I fail to see where your analogy has anything to do with his argument. He's saying he wants more magazine capacity because he can. That's 100% legal and does not put anyone in danger. Your example is illegal and does put people in danger. Apples and oranges.

1) recreation
2) self defense
3) national defense "behind every blade of grass" I swore an oath to defend my country against enemies, both foreign and domestic...

Because packs of idiots sometimes show up......4 suspects, 9 bullets hardly seems like enough in this situation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuhKCiY-lu0

You still only want 9 rounds?

Just my opinion, but the question shouldn't be "Why?", but rather, "Why not?" Instead of asking me to justify why I need/want something, explain to me why I don't. (not aimed at the OP, just a general statement)

The correct position is right there........

Marc

Exactly.

20, 30, 50, 100 round mags, I can have any I want. And I have zero desire to kill people.

Bill, look what Whitman did on the UT campus. How many rounds did his mag hold? I can assure you there are scores of riflemen than could wreak havoc with a single shot bolt action rifle and the right scope, from the right position. So restricting magazine capacity will do no more for the false sense of security for the libtards than any other gun law does. Same thing with minimum rifle barrel lengths and restrictions on suppressors. It prevents no crimes and only makes law abiding folks business more difficult.

Mag capacity is only step 1.

I fully expect Obama to make some executive decisions about this and other stuff just as he is leaving office.

Way I see it is if I'm being attacked I'm going to put atleast 3 bullets into each threat but what if there is two or three guys and what if I miss one or two shots I don't want to worry if I will have enough bullets to stop the threats.
Or if my girlfriend has to use they pistol she's not the best shot that's why I leave my Springfield that holds twenty where she can get it and not have to worry about missing or running out
It's better to have extra than to need more

The 2ND Amendment only mentions weapons, there nothing in the Amendment about the capacity of bullets that it can hold. The weapons of today were not even dreamed of in 18TH century, it was the last half of the 19TH Century that cartridge and capacity even became an issue with weapons.

In my lifetime I have seen a few changes in the laws about weapons. You can bet the outhouse all of you will see more in the next 30 years than what I have witnessed since the first change in 1968. Gun owners and hunters are a minority and the numbers are decreasing annually. Every time some nut case with a gun goes crazy and kills a few people, more people become anti gun.

Wayne LaPierre is an idiot. How many "tragedies" of this type have been stopped by "one good man with a gun"? We are never in the right place at the right time.

I'm all for not giving any ground to the antis. But let's be realistic in our arguments. The reality is people kill people. They do it for many reasons. Mental illness, religion, greed, anger . . .

What we need to be behind is a resolution that will help diminish the tragedies and increase understanding. Maybe if some of the millions of dollars we pump into the lobbyists for the NRA was spent on studies on how we can help the situation instead of just road blocking the opposition the people who aren't pro or anti would see us in a different light.

And I prefer to hunt with 20 round mags. In a large sounder I can empty the 10 round mag too quickly. But I've never shot more than 17 in that type of situation. However I don't like the weight of the 30 round mags when swinging the weapon. Getting older and slower so . . .

I don't have a 50 or 100 round mag but I have plenty of 30s. I plan to keep them.

So what is your plan to help diminish the tragedies and increase understanding? If it wasn't for Wayne LaPierre and the NRA putting up roadblocks and being the first in line TO DEFEND US we would have already been overrun with anti's and their knee jerk reactions to mass murders with scary black guns. There are attempted crimes that happen almost every day in this country that are deterred because of a good guy with a gun. Don't hear much about them in the news though. The NRA is our shield. Why the hate?

Agreed, There are lots of crimes that are stopped with "one good guy with a gun". Maybe quit watching the Main Stream Media and do some of your own research and you'll find lots of them. Heck just go to youtube and type it in, hundreds of videos. Don't believe all the crap you hear on TV.

