Related to the "stop a mass shooter more likely with lower capacity mags" thread... but slightly different... this one, based on research by a college professor, showing that higher capacity mags save lives.

Today's Cam and Company podcast at BearingArms.com.

The professor used real world incidents and modeled from those, concluding that during a home invasion by two perpetrators a homeowner having 30 round magazines is TWICE as likely to survive as if s/he was using 7 round mags (the lowest existing legal limit [of the New York SAFE Act]).

Dr. J. Eric Deitz, who’s the director of the Homeland Security Institute at Purdue University joins me to talk about the research he and his team have done into pandemics and how to best stop the spread, but we also spent some time talking about the recent research into magazine capacity and self-defense that the HSI has been working on.

Beginning at the segment re home invasion survivability and mag capacity (13:45):

https://youtu.be/Oop34WQJ1I8?t=827

Full podcast:

https://bearingarms.com/cam-e/2020/03/16/mag-bans-hurt-the-right-of-self-defense/

These are the kind of stats I was looking for!

This was produced in 2013, when NY tried limiting mags to 7 rds.

Still a good illustration as to why one gun with 7 rds against two ARMED home invaders isn't "common sense" ...

Lawsuit against Connecticut's new 10 rd mag limit ...

Alan Gottlieb, head of the Second Amendment Foundation, briefly discussed the Connecticut mag capacity lawsuit during the first hour of Sunday's Armed American Radio with Mark Walters. He said the "expert witness" for the defense in a lower court trial had testified in response to being asked what research she was basing her assertion that "high capacity" magazines (greater than 10 rounds) caused greater harm replied, "None. I just feel it's true." I find that hard to believe (it's likely a paraphrase or summation by Gottlieb...)... but these people are dumb as fucking rocks so it might be...

Gottlieb also noted that not only may you not put more than 10 rounds into a higher capacity magazine, you are a criminal IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN ONE MAGAZINE LOADED! So you can have all the "extra" magazines  you want, but you can't load even the second one until the first one is empty... or maybe you can load seven into the second mag if you only have three left in the first... that's not clear. Who makes this shit up? Oh, yeah, morons like Karl Rhoads,  Chris Lee, et al. SMH. 

There's a challenge to Oregon's push on mag capacity limits as well. 

Related to the "stop a mass shooter more likely with lower capacity mags" thread... but slightly different... this one, based on research by a college professor, showing that higher capacity mags save lives.

Today's Cam and Company podcast at BearingArms.com.

The professor used real world incidents and modeled from those, concluding that during a home invasion by two perpetrators a homeowner having 30 round magazines is TWICE as likely to survive as if s/he was using 7 round mags (the lowest existing legal limit [of the New York SAFE Act]).

Dr. J. Eric Deitz, who’s the director of the Homeland Security Institute at Purdue University joins me to talk about the research he and his team have done into pandemics and how to best stop the spread, but we also spent some time talking about the recent research into magazine capacity and self-defense that the HSI has been working on.

Beginning at the segment re home invasion survivability and mag capacity (13:45):

https://youtu.be/Oop34WQJ1I8?t=827

Full podcast:

https://bearingarms.com/cam-e/2020/03/16/mag-bans-hurt-the-right-of-self-defense/

Any chance we can quarantine them all in a room and make them watch and listen?

I wish I could take the legislators out to an airsoft or paintball game so they can see how difficult it can be to hit someone and amount of ammunition it can take.  When I talk to people, I get the feeling they think your up against someone standing still in the open.  They don't consider cover, movement, number of hits needed to stop an attacker, the stressful situation, and lack of experience in most shooters.

I wish I could take the legislators out to an airsoft or paintball game so they can see how difficult it can be to hit someone and amount of ammunition it can take.  When I talk to people, I get the feeling they think your up against someone standing still in the open.  They don't consider cover, movement, number of hits needed to stop an attacker, the stressful situation, and lack of experience in most shooters.

It's not easy to tackle someone shooting into a large crowd from the window of a tall building (e.g. Mandalay Bay) whether they are having to reload or not!

After this firefight, a cop that used to carry 47 rds for his Glock 45ACP, now carries 145 rds.  This was against just one assailant
who took 17 hits from a 45ACP before being taken out.

https://www.policemag.com/340699/shots-fired-skokie-illinois-08-25-2008

After this firefight, a cop that used to carry 47 rds for his Glock 45ACP, now carries 145 rds.  This was against just one assailant
who took 17 hits from a 45ACP before being taken out.

https://www.policemag.com/340699/shots-fired-skokie-illinois-08-25-2008

Interesting article.
I noted the dead guy had an SKS which is one my favorite rifles.
Cop is lucky the guy didn't use that.  Even though it is only ten rounds.
Stripper clip loaded(I know you can load an AR mag that way),
but an SKS was designed for idiots who were scared to death, to be accurate,
and work reliably in a war.
The SKS gave America a lot of shit in Vietnam.