Why 33 rounds makes sense in a defensive weapon

[jetboatdeath]

It is not unusual for said civilian to run out of a single magazine of ammunition during a SD situation.

While I generally agree with what you are saying and supporting we must make sure not to make up facts.
Most self defense situations are on average only 3 shots.
But this in no way should lead to banning high cap mags..

 

[billc]

No reason why a cars top speed shouldn't be 30 miles an hour, it would be safer, more fuel efficient and you can always use a plane to get somewhere, farther away, faster. Also, there is no reason for all the food choices in the grocery store. One type of vitamin enriched wheat bread, oatmeal, and you are all set to go. Drink water from the tap and you have just saved so much time and energy. No reason to have so many clothing choices either. Just one light brown work coverall should do everyone just fine. Also, there is no reason for people to own their own homes, just assign each individual, at the age of 18, a room in a group apartment with access to public transportation and you can just get rid of cars altogether.

See, that was easy. next problem please.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

While I generally agree with what you are saying and supporting we must make sure not to make up facts.
Most self defense situations are on average only 3 shots.
But this in no way should lead to banning high cap mags..

I would be interested in seeing the stat to back up your allegation. I looked up what I can only assume to be yours and I see that criminals average three shots when fired per incident. This says nothing regarding the number used by people in self-defense. Not only that, I will anecdotally say that I have personally seen situation where people have expended the entire magazine in self-defense, so.....

 

[jks9199]

If you find yourself in that situation you have set the events in motion long before that.

Which is exactly my point, thank you very much: You find yourself in a mass shoot out you really made some bad choices along the way.

Not necessarily. Vicky Armel & Michael Garbarino simply went to work on May afternoon in 2006. The guy with the automatic weapons came to them, in the station lot.

None of the students at Virginia Tech on April 16, 2007 had a mass shooting come to them, too. School policies prohibited any of them from being prepared to deal with the situation more effectively. (Yes, I know, he didn't have anything other than standard magazines.)

At Columbine, again, trouble came calling.

Seeing a trend?

While I'm not suggesting we should all trade the family grocery getter in for an Abrams and walk around with Tommy guns or full auto Glocks, it is a little naive to assume that the bad guys won't have anything better than a Saturday night special revolver or that trouble won't come looking...

 

[granfire]

Not necessarily. Vicky Armel & Michael Garbarino simply went to work on May afternoon in 2006. The guy with the automatic weapons came to them, in the station lot.

None of the students at Virginia Tech on April 16, 2007 had a mass shooting come to them, too. School policies prohibited any of them from being prepared to deal with the situation more effectively. (Yes, I know, he didn't have anything other than standard magazines.)

At Columbine, again, trouble came calling.

Seeing a trend?

While I'm not suggesting we should all trade the family grocery getter in for an Abrams and walk around with Tommy guns or full auto Glocks, it is a little naive to assume that the bad guys won't have anything better than a Saturday night special revolver or that trouble won't come looking...

The trend is that every few years one person, maybe 2 out of over 300 million goes nuts.
In the same time frame more people have been killed - unexpectently by car crashes.

If you are scared, in the dark waving a gun with 30 odd bullets around, bad things happen.

Those movie scenarios just don't wash it for me. If the Arizona gunman didn't have those oversized mags...lot less lead would have been in the air...

 

[granfire]

I would be interested in seeing the stat to back up your allegation. I looked up what I can only assume to be yours and I see that criminals average three shots when fired per incident. This says nothing regarding the number used by people in self-defense. Not only that, I will anecdotally say that I have personally seen situation where people have expended the entire magazine in self-defense, so.....

intruiging.
What people do you see that shoot a full magazine in SD, and more important:
How much regular training do they have and how much did they hit.

 

[Carol]

The trend is that every few years one person, maybe 2 out of over 300 million goes nuts.
In the same time frame more people have been killed - unexpectently by car crashes.

If you are scared, in the dark waving a gun with 30 odd bullets around, bad things happen.

