under ideal situations right? Can you do it in a fire fight? Can you do it under stress and fear? I don't know.

I can guarantee you that spree shooters get pretty frustrated too. The Virginia Tech guy certainly was. He knew how to shoot, but when it became clear he couldn't bust into certain classrooms, he started getting distraught. In those situations, no one is 100%, and you're not going to be changing mags in a second or two. They're fumbling for mags, and then changing it while assessing the situation to make sure that no one's gonna pop up and shoot them or the cops haven't arrived yet.

While I don't think banning large magazines is the right way to go, I think they are certainly a tool of mass shootings. And I'm pretty sure if you simulated mass shootings with 10 round magazines versus a 100 round drums, the 100 round drum guy would do more damage.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
You can't read, can you? Limiting magazine sizes will reduce the lethality of spree shootings, that start and end very quickly.
How will having 10 rounds in 3 mags be any different than having 30 rounds in one mag?

You haven't got a clue.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
Under ideal situations right? Can you do it in a fire fight? Can you do it under stress and fear? I don't know.

I can guarantee you that spree shooters get pretty frustrated too. The Virginia Tech guy certainly was. He knew how to shoot, but when it became clear he couldn't bust into certain classrooms, he started getting distraught. In those situations, no one is 100%, and you're not going to be changing mags in a second or two. They're fumbling for mags, and then changing it while assessing the situation to make sure that no one's gonna pop up and shoot them or the cops haven't arrived yet.

While I don't think banning large magazines is the right way to go, I think they are certainly a tool of mass shootings. And I'm pretty sure if you simulated mass shootings with 10 round magazines versus a 100 round drums, the 100 round drum guy would do more damage.
More fail from the anti-gun morons.

The Aurora shooter had a 100 round drum.

It jammed.

You idiots need to pull your heads out of your asses.
 

DLeRium

Lifer
Feb 19, 2001
20,161
20
81
More fail from the anti-gun morons.

The Aurora shooter had a 100 round drum.

It jammed.

You idiots need to pull your heads out of your asses.
You're using ONE scenario. Of course you're finding ONE case that suits your argument.

Yes let's compare a 100 round drum that jams on the first trigger pull with a 10 round magazine that shoots flawlessly. How well will each shooter do? Is that even a fair benchmark?

I'm not arguing for bans of large magazines, but any unbiased person can acknowledge that large magazines are indeed tools for mass shootings. I'm not anti-gun. You're just so bent on name calling and yelling at anyone who says anything remotely negative about guns that you'll throw logic and reason out the window. Banning magazines would NOT have stopped these shootings. However, someone with 100 round drums would do FAR more damage than someone with 10 round magazines.

If you had a bolt action rifle would you be shooting each person 5 times like the Sandy Hook shooter did? By the time you were on your 20th shot someone would've popped you for taking your sweet time.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
The shooter at Sandy Hook would have gotten popped? You mean the kindergartner would have whipped out his Glock while the shooter was swapping mags?
 

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,537
3
76
And a semi-Auto would be more accurate and effective- ar15 or m16.

Really... its a question of whether or not civilians should have access to full blown modern military weapons- times have changed dramatically from the writing of your ol'constitution.

Your being enslaved financially now by people within who buy your "democracy". People like GW and rockerfellas. who are old money and power working under the stars n stripes, sending your children to die and prostitute themselves in a system with little chance of busting free. They lie to you every day, but still you say fuck all......it ok you got your guns to clean!!!

- I still haven't seen you "good old boys" break your arms and protect your house and home from being stolen by bankers, your kids on drugs, alcohol and porno......

In this case what is the good achieved by the second amendment(or even the first, when you won't say what you should). When are you guys aren't doing anything constructive to retaliate to the corporatocracy you currently live under, shows how impotent and egotistical your culture really is.........Like throwing a monkey a banana every now and then, but mostly they live on peanuts!

Look at that!

When will you look at the data of crime and metal health and see it's related directly to socioeconomic conditions, that's why they go nuts, because they have no hope for a better future...but fuck you jack I am ok!!!!(thats how your society works!).

How do you expect people to lead a happy, healthy life and be law abiding on $8/hr?????
Drivel and not related to fully-automatic weapons in any way, but thanks for playing.
 

desura

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2013
4,627
129
101
The shooter at Sandy Hook would have gotten popped? You mean the kindergartner would have whipped out his Glock while the shooter was swapping mags?
First responders were there in 5 minutes.

But you're being disingenuous, as usual.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,481
3
76
First responders were there in 5 minutes.

But you're being disingenuous, as usual.
And I can guarantee you any capable shooter could take out as many people as he did with a 10 round magazine. Hell, it wouldn't be difficult with a pump shotgun or bolt action or a revolver.