Had a similar discussion with my wife's grandfather this past weekend. Somehow we got on politics, which I hate because they're liberal as hell. I don't want to get into a heated debate with them because its my in-laws and I can hold my tongue even though I know I'm right. I digress, He said "I'm not against guns, I own lots of guns and I hunt. I'm not against high capacity magazines because you can change a mag in less than a second. I just don't understand the need for "assault weapons" they use these weapons to go murder little kids and shoot up schools they're too dangerous. I couldn't stand it anymore, but instead of just throwing out some random numbers that wouldn't mean anything to anybody I whipped up my phone and went to the FBI statistics for 2013 and showed him the actual homicide statistics and explained to him the number of gun deaths the MSM and antigun people always tout have a huge number of suicides and accidents mixed in. Showed him that out of 8,454 homicides with guns in 2013 that only 285 of those were committed with a rifle. And of those 285 that were committed with a rifle only a fraction of those were with a scary "assault rifle". Showed him that Knives or cutting instruments, Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.), and Personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.) are used to murder more people per year than these big bad "assault rifles" everyone always wants to ban. He couldn't believe the actual statistics and pretty much changed his mind on the spot.

Point of the story is do your own research, don't listen to some talking head has to say on TV. They're biased and it is blatantly obvious. On both sides.

**cited murder statistics

Well said.

I had that same discussion with my liberal dad about Planned Parenthood. He went pale when I showed him the data, and told me he refused to believe it and would never discuss it again. A true head-in-sand liberal until the day he died.

And yes, well said.

That's and you know it. I have stopped violent aggression to my person with my pdw but that's not the same as a citizen with a gun stopping a criminal or crazy person committing a mass murder. The fact is that those things happen. And will continue to. Making more laws will not change it. And neither will the NRA and their wealthy mouth of the organization spewing rhetoric .

I support the NRA. Been a member a long time. I also know that denial of the fact that people use guns to do bad things and taking no responsibility in efforts to minimize their ability to do that is deplorable.

Im sorry which part is bs? Pretty sure the FBI statistics don't lie sir

Since you don't want to search for yourself, the link below shows some of the mass shootings stopped by concealed carry folks. It touts 9 which is more stopped than thst have happened in the last few years. So more have been stopped than have happened so.... Which part is bs again?

http://bearingarms.com/yes-concealed-carriers-have-stopped-mass-shootings/

I most sincerely agree with your statement that I underlined above. Specifically, what laws are you advocating - that won't stop the problem in the first place?

Please note that they almost invariably happen in "gun free" places, so armed citizens cannot help stop the bad guy.

Your comment......:
"I also know that denial of the fact that people use guns to do bad things and taking no responsibility in efforts to minimize their ability to do that is deplorable."

I'm sorry - but that honestly sounds like spewing unfounded rhetoric to me. Seriously, I'm not attacking you, but I find myself asking: "Where did that come from?"

I've never met nor even heard of even one person in denial that bad people do bad things with guns. Who is shirking what responsibility?

Respectfully,
Marc

And every argument so far has been just what the OP said he didn't want, nose of the camel. There is a lot we can do with our money besides pay off people in congress. I'm sure we can find a system that allows identification of mentally unstable individuals and putting them on a no buy list. Too many of the mass shooters legally bought there weapons even though most of them had all sorts of warning signs that they had significant mental issues. I'm not saying give in to new laws. I'm just saying spending some money and showing some compassion has a better chance of not alienating all of the non gun owning public than the staunch attitude we portray now. And if you can keep a few from not being against us the battle against the hard core antis will be a little easier.

Every argument so far has been nose of the camel? You are either joking, or have not read the responses in this thread!

Showing compassion to avoid alienating the hard core anti gun folks? How about simply standing our ground of what is obviously common sense. That little jab at pro gun people not being compassionate tells me a lot about your actual attitude.

- Nobody wants a mentally deranged killer to kill hoards of innocent people, with guns, hammers or knives or cars.
- Yes, of course it is a mental health issue. THAT is what responsible gun owners keep saying!
- Take a look at mood altering medications and illegal drug use, while you are at it.
- You have already said more than once, that new laws will not solve the problem.