Those movie scenarios just don't wash it for me. If the Arizona gunman didn't have those oversized mags...lot less lead would have been in the air...

But if a skilled shooter can change mags quickly that doesn't mean less lead would have been in the air.

 

[granfire]

But if a skilled shooter can change mags quickly that doesn't mean less lead would have been in the air.

Still more of the 2 seconds of lead free air time...insignificant maybe, but a short break in the barrage.

 

[Carol]

Still more of the 2 seconds of lead free air time...insignificant maybe, but a short break in the barrage.

Can't get behind punishing law-abiding gun owners for something insignificant.

 

[Cryozombie]

Still more of the 2 seconds of lead free air time...insignificant maybe, but a short break in the barrage.

I'm sorry... how short a break in the Barrage?

Insignificant is correct.

 

[Carol]

Why can't we punish criminals instead of law abiding citizens?

Had the Comm. of Mass. not paroled Dominic Cinelli from his THREE concurrent life sentences, Officer Jack Maguire would still be alive today and looking forward to his retirement.

About 10 times each year, Michigan prison parolees kill someone.

Then the lives of about 10 innocent Michiganders can be saved by keeping these perps behind bars.

In the 10 years ending in 2003, at least 105 parolees -- one out of every 530 -- had returned to prison for homicide convictions. The relatively small band of parolee killers is vexing to policymakers. It's an issue again because Patrick Selepak is accused of three killings last month and prison authorities have admitted that mistakes in the parole system kept him out of jail.

At least 105 lives could have been saved?

http://www.capps-mi.org/material to put up/Despite tough parole laws, a few still kill.htm

How many lives would be saved if there was a minimum 25 year sentence for every gun crime?

 

[Bruno@MT]

I disagree. It isn't uncommon for 4-6 'bangers to participate in a home invasion. What was the bad choice there?

Also, my FWIW, my range charges by the hour. The time it takes to reload mags at the range could be better spent shooting, unless you want to A) Shoot Less, B) Shoot faster, C) Buy and extra hour.

I don't see how that logic works.
If you shoot for an hour, you will have to reload anyway.
So rather than having to refill a 30 bullet mag you will reload a 17 or so bullet mag.
In the end, you've put the same number of bullets into the magazine.

The only difference I see is that you need a couple more reload cycles.
I have only been to the range a couple of times, and I did notice that people do not shoot as fast as they can for a full hour. The weapon gets too hot, and their arm gets weary etc. The reload cycles are used to rest their arms and allow their weapon to cool off so it's not like the reload cycles have that much impact. Or at least that is what it looked like from my layman's point of view.

 

[Cryozombie]

The only difference I see is that you need a couple more reload cycles.
I have only been to the range a couple of times, and I did notice that people do not shoot as fast as they can for a full hour. The weapon gets too hot, and their arm gets weary etc. The reload cycles are used to rest their arms and allow their weapon to cool off so it's not like the reload cycles have that much impact. Or at least that is what it looked like from my layman's point of view.

It depends on preference I suppose. I would rather buy, lets say 100 rounds, load 3 hi cap mags at home, and focus on my shooting when I am at the range. That way I have an hour to shoot, evaluate my target, compensate, etc... rather than taking the 20 minutes or so it might take to reload three 10 round mags 3 times. That only leaves me 40 minutes to shoot, in which case I might feel rushed, especially if I am shooting more than one firearm, all those times go up exponentially and I have to shorten my shooting time even further with each weapon, or limit the number of rounds I put thru them.

 

[Bruno@MT]

Ok I can understand that, though that seems like an awful lot of time wasted just to put some bullets in a magazine. another question: does the added weight of 16 or so additional bullets not change the physical feedback of the gun?

 

[granfire]

Why can't we punish criminals instead of law abiding citizens?

Had the Comm. of Mass. not paroled Dominic Cinelli from his THREE concurrent life sentences, Officer Jack Maguire would still be alive today and looking forward to his retirement.



