I fixed it for you.


While arguments can have merit, this is the problem with that.  Merit has nothing to do with proof or fact.  It's more related to feelings of worth.  An example of an argument that had merit is "Separate but equal" which was an argument used to justify school segregation, and an argument that had merit, but was proven to be false.  Again, you don't offer any proof to your argument that banning standard capacity magazines would allow survivors to escape from an active shooter because he would have to reload more often.  None of this addresses the main cause of all of this and that's the shooter.

"None of this addresses the main cause of all of this and that's the shooter. "
It is not wise to confuse Democrats with facts and data.
They just order society to shut down.

The problem with pointing out the merits of an argument is the merits are not based on anything provable or supported by reality.

It's easy to convince an anti-gun person that "reloading equals a chance to flee or tackle the shooter "when they may also believe that a magazine is no longer useful, ever again, when it's been emptied.

Democratic Rep. Diana DeGette has been the lead sponsor on a federal ban on high-capacity
ammunition magazines in two Congresses, saying it’s one of her top priorities.
:
Asked how a ban on magazines holding more than 15 rounds would be effective in reducing
gun violence, DeGette said:

“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.”

At least her argument has "merit."   

Merit:  the quality of being particularly good or worthy, especially so as to deserve praise or reward.

Merits can be made for anything anti 2a, watch


If barrels were required to be 17 inches, the shooter might bang the door or wall cause that extra 1 inch didnt clear it. Thus giving someone time to run or attack the shooter.

Not being able to wrap ur thumb around the pistol grip of an AR would give the shooter less control of the rifle if someone were to attack the active shooter.

Requiring rifles to weigh 80lbs or more would make an active shooter move too slow and unable to move the rifle quickly.

Rights are designed to not be taken away or limited.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I acknowledge reasonable merits in arguments whether they are for or against my position though. As is often stated, facts don't care about feelings. Thus I am acknowledging when the opposition makes an argument that has a reasonable merit. Pretending it is fallacious would be dishonest on my behalf. Now where my opinion comes into play in this is that I don't think that merit justifies banning high capacity magazines.

As to you last line I agree generally but very few, if any, rights are absolute but that's kind of getting into a different subject.

I fixed it for you.


While arguments can have merit, this is the problem with that.  Merit has nothing to do with proof or fact.  It's more related to feelings of worth.  An example of an argument that had merit is "Separate but equal" which was an argument used to justify school segregation, and an argument that had merit, but was proven to be false.  Again, you don't offer any proof to your argument that banning standard capacity magazines would allow survivors to escape from an active shooter because he would have to reload more often.  None of this addresses the main cause of all of this and that's the shooter.

Perhaps merit is not the most precise word to describe what I am getting at. Another way of putting it is that the argument has a point. The argument has a basis in logic and I would argue that there is enough proof to support the conclusion.

A high capacity magazine means you can fire more rounds quicker. This really isn't something we need some scientific test to know is true, especially if you have any experience with firearms. But even then, people have done tests which do show that higher capacity magazines allow more rounds to be fired in the same time frame. With an experienced shooter the time difference is less significant but with a novice shooter the time difference is going to be more significant. Either way it creates a window, however short, which will enable people to get farther away or someone else to confront the threat. Why do you think reload practice is so important? Because a lot can happen in that gap between the first magazine and the second.

Why do people use rare occurrences of mass shootings to justify limiting magazine capacities when the reality is that more law abiding people should have the option to protect themselves and others with the exact same capacities the Cops use.

I'm tired of people who think limiting the rights of millions who do nothing illegal will somehow prevent a criminal from obtaining illegal mags or finding other ways to circumvent the law (like carrying multiple weapons, planning his route so he's not exposed during reloads, firing the entire time from cover, etc, etc).

Why are Cops exempted?  If there are any exemptions, then the premise that nobody in the state can commit crimes with standard capacity mags is false.  How many Cop cars in Hawaii have been burglarized and guns stolen?  How many Cops have been investigated and indicted for felonies in the state in the last 4 years?

