Magazine Ban Debunked.

[Guest RobThatsMe]

This is a good video that demonstates how fast one can shoot and reload.

There are a vew stats shown in the beginning, and