Then the lives of about 10 innocent Michiganders can be saved by keeping these perps behind bars.



At least 105 lives could have been saved?

http://www.capps-mi.org/material to put up/Despite tough parole laws, a few still kill.htm

How many lives would be saved if there was a minimum 25 year sentence for every gun crime?

That does not exactly go with the problem of why a civilian needs to have 33 rounds in his/her pistol.

Unless of course those parolees were ganging up to kill those 10 citizens in a concerted effort.


However.

Too often the laws crafted after specific incidents resemble knee jerk reactions. In the end you have people going away for life for stealing a candybar (or the felony aquivalent there of) because a well meaning legislature bowed to the demands of the public for a harsher stand on crime. (and no, a person serving 3 life terms should not be ellgible for parole....)

Points to ponder though:
Putting those large magazines into the hands of the general public also puts them in hands of the gun afisionado who might snap under stress at any time. Bad enough to have somebody go postal with the normal amount of rounds. (not to mention you can have a lot of those....if the aggressor shooter can quickly reload, the SD shooter should be able to as well, no?)


The average gun owner does not practice shooting. Not on a regular basis as one should when you deem a gun a valid means of SD.

The distance between the shooter and the target can be closed rather quickly by the determined. I forgot the exact numbers, but they were astonishingly small. Add to that the miss rate of trained shooters like cops....The chances of an amateur getting off 33 rounds and doing more than shooting holes into the air (and maybe bystanders) are on the remote side.

Then, should the unimaginable have happened and you have been separated from your gun you get to look down the barrel of a weapon you outfitted with many more bullets than is needed to kill you.

The logistics for the average person to keep a gun for SD purposes is staggering. Let alone a supersized one.

Now, I let you get back to your movie fantasies about standing in a hail of lead and dropping 20 bad guys with your trusty six shooter....

 

[crushing]

Now, I let you get back to your movie fantasies about standing in a hail of lead and dropping 20 bad guys with your trusty six shooter....

Is that not the fantasy of people that think people should be able to defend themselves with very small magazines?

"You don't need 33 rounds! You only need one round per bad guy. Just shoot the gun out of their hand and they will beg for mercy. Launch any more lead than that and someone could get hurt!"

Too often the laws crafted after specific incidents resemble knee jerk reactions.

Yes, that is exactly what this thread is about.

 

[granfire]

Is that not the fantasy of people that think people should be able to defend themselves with very small magazines?

"You don't need 33 rounds! You only need one round per bad guy. Just shoot the gun out of their hand and they will beg for mercy. Launch any more lead than that and someone could get hurt!"



Yes, that is exactly what this thread is about.

More of a sarcastic recount of the common movie/TV scenario: bad guys spray the good guys with a hail of lead, while good guy, cool as a cucumber or the the other side of the pillow drops bad guy with one shot. Miami Vice had a few of those scenes if I recall...even considering the sub machine gun's inaccuracy.... :lfao:

 

[crushing]

More of a sarcastic recount of the common movie/TV scenario: bad guys spray the good guys with a hail of lead, while good guy, cool as a cucumber or the the other side of the pillow drops bad guy with one shot. Miami Vice had a few of those scenes if I recall...even considering the sub machine gun's inaccuracy.... :lfao:

Quite right! On another forum there was a similar discussion regarding magazine capacity. One participant used such scenes from TV and movies to justify cracking down on magazine sizes. This person was sure that it should never take more than one or two rounds per criminal to defend one's self when attacked by armed criminals. Talk about a fantasy world!

 

[granfire]

It's not so much that you don't need it, more like when you do need it, you have made some pretty poor decisions a long the road prior.

 

[Big Don]

It's not so much that you don't need it, more like when you do need it, you have made some pretty poor decisions a long the road prior.

You mean like deciding to go to school (Columbine, Virginia Tech, University of Texas) or work (Edmond, OK postal shooting) or going to eat (San Ysidro McDonald's Massacre, Luby's Massacre)?

Or, like going to the supermarket in Tucson...