Magazine limits only limit one's own defense. It had zero effect on crime or shootings the last time we had one. That's the reason it sunset, because it had zero impact and only hurt law abiding citizens who wish to defend themselves.
 
May 16, 2000
13,529
0
0
Weapons of mass murder like those use in the Aurora, Sandy Hook, and Arizona shooting can be purchased with ease over the internet, at gun sales, and in person private sales. No background check is needed and the killing machines can be had the same day.

Do you support doing more to prevent criminals from getting these weapons of mass death and destruction?
You're an ignorant wise and beautiful woman.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
27,109
1,884
126
Under ideal situations right? Can you do it in a fire fight? Can you do it under stress and fear? I don't know.

I can guarantee you that spree shooters get pretty frustrated too. The Virginia Tech guy certainly was. He knew how to shoot, but when it became clear he couldn't bust into certain classrooms, he started getting distraught. In those situations, no one is 100%, and you're not going to be changing mags in a second or two. They're fumbling for mags, and then changing it while assessing the situation to make sure that no one's gonna pop up and shoot them or the cops haven't arrived yet.

While I don't think banning large magazines is the right way to go, I think they are certainly a tool of mass shootings. And I'm pretty sure if you simulated mass shootings with 10 round magazines versus a 100 round drums, the 100 round drum guy would do more damage.
the only person doing the firing and fighting in a mass shooting is the shooter.

there is virtually no one to challenge them. i doubt they would be very fearful at all.

Also, this thing about women defending themselves with AR-15's is just ridiculous. It really is. It's just another crazy emotional argument used, bringing up ridiculous situations that have no bearing in fact.
so korean storeowners defending their property during the LA riots is not fact?
 
Last edited:

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,481
3
76
the only person doing the firing and fighting in a mass shooting is the shooter.

there is virtually no one to challenge them. i doubt they would be very fearful at all.
No, no, no! Folks will all just bum rush him when he's changing magazines, like in the movies! There is simply no way they could change a magazine before folks get to the shooter.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
-snip-
Also, this thing about women defending themselves with AR-15's is just ridiculous. It really is. It's just another crazy emotional argument used, bringing up ridiculous situations that have no bearing in fact.
It's a much better self defense for women than you know.

They're low recoil, light and generally pretty short. AR-15s are a superior choice for women over shotguns, other long rifles and even most handguns for these reasons.

You've been listening to Joe Biden apparently.

Fern
 

LennyZ

Golden Member
Oct 24, 1999
1,557
0
76
Why is everyone talking about making it harder for law abiding citizens to get guns but
not talking about making the criminals stay in jail longer for using guns in crime?

At some point the penalty would make criminals think before using guns.
(Solitary confinement,25 years minimum,No cable tv ect)
 

Cstefan

Golden Member
Oct 6, 2005
1,511
0
71
As per usual, people who have no idea what a gun actually is, how they work, or what kind of gun is actually the problem be postin in this here thread.

And FERN you better be rolling JHP in a 5.56. None of that FMJ or there will be some unintended holes.
 

DLeRium

Lifer
Feb 19, 2001
20,161
20
81
And I can guarantee you any capable shooter could take out as many people as he did with a 10 round magazine. Hell, it wouldn't be difficult with a pump shotgun or bolt action or a revolver.

Magazine limits only limit one's own defense. It had zero effect on crime or shootings the last time we had one. That's the reason it sunset, because it had zero impact and only hurt law abiding citizens who wish to defend themselves.
Magazine limits only limits defense but not offense? You're right at the onset of any mass shooting you're fearless. The MAN.

But please, people scatter. Others try to fight back. Others fight. With every minute the situation becomes more dire for the shooter. Maybe the first mag he reloads is flawless. As innocent bystanders flee and the premises become more vacated, don't you think there's a bit of eeriness? At that point it's a ticking time bomb before the cops show up. You think the shooter is just as confident 3 minutes in? 5 minutes in? 10 minutes in? At a certain point he's trying hard to look for targets while making sure he's not about to get popped yet and he has a time to put a bullet in his head.

You honestly think magazine limits have ZERO effect on how much damage a shooter can do? It has an effect.

Once again I'm not arguing for magazine bans, but let's not be idiotic and deny that magazine size has no arguments.

I've never been in a shootout, but even at the range when I'm emptying a 10 round magazine, after the first few, I start conserving. I make sure that every shot counts and that I don't just expend another round at my paper target. If I always shot with 30 round magazines, I might not give a crap the first few rounds and just shoot a couple off. That's why I use the example of the Sandy Hook shooter who put 5-6 rounds on average into each body. You think he would've done that with a 7 round magazine? He would've been much more conservative with his magazines. If you gave him 3 hours to do damage, it might've been the same, but given that mass shootings are time limited, it's not the same thing.

I'm not here arguing for or against gun controls. Just against stupidass arugments. Like the whole cars versus guns argument. Spirited debate is good, but unsound arguments are terrible.