If mags are the problem, then NOBODY should have them.  If they are effective enough for Cops, they should be allowed for the public.  Period.

Perhaps merit is not the most precise word to describe what I am getting at. Another way of putting it is that the argument has a point. The argument has a basis in logic and I would argue that there is enough proof to support the conclusion.

A high capacity magazine means you can fire more rounds quicker. This really isn't something we need some scientific test to know is true, especially if you have any experience with firearms. But even then, people have done tests which do show that higher capacity magazines allow more rounds to be fired in the same time frame. With an experienced shooter the time difference is less significant but with a novice shooter the time difference is going to be more significant. Either way it creates a window, however short, which will enable people to get farther away or someone else to confront the threat. Why do you think reload practice is so important? Because a lot can happen in that gap between the first magazine and the second.

Names, specific names of survivors from recent mass shootings that said they survived because the shooter took too long to reload.  You only offer generalities and are evasively vague in your answer.  What “tests”, and what “people”?  Give us the names of these people and organizations that conducted these “tests” because I believe that would be a first.  You lack specific, concrete, examples to support your claim. 

    If you reverse the Tueller 21 ft rule and apply it to the potential victim, it would take them 1.5 seconds to even decide to commit to attack the shooter if they thought he was empty and going to reload
Now add the time it takes to cover the distance to get to shooter.
For the sake of argument we'll call that 3 seconds ( empty a 10 rnd mag in 3 seconds)  for  21 ft distance as I think once the shooting started , most folks near the shooter would already be victims or would be digging out. and  that's getting at least 21 ft via Tueller.
How many mag changes can most "Regular" shooters make in 4.5 seconds ?

    If you reverse the Tueller 21 ft rule and apply it to the potential victim, it would take them 1.5 seconds to even decide to commit to attack the shooter if they thought he was empty and going to reload
Now add the time it takes to cover the distance to get to shooter.
For the sake of argument we'll call that 3 seconds ( empty a 10 rnd mag in 3 seconds)  for  21 ft distance as I think once the shooting started , most folks near the shooter would already be victims or would be digging out. and  that's getting at least 21 ft via Tueller.
How many mag changes can most "Regular" shooters make in 4.5 seconds ?

I reviewed the video that the guy in New Zealand moslem
shooting.  It is a class in why Hawaii gun laws can't possibly work,
to avoid such crimes.
911 really works, NOT! for you Hawaii cops
reading this.  You are useless in a situation where I have to
save my or someone else's life in a matter of minutes.

Shooter fumbled his mag changes. Dropping some.

If just one guy had blasted some rounds at the guy
it would have stopped him even if your shots missed or did not
kill him if you hit him.

The one guy that either tripped into the shooter or tried to tackle
the guy was shot.  Didn't slow shooter down,  they needed more than one guy
to attack.  Only military/gang trained guys would attack as a group.

For some reason that video has been removed from everywhere,
probably because Democrats don't want you to see how easy it is to
ki ll people in a "Gun free" zone.
Even when you drop your magazines.

Hawaii Democrats keep doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different
result.

The problem with pointing out the merits of an argument is the merits are not based on anything provable or supported by reality.

It's easy to convince an anti-gun person that "reloading equals a chance to flee or tackle the shooter "when they may also believe that a magazine is no longer useful, ever again, when it's been emptied.

At least her argument has "merit."   

Merit:  the quality of being particularly good or worthy, especially so as to deserve praise or reward.

Does it have merit when her statement is completely false?  Like implying an empty magazine is no longer any good?  Does she not know magazines are sold empty and the buyer has to fill it up?  Like most liberals, her argument is senseless and stupid.

Does it have merit when her statement is completely false?  Like implying an empty magazine is no longer any good?  Does she not know magazines are sold empty and the buyer has to fill it up?  Like most liberals, her argument is senseless and stupid.