But, like all of the rabid "anti" folks - you keep talking in generalities that end up bordering on circular logic.

PLEASE present an outline of exactly what gun law changes that you feel will solve the problem. I would love to hear a gun related plan that stops the problem while allowing me to protect myself.

I'm all ears.

Respectfully,
Marc

Looks like I got suckered into an ad campaign for gun control - and I fell for it, thinking that there would be some exchange of ideas.

Next time, I hope to recognize the signs more rapidly and not waste my time.

Marc

There are no gun law changes that will stop crime. But you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Run some ads, fund some research into the the types of things that the non gun, yet not anti gun, public would see as gun owners caring about the fact that these tragedies do happen and we do want to help find out why and minimize them. Spend a little of the money they ask us for on at least trying to help instead of on the endless barrage of mailers on greedy lobists. If you only win over 5% of the non gun public with a little compassion and positive publicity it could pay dividends down the road.

And nothing I've said is anti gun. What you have said has been just what I expect out people who can't think outside of their own wants and fears.

passthru,

You are correct in that comment: No, you didn't say anything directly anti gun - I agree. I meant that you are using the tactics common to people with a hidden agenda.

Specifically, you said: "What you have said has been just what I expect out people who can't think outside of their own wants and fears." THAT is exactly from their playbook: Marginalize valid positions as ignorance/emotional/backwards thinking.

Any logical and informed person like you and I, will agree that no legislation can fix the problem. Then let us disconnect the conversations about guns as part of the solution. That is the point where we seem to diverge.

We all know that it is a mental health/societal decline condition - not a gun problem.
Most of us have tremendous compassion for our fellow man.
By the same token, most of us have learned that being nice to people who are rabidly and blindly on a quest, has no positive effect advancing toward a solution to the problem at hand.

So, where does that leave us?

YES - as a nation we need to explore the obvious breakdown in our society. Ask any school teacher!
YES - as a nation we need to look closely at the proliferation of mind/mood altering medications.
Yes - as a nation we need to have open discussions about why murderers do their deeds.

I am a Dad of five daughters and a grandfather of 11. I care deeply and compassionately for life.

It is not the tool, it is the user. Let us not waste time, lives, money and resources making it about the tool being used for evil doings. Let us go after the evil.

Dang, you have five daughters? My one nearly drove me nuts. Now she's trying to drive me to the poor house.

Seriously, those issues are the real issues. We can stand a staunch line and we can spew the rhetoric that we should be allowed the same weapons as our standing army in case there is a need to stand against that army. Because that is what our forefathers had to do to gain their freedom. But honestly, no matter how big the magazine is on my AR, do we really stand a chance against the ptb? And honestly, if our government makes a hard run at our guns, a few might go to jail or die in defense of their rights but the vast majority aren't going to want to give up their comfy life to defend the second amendment. It's not like a million NRA members are going to be shoulder to shoulder on a battle line, holding the line against the army or the air force. It will be one house, one gun owner at a time. Arrested as he goes out the door to work in the morning, or while he is at work one day. Then his guns will be taken without a fight.

Let's put it like this. If the ATF kicked in your door to confiscate your weapons are you going to endanger your families lives to hold on to them? You may be willing to die for that right but are you willing to see them caught in the cross fire, either killed or left leaderless without you?

I'm sure the vast majority of gun owners in Britain and Australia said "hell no" to giving up their guns. But when the government stepped in and they were faced with becoming criminals, losing their lively hoods, freedom or lives, they gave up their guns. So honestly, I don't think we will get to keep ours in the end with a show of force.

Those issues you listed, finding real solutions to them, isn't easy or cheap. But if the NRA supported those issues and was out front in the media about their support in helping with those issues there would be some who would see us in a different light. And in this battle we need every voting ally we can get.

Maybe that is simpleton and wrong but they seem to keep being able to rally more voters to their side. And we seem to becoming more of a minority.