RSS

Sheriff Demonstrates Absurdity of Restricted-Capacity Magazines

18 Aug

Magazines (courtesy of Google Images)

Magazines (courtesy of Google Images)

The video below is impressive because it’s presented by a Sheriff who is openly opposed to restrictions on firearm magazine capacities.  Thus, there are some good people in law enforcement who favor 2nd Amendment rights over the unrestricted powers of government.

However, I think the facts presented as text in this video are more persuasive than the demonstrations of people firing pistols and repeatedly reloading.  In the video, the demonstrations are conducted by people who have multiple magazines sitting on a 50-gallon barrel immediately in front of them.  They stand in one place, shoot and reload repeatedly.  That’s a nice demonstration of personal abilities to shoot and reload.

However, in the real world, and in the event that I’m ever called upon to suddenly wake up and grab my pistol to defend my home, family, property, or life, I doubt that I’ll have the presence of mind to also grab one, two or three extra magazines.  I doubt that I’ll be able to simply stand and shoot at my attackers from behind a 55-gallon drum on which I can stack my spare magazines.  I’ll probably be running, ducking, trying to hide behind the chair or the table, mewing like a cat, and shooting from positions that make it unlikely that I’ll have a spare magazine instantly available if I shoot every round out of my pistol’s first magazine.

Therefore, given the statistical evidence seen in the video’s text that tells us that the vast majority of bullets fired don’t even hit their target, I want the biggest damn magazine I can get.  I want the most bullets in one magazine so I have the most chances to get off a least a couple of “lucky” shots that actually hit my intended target–without having to rely on reloading a second or third magazine that I may not even have with me.

I do not want a 6-round magazine if I can get a 15-round magazine, and I don’t want a 15-round magazine if I can get a 50-round magazine.

The issue is not how fast a defender can swap magazines and reload.  The issue is whether a defender even has, can find or has the presence of mind to reload, a second or third magazine in the midst of a surprise gunfight.

If I’m awake and initiating a firearms attack on someone else, and if I’ve practiced reloading, and if I had the presence of mind to don my body armor and bring a bucketful of spare magazines, the issue of magazine capacity may be moot.  I can shoot, swap magazines and shoot again with little or no effort or inconvenience.

But if I’m waking up from a deep sleep and I need a gun to defend myself, I don’t want to depend on my ability to remember to grab both a pistol and handful of spare magazines.  Instead, I want access to: 1) the most reliable firearm available; and 2) the biggest magazine it can handle.  Then, even if my shots go into the floor or ceiling, I’ll have enough bullets to at least scare my attackers while I try to simultaneously shoot and wake up.

Some WWII general once said “God is with the big battalions”.  I suspect He’s also with the “big magazines”.

My point is (exactly as illustrated by the video’s demonstrations of reloading expertise) that restricted magazine capacities may have virtually no effect on a determined attacker who has the advantages of time to prepare and surprise.  However, restricted magazine capacity can be lethal for defenders suddenly called upon to protect their families and themselves.

Restricted magazine capacities pose no significant problem for “professional” attackers.  However, restricted magazine capacities pose an enormous problem for the average “amateur” defender.  The vast majority of Americans are “amateur” defenders who don’t really know how to shoot let alone, reload under pressure.  Thus, restricted magazine capacities are contrary to the best interests of the vast majority of Americans and actually serve the interests of the “professional” attackers.

I.e., suppose you wanted to shoot the guy who lives across the street and both you and he could only find 6-round magazines.  Suppose you decided to sneak into your neighbor’s house while he was asleep.  Suppose you were packing an extra ten magazines (66 bullets, total) and you knew that your sleeping neighbor was unlikely to have more than a pistol with a single 6-round magazine.  Would the knowledge of your superior “firepower” encourage or discourage you from making your surprise attack?  If you are wide awake and have access to 66 rounds while your target is asleep and will have, at most, 6-rounds, the odds are clearly in your favor.

Restricted magazine capacities favor attackers and impair defenders.  Insofar as your government wants restricted magazine capacities, it seeks to empower attackers and impair the vast majority of Americans.

video   00:13:56

 
8 Comments

Posted by on August 18, 2013 in 2nd Amendment, Video

 

Tags: , , ,

8 responses to “Sheriff Demonstrates Absurdity of Restricted-Capacity Magazines

  1. Gary Lee, [Russell], sui juris

    August 18, 2013 at 11:04 AM

    Excellent find Alfred. 100% common sense, so, now we know what ( okay, we really already knew before) the reason is NOT for magazine restrictions…..what a surpise…. ; I

     
  2. pop de adam

    August 18, 2013 at 11:22 AM

    A few months ago I read a book called Glock, Rise of Americas Gun, in the first or second chapter it explained how many police forces made the switch from revolvers to pistols. In Miami during the 1980s police increasingly found themselves outgunned by the criminal element prevalent there, a tipping point occured while during a shoot out an officer spent all the cartridges in his revolver allowing is killer to simply execute him before he could reload.

     
    • Jetlag

      August 18, 2013 at 3:35 PM

      It is interesting that police departments used to consider a 6-shot revolver sufficient for every situation a cop was likely to run into.

      Then something caused this to change. And it wasn’t that higher spec firearms appeared on the open market all of a sudden. They were around long beforehand.

       
  3. Yartap

    August 18, 2013 at 2:19 PM

    Damn! That Jim is fast. And Christy ain’t so bad herself. But bigger magazines are better (of course!). But, a better question is where and how to locate your gun(s)? This, I feel, is more important.

    I believe that anyone may carry concealed without a permit (due to the 14th Amendment, now). Gov-co. can only regulate the military and police, not individuals with a 2nd Amendment right. And gov-co. knows this. This is why they are trying to regulate commercial makers of weapons.

     
  4. Adrian

    August 18, 2013 at 3:55 PM

    Guys,”Government” dos not exist.Corporate MAFIA does.THEIR rules and regulations do not apply
    to American People.We are not foreigners in America,THEY are.
    You have natural rights,exercise them.It is your patriotic duty to yourself and America.

     
    • palani

      August 18, 2013 at 4:54 PM

      “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”

      http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/2013/04/03/as-lead-sponsor-in-house-on-gun-legislation-rep-diana-degette-appears-to-not-understand-how-they-work/93506/

      Have you ever tried to reason with someone who is so clueless that they don’t even know a magazine is RELOADABLE? Who believe that once it has been depleted it must be thrown away for lack of bullets?

       
      • Adask

        August 18, 2013 at 5:16 PM

        Yes, I’ve been married 1.5 times so I have some experience in trying to reason with people who are “clueless”. Generally speaking, I lost the arguments. Or, if I actually won, no one else conceded my victory.

         

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s