1.  She has been pushing mag limit legislation for YEARS.

2.  She doesn't have the first clue about how a magazine functions, nor whether her proposed laws will save one single life.

3.  We do know that if someone is forced to protect themselves or family members, limiting the capacity in their mags puts their lives at risk.  Her only apparent goal is to effect a decrease in the number of people who can own certain firearm accessories.

4.  There's no way to find and confiscate every single higher-capacity mag in the jurisdiction.  Therefore, the laws will have no effect on criminals who already have, or can obtain through purchase or theft, grandfathered items.  Her lack of understanding of how mags work leads her to believe this is a non-issue over some unspecified amount of time, as magazines will be "used up and disappear from the public."

5.. Exemptions from limits for Cops ensures there will always be higher-capacity mags in circulation, through theft, illegal black market sales, and access by friends or family of Cops.

According to EEF, her argument has merit, even if her ignorance is on full display, because HE AGREES with the underlying premise that requiring a mass shooter to perform more mag changes will equal more time to fight or flee for victims.

He ignores the REAL solution, which was demonstrated in a church recently where a shooter was stopped by an armed civilian in 6 seconds.  it was a mass shooting that never reached mass shooting fatality numbers.  If they had relied on the law to protect them, there could have been 10 casualties before a reload presented any opportunity to fight back versus the actual number of 2 fatalities (not counting the dead shooter).

I wonder if EEF wants to be one of the first 10 to die waiting on a reload so "somebody" can "maybe try" to tackle him?

 
How many mag changes can most "Regular" shooters make in 4.5 seconds ?

I don't know if people who attend Front Sight courses would be considered "regular" shooters or not, but I do know if you cannot clear a type 3 malfunction in 4.5 sec or less,  you failed that part of the course.  The time they give you for a tactical reload is much less.

I don't know if people who attend Front Sight courses would be considered "regular" shooters or not, but I do know if you cannot clear a type 3 malfunction in 4.5 sec or less,  you failed that part of the course.  The time they give you for a tactical reload is much less.

A tactical reload by definition means the pistol is not empty, even after the mag is ejected and before another mag is inserted.

That fact alone destroys any argument that a mag change = chance to  fight or flee.

I reviewed the video that the guy in New Zealand moslem
shooting.  It is a class in why Hawaii gun laws can't possibly work,
to avoid such crimes.
911 really works, NOT! for you Hawaii cops
reading this.  You are useless in a situation where I have to
save my or someone else's life in a matter of minutes.

Shooter fumbled his mag changes. Dropping some.

If just one guy had blasted some rounds at the guy
it would have stopped him even if your shots missed or did not
kill him if you hit him.

The one guy that either tripped into the shooter or tried to tackle
the guy was shot.  Didn't slow shooter down,  they needed more than one guy
to attack.  Only military/gang trained guys would attack as a group.

For some reason that video has been removed from everywhere,
probably because Democrats don't want you to see how easy it is to
ki ll people in a "Gun free" zone.
Even when you drop your magazines.

Hawaii Democrats keep doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different
result.

Dont forget ur wml falling off too.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Dont forget ur wml falling off too.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

what is "wml"?
I'm an old guy.
I'm thinking of offering NJ my services as a COBOL
programmer.  They apparently can't find any.
I'm that old.

what is "wml"?
I'm an old guy.
I'm thinking of offering NJ my services as a COBOL
programmer.  They apparently can't find any.
I'm that old.

I only know one person who voluntarily devoted their career to COBOL.  He was paid quite well until he retired from HECO.  When he left, they had no choice but to migrate to a less obscure coding language.  That was in 2013.

I only know one person who voluntarily devoted their career to COBOL.  He was paid quite well until he retired from HECO.  When he left, they had no choice but to migrate to a less obscure coding language.  That was in 2013.

