How do you feel about gun control after the Sandy Hook shooting?

Originally Posted by 2 Humped Camel

I already stated 6 which allows for hunting, target shooting, and home defense without restricting any type or class of weapons currently considered legal. Is that so bad? The 30 round argument gets nowhere because if there were a case for it to be made it would be obvious and logical, in my opinion of course.

Yes, 6 is too little. I gave a simple scenario why.

Originally Posted by 2 Humped Camel

I already stated 6 which allows for hunting, target shooting, and home defense without restricting any type or class of weapons currently considered legal.

Also, what sense would there be to have anything other than a revolver if all that was allowed were 6 shots in handguns?

Originally Posted by Run To State

Yes, 6 is too little. I gave a simple scenario why.

I responded which you never replied that most home invasions, shootings occur to people who are involved in other criminal activities. I argue that crimes are very rarely random in the cases that they are random and occur to law abiding citizens that 6 rounds should be enough. I could be swayed by a solid argument that 6 is to low and I've asked if 9 is more appropriate with no answer. I know that 30 round magazines aren't designed for home defense or hunting.

Originally Posted by Run To State

Also, what sense would there be to have anything other than a revolver if all that was allowed were 6 shots in handguns?

Probably none, what amount of rounds do you feel is adequate for a law abiding citizen's home defense needs? I can be swayed for higher but how much is the question.

Originally Posted by 2 Humped Camel

Probably none, what amount of rounds do you feel is adequate for a law abiding citizen's home defense needs? I can be swayed for higher but how much is the question.

This is a never ending argument. How many is too many versus how few is enough? You say 6, why? Don't give me the it gives someone time to tackle a shooter. In a situation like the CO theater shooting no one is looking to tackle that guy. Everyone is running for the door or hiding behind seats. In a school shooting you will never get close enough to a shooter to tackle them. If someone breaks into my house and has 15 shots I would like to at least have the same. Do I need 30, don't know. But I sure don't want to be dead because I ran out of bullets before the bad guy did.

Originally Posted by 2 Humped Camel

I responded which you never replied that most home invasions, shootings occur to people who are involved in other criminal activities. I argue that crimes are very rarely random in the cases that they are random and occur to law abiding citizens that 6 rounds should be enough. I could be swayed by a solid argument that 6 is to low and I've asked if 9 is more appropriate with no answer. I know that 30 round magazines aren't designed for home defense or hunting.

I disagree completely. I've seen some that were involved in other criminal activities. I've seen as many that were just innocent people. 9 is also too low IMO.

No, not for hunting, 30 rounds are more for target shooting or defense if something major happened, like the L.A. riots for example.

Originally Posted by 2 Humped Camel

Probably none, what amount of rounds do you feel is adequate for a law abiding citizen's home defense needs? I can be swayed for higher but how much is the question.

I honestly don't know. I know I wouldn't want to be the guy caught short defending his family and own life. Like I said in another thread, the only thing worse than not having a gun when someone’s trying to kill you with a gun is having a gun without enough bullets.

Originally Posted by woodsrider

This is a never ending argument. How many is too many versus how few is enough? You say 6, why? Don't give me the it gives someone time to tackle a shooter. In a situation like the CO theater shooting no one is looking to tackle that guy. Everyone is running for the door or hiding behind seats. In a school shooting you will never get close enough to a shooter to tackle them. If someone breaks into my house and has 15 shots I would like to at least have the same. Do I need 30, don't know. But I sure don't want to be dead because I ran out of bullets before the bad guy did.

Ok, no one is going to tackle a shooter. How many more escape death because of his 2-5 second reloads? These are real lives lost in the last few months they and the need to prevent future deaths should be more important than some paranoid person's dooms day scenario. There is a sensible argument for fire arms and home defense I'm just trying to find a happy medium between that need and public safety.

Originally Posted by 2 Humped Camel

Ok, no one is going to tackle a shooter. How many more escape death because of his 2-5 second reloads? These are real lives lost in the last few months they and prevent future deaths should be more important than some paranoid person's dooms day scenario. There is a sensible argument for fire arms and home defense I'm just trying to find a happy medium between that need and public safety.

In a crowded theather like Aurora, I'd venture zero.

For the love of Pete; 20 round, 30 round or 100 round magazines are not the problem or the issue.

YOU CANNOT legislate utopia as much as some of you may wish to be able to.

In all school shooting prior to the last one low capacity pistols, rifles and shotguns were used. No AR-15s or AK-47s were used contrary to popular belief. As I stated in another post the most often used weapon was a .22 cal pistol with an average capacity of 6 to 15 shots. Why didn't some one tackle the guy at Va Tech all he had was a Walther .22 with about an 8 shot capacity and a 9mm with around a 12 -15 shot capacity.

Originally Posted by UKMustangFan

In a crowded theater like Aurora, I'd venture zero.

I wonder how many lives would have been saved if he was confronted with someone with a gun? In almost all of these events as soon as they are confronted they back down or kill themselves.

Originally Posted by Jumper_Dad

For the love of Pete; 20 round, 30 round or 100 round magazines are not the problem or the issue.

YOU CANNOT legislate utopia as much as some of you may wish to be able to.

In all school shooting prior to the last one low capacity pistols, rifles and shotguns were used. No AR-15s or AK-47s were used contrary to popular belief. As I stated in another post the most often used weapon was a .22 cal pistol with an average capacity of 6 to 15 shots. Why didn't some one tackle the guy at Va Tech all he had was a Walther .22 with about an 8 shot capacity and a 9mm with around a 12 -15 shot capacity.

This.

Originally Posted by 2 Humped Camel

I responded which you never replied that most home invasions, shootings occur to people who are involved in other criminal activities. I argue that crimes are very rarely random in the cases that they are random and occur to law abiding citizens that 6 rounds should be enough. I could be swayed by a solid argument that 6 is to low and I've asked if 9 is more appropriate with no answer. I know that 30 round magazines aren't designed for home defense or hunting.

I find this idea that limiting magazines is the answer or helpful to anything simply bizarre. Lower capacity mags mean just carrying more mags. and they sell vests for just that.

But if you are looking a 'personal protection' number for pistols this statement comes from a professional security and firearms person in regards to a .40 cal automatic -

'it only has 11 rounds, but if you need more than 11 .40 rounds to get out of something - you should not have been in that situation to start with.'

Some 9 mm semi-automatic pistols will carry up to 15 rounds.

If we are going to ban semiautomatic weapons and extended mags, we can start with the secret service.

Some say gun control has a racial theme behind it:

Who Goes to Prison Due to Gun Control? | The Beacon

Originally Posted by Jumper_Dad

I wonder how many lives would have been saved if he was confronted with someone with a gun? In almost all of these events as soon as they are confronted they back down or kill themselves.

Shots fired, patrons panic at San Antonio theater - CBS News

Similar situation in San Antonio, excpet this time the shooter wasn't the only person armed. At least in this case, it appears that several lives were likely saved.

Originally Posted by Irish Cat

Shots fired, patrons panic at San Antonio theater - CBS News

Similar situation in San Antonio, excpet this time the shooter wasn't the only person armed. At least in this case, it appears that several lives were likely saved.

One of the comments in that article got me thinking. Someone said blaming guns for shooting sprees is like blaming cars for drunk driving. It got me thinking because someone mentioned using biometrics for guns so that only the owner could shoot them, in my mind that's similar to suggesting we install breathalyzers in all cars that are on the road.