alan colmes on mag capacity

[Ctwo]

colmes' show tonight discussed the Sandy Hook event stating that 'we learned' that 154 rounds were fired in less than 5 minutes, and he asked if we need such a capacity?

Well, there are 300 seconds in a 5 minute period. How many rounds can a typical single shot firearm, such as a bolt action rifle, fire in five minutes with a pocket full of ammo?

How many rocks could a typical young man of the stature of lanza throw in five minutes?

More than 154?

[Noble Cause]

This has become my standard reply on this issue...

Why do Americans need "high capacity magazines" ?

Some occasional over lap and duplication, but otherwise a rather
comprehensive list:

* In case of multiple assailants. If you are attacked by 5 or 6 thugs,
New Yorks 7 round limit doesn't improve your chances of surviving..
it decreases your chances of surviving.

* TRUE high capacity mags would be mags beyond the original design
and in uncommon use (example would be the 100rnd mag for AR15).
Once again, a 30 round AR15 mag is a NORMAL capacity mag.

* Normal capacity mags should be protected under Heller.
AR15's are designed to use, and often ship with, 30 round mags.
Magazines are considered a functional part of the firearm, and
30 round mags are "in common use".

Ergo, limiting mags to 10, or 7 or 5 or Zero nullifies the intent of the 2nd
Amendment and violates Americans Civil Rights.

* Defensive situations are stressful & reduce accuracy tremendously.
You could empty your restricted 7 rnd mag, & miss your attacker.
With a normal 13 to 30 rnd mag, you greatly increase your chances
of surviving the attack, and protecting your family. Police accuracy
can drop to 17% in a gun battle. Yours could be even lower.

* In many rural areas in could take 30 minutes or more for police to
respond to an attack. The family could be on its own for long time,
and if they have to reload their magazines because they are restricted
from 10 to say New Yorks 7 limit, while under fire it decrease's their
ability to defend themselves.

* Ability to use suppression fire to keep bad guys from advancing.
or using it so you can move to a better defensive position.
Supressive fire with 30 rounds is feasible. With only 7 or 10, you are
quite likely to run out of ammo before you can reach a better position,
allowing the criminal / predator to shoot you with impunity.

* An attacker can sustain a few hits, and still be trying to kill you.
This is rarely a 1 shot = kill world. You never know how many rounds it
will take to stop a threat. Or mutiple threats. Criminals have been shot
28 times and lived to see their trial and conviction.

* An attacker is on drugs, & is irrationally determined to kill you.
You could empty your restricted 7 round magazine into them with
little or no apparent effect. If you emptied a normal capacity mag
of say 16 to 19 rounds of 9mm, your chances are greatly improved.

* Despite multiple hits, even though they are "dead man walking"
some violent people will continue to try and kill others until they
lose blood pressure & bleed out. This can take several minutes.
Its not like the movies where one shot from the good guy kills the
bad guy within 2 seconds (unless its a head shot). You need every
round you have to keep them from killing you or your family.

* Americans with a legal conceal carry license would now have to carry
extra mags to match what they currently allready have.. this increases
their chance of "printing" and may result in them running out of ammo
and putting themselves and the people they are protecting in mortal
danger.

* A person unable to shoot proper defensive rounds because of recoil
(they have arthritis, they are veterans who were severely wounded,
they are of small statue or frail, they are disabled in some respect.)

If they can only handle a 22LR recoil, and are restricted to only 10 to 5
rounds, they will be at a disadvantage, since 22LR is not considered to
be a reliable defensive round, and it would take a lot more hits with 22LR
than say a 9mm or 45acp. Allowing them to have 20 to 30 rounds in
their firearm might allow them to live thru an assault.

* A person with a disability unable to change out magazines.

* A law restricting magazine capacity only punishes the law abiding.

* Criminals can easily make "high capacity" mags even if outlawed.
They simply extend the bottom of existing mags and add a spring.

* Criminals and the insane will use 30+ mags no matter what the law is.

* Has any politician asked the people who actually used a firearm to
defend themselves and their family, how they would feel with having
even less defensive rounds the next time theirs lives are in danger ?

* If "high capacity magazines" are such a concern to law enforcement,
explain why the FBI doesn't track it. (and, btw, so called assault rifles
murder useage is so low, the FBI simply lumps them together with
other rifles... in 2011, All rifles (including AR15) accounted for only
323 murders (2.5%) for the entire nation. The AR15 probably less
than 2%. since the 323 (2.5%) figure includes every type of rifle.

* There are millions of so called high-capacity magazines in the hands of
Americans, and have been for decades. They are used millions of times
each year by Americans for defense, hunting, target shooting. So you
have millions used legally & safely each year, versus a few used by
a couple of mentally disturbed predators illegally. And now you want to
blame & scream at all the Sane, normal people who did not harm anyone ?

It is irrational to think by punishing the millions of Americans who
legally own & use them, you will somehow stop criminals & insane
predators from using them.

On previous magazine neutering laws (California / New York ):

* Slippery Slope. New York reduced it to 10, and now 7, another state
is apparently considering 5. When the next massacre occurs
(and it will, since gun-free zones attract insane predators intent on
killing as many defenseless innocents as possible without resistance. )
politicians will push for 3 rnd mags, or just simply outlaw magazines.

* No panels of Firearm experts were consulted about the effect of
restricting magazine capacities on normal people.

* What scientific study was performed on the effects of outlawing
normal magazine capacities (making them now high-caps) ? (None).

* What public hearings were conducted before some states banned
normal capacity (high caps) magazines ? (None) New York only gave
elected officials 20 minutes to read the bill before voting.

* Why are people who have never held a firearm, owned a firearm,
shot a firearm, or know anything about firearms (other than
fictional accounts in movies) shouting for restrictions on magazines.?

These people are easily identified online. They call magazines "clips",
or assault clips, or High Capacity Assault Clips, or Military grade
high capacity assault clips. Most of these people we call "The Media",
parroting what the anti gun politicians have told them what to say.

* Would political leaders, Hollywood celebrities, the rich and affluent,
insist that all their bodyguards have restricted capacity magazines ?

* Would police officers feel better about using reduced capacity
mags to protect themselves and family when they retire ?

* Police officer can have 20 rounds in his XDm to defend himself from
a criminal. A law abiding citizen would only have 10 to 5 to defend
himself from the same criminal. How is that even remotely fair ?

* The 2nd Amendment is to protect us from Tyranny. An AR15 with a
30 round magazine is an excellent choice for our first line of defense.

* Telling me I do not need a normal capacity magazine to defend myself
and my family is the same as telling Rosa Parks she did not need to sit in
the front of the bus. It is a Civil Right.

Noble

[TahoeTim]

Sandy Hook is irrelevant. The issue is that he was crazy and his mom should be in jail with him. She knew he was violent and yet gave him money to buy a gun.

You need to simply ask "How many rounds should a criminal or a mentally ill person be allowed?"

The answer is obviously zero. So fix that problem and leave us alone. Also ask how far a drunk should be allowed to drive intoxicated. It's the same. Are we banning large cars? fast cars? car free zones? When a crazy person operates an inanimate object, bad things happen. Car, gun. knife, fork, broken plate, bat, hammer, etc, etc.

[negolien]

Their arguments are only meant as a stepping stone to ban ALL firearms let's be honest. If anti's got their way the next time somone went postal with a 6 round revolver they would want to ban them also.

Oh btw to the guy above me could you be any more cluless Just saying... He shot his mother first..