I actually am fluent in 20 or so computer languages.
I have a BS degree in computer science.
I know how to design a computer language.
One of my senior projects was to create a language,
write a compiler for it,  and let other people use it.
COBOL was not, is not obscure.
What surprises me is why people find COBOL
hard to understand.
But then again I read code like you read this comment.
Full disclosure;
Retired Boeing real time software engineer,
that mainly designed power supplies for airplanes,
(Mine worked and didn't burn up)
managed multi million dollar projects,
and had to hide the fact I'm a life time NRA
member.
If you can't multi task, you are going to be history
in today's world.
Want me to design and build you a robot that will hunt
down cops parked and waiting to give you a speeding ticket? 
It is easier than you think.
Aloha and stay healthy.

I actually am fluent in 20 or so computer languages.
I have a BS degree in computer science.
I know how to design a computer language.
One of my senior projects was to create a language,
write a compiler for it,  and let other people use it.
COBOL was not, is not obscure.
What surprises me is why people find COBOL
hard to understand.
But then again I read code like you read this comment.
Full disclosure;
Retired Boeing real time software engineer,
that mainly designed power supplies for airplanes,
(Mine worked and didn't burn up)
managed multi million dollar projects,
and had to hide the fact I'm a life time NRA
member.
If you can't multi task, you are going to be history
in today's world.
Want me to design and build you a robot that will hunt
down cops parked and waiting to give you a speeding ticket? 
It is easier than you think.
Aloha and stay healthy.

Not news to me.

I worked on AWACS, a Boeing 707 airframe, with a mission compartment designed by Boeing (the radar was from Westinghouse, and the radios from Motorola).

We used 4Pi Assembler, Fortran, IBM 370 Assembler, and, yes COBOL.

I also wrote a compiler in college, but used PASCAL.

I thought my COBOL days were over when I graduated, but my 13 week training at Keesler AFB and 5 years at Tinker AFB continued my COBOL use.  When I PCSed to Langley, my COBOL days were over.   

COBOL is self documenting -- IF the coder uses intelligible naming conventions.  Big "if".

what is "wml"?
I'm an old guy.
I'm thinking of offering NJ my services as a COBOL
programmer.  They apparently can't find any.
I'm that old.

The mosque shooters weapon mounted light fell off.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Not news to me.

I worked on AWACS, a Boeing 707 airframe, with a mission compartment designed by Boeing (the radar was from Westinghouse, and the radios from Motorola).

We used 4Pi Assembler, Fortran, IBM 370 Assembler, and, yes COBOL.

I also wrote a compiler in college, but used PASCAL.

I thought my COBOL days were over when I graduated, but my 13 week training at Keesler AFB and 5 years at Tinker AFB continued my COBOL use.  When I PCSed to Langley, my COBOL days were over.   

COBOL is self documenting -- IF the coder uses intelligible naming conventions.  Big "if".

We probably know each other.
or at least crossed paths.
To be honest my favorite language is Pascal,
but it is more for academic types.
ADA is probably the best but very hard to master.
I'm familiar with your OTAN planes as I worked to certify them,
NATO for you guys that don't speak French.
Most "coders" are kids that should be fired
as they want to make their creations as
mysterious as possible.
My education was to make it as
"open as possible"
It is just a  Ones and Zeros
Transistors that is really fast.

Names, specific names of survivors from recent mass shootings that said they survived because the shooter took too long to reload.  You only offer generalities and are evasively vague in your answer.  What “tests”, and what “people”?  Give us the names of these people and organizations that conducted these “tests” because I believe that would be a first.  You lack specific, concrete, examples to support your claim.

Maybe you would like to participate in a controlled study and get shot at to see if you have a smaller chance of getting hit but I will pass.

How about this, if you had to shoot 30 rounds as fast as possible, would you choose a single 30 round magazine or 3 ten round magazines? My guess is you wouldn't need a scientific test to find out. Reloading takes time, why do you need a scientific test to prove this?

But check out this video. Having to reload added time to their shooting. All other things being equal are you going to tell me those extra couple of seconds won't make any difference in someone running from or attacking the threat?