It's a much better self defense for women than you know.

They're low recoil, light and generally pretty short. AR-15s are a superior choice for women over shotguns, other long rifles and even most handguns for these reasons.
I really like shooting the AR-15, but I really can't see how I would use this in home defense over a pistol. Maybe shooting down the stairwell I could see myself doing, but hallways and corners? I don't know.

And last time I checked there aren't droves of people in line for AR-15s for home defense.
 
Last edited:

OverVolt

Lifer
Aug 31, 2002
14,285
87
86
Could the OP have any more loaded language.

There already are background checks anyway. There was that Boston bombing. What makes you think guns turn people into violent criminals? It doesn't empower them, they were crazy to begin with and will always find a way if they have devious minds.

Guns prevent more crimes through defense than crimes are perpetrated with them, which you would expect, since the average person (whom you seem deathly terrified of, do you ever leave the house?) is not a psychotic killer. They are a net gain for society since they enable women/elderly to defend themselves.

The rare mass killing events are tragedies but in no way reflect the overall use of guns in America and are a very small portion of all gun crime. They also always happen in gun free zones go figure. The ones that happen that aren't in gun free zones don't make the news because they were probably stopped.

Not really seeing the "weapon of mass destruction death machine looney empowerment store of death and despair" considering there are 300million Americans and 200million guns in America you are just one of the uninformed useful idiots that the liberals target with their message.

Hmm lets see my granddad had guns, my great granddad had guns, my great great granddad had guns. I like telling the story of how my great grandmother used to keep wondering men out of the farm in 1930 while my great granddad looked for work during the great depression. Because they were desperate and would try to steal the food or worse. Meanwhile your ignorant tool OP thinking guns are evil clearly demonstrates you know nothing about guns or your history or human nature, or crime, or any kind of realistic view of crime other than what you get off your tv, obviously.

What I'm trying to say is you are retarded and have nothing of substance to offer so I'm not even sure why you typed up a bunch of shit that you are obviously parroting from TV. I can just go watch TV.
 
Last edited:

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,148
617
126
Ok. So a siege is OK, but a spree is not. Gotcha.

Limiting magazine size will have absolutely ZERO effect on "mass shootings". None. We tried it before, it made ZERO difference. The only difference is it harms peoples ability to defend themselves.
To play devil's advocate here...how much worse would the shootings in AZ have been had Jared Loughner had hi-cap mags?
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,481
3
76
Meh. For him defense rifle > shotgun > pistol. This is accepted fact among defense experts.

The Ar-15 is darn near unbeatable in all aspects of home defense.

And yes I'm stating mag limits have no affect. We did it before. It had no affect. The only affect is limiting law abiding citizens means to protect themselves. You think a bad guy is going to suddenly obey the law when it comes to magazine size?
 
Last edited:

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,481
3
76
To play devil's advocate here...how much worse would the shootings in AZ have been had Jared Loughner had hi-cap mags?
Umm he did have extended capacity mags. Not standard capacity which would be 16 I believe. Can't remember the firearm.
 

SparkyJJO

Lifer
May 16, 2002
13,360
5
81
And beyond that, it takes training to reload quickly. Lots of practice. It isn't easy.
Dude, I'm easily considered a noob when it comes to rapid reloads as I have not really practiced it, but I can still swap a mag in only a few seconds. A mag swap isn't hard. Push button, empty falls out, shove full one in. Maybe release the slide if it hasn't already.

Have you ever even shot a firearm?
 

OverVolt

Lifer
Aug 31, 2002
14,285
87
86
You're using ONE scenario. Of course you're finding ONE case that suits your argument.

Yes let's compare a 100 round drum that jams on the first trigger pull with a 10 round magazine that shoots flawlessly. How well will each shooter do? Is that even a fair benchmark?

I'm not arguing for bans of large magazines, but any unbiased person can acknowledge that large magazines are indeed tools for mass shootings. I'm not anti-gun. You're just so bent on name calling and yelling at anyone who says anything remotely negative about guns that you'll throw logic and reason out the window. Banning magazines would NOT have stopped these shootings. However, someone with 100 round drums would do FAR more damage than someone with 10 round magazines.

If you had a bolt action rifle would you be shooting each person 5 times like the Sandy Hook shooter did? By the time you were on your 20th shot someone would've popped you for taking your sweet time.
Armchair commander doesn't work at all. If the magazines are already loaded reloading is completely trivial. Its truly not call of duty. Equipment failing matters, but reloading does not.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,388
1,013
126
You can't read, can you? Limiting magazine sizes will reduce the lethality of spree shootings, that start and end very quickly.
Yes, just like imposing a maximum size for the gas tank in automobiles will reduce the duration of high speed car chases. Or limiting the size of soft drinks in NYC will reduce obesity.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY