They do make 10rders for the G43, if that's what he had. But they're often sold out. This is why I ruled the G43 out as my CCW gun. The G43X comes with 10rders from Glock. I felt that owning a modern handgun that's not a revolver and it coming with a factory 6rd mag is a waste. There is no way to know whether he attempted to get these 10rd mags or not, unless someone knows him and ask. Cause if he did have the HIVE +2 extentions, which are in stock more often, then that would explain things.
I wonder how many he shot after he reloaded. Cause if it was only 2 more rounds, then the anti gunners will say "see, 10rds is enough".
The problem with that 'logic' is it flies in the face of their reason for limiting mag capacities.
Gun hater:
We need smaller capacity mags so criminals and mass shooters have to reload, giving someone enough time to stop them.Same gun hater:
We don't see a problem with limiting magazine capacity. If 10 rds isn't enough in a self defense situation, it doesn't take more than a second or two to reload another mag.Totally conflicting rationales -- one saying limits will prevent continued firing for criminals, and one saying limits won't interfere with continued firing for crime victims.
I get that you were talking about the total rounds fired equaled the 10 rd mag limit, but that's just this one event, and it ignores that he would actually have 16rds between 2 mags, not 10.
To argue that 8rds in 1 mag + 2rds in 1 mag = 1 x 10rd mag would suggest that 2 x 10rd mags = 1 x 20rd mag. So, if I have 1 x 10rd mag, that's okay with them, but what if i have a spare 10rd mag? Why is that not as illegal as a 20rd mag?
Another way to look at it is, if the legal limit was 8rds, and that's why he had 8rd mags, the 10rds he theoretically fired would negate the limit completely. The bad guy didn't kill him between reloads, so the "vulnerable during reloads" argument would have been debunked here.
The whole mag limit debate is ridiculous. No matter what they say about it, it's unrealistic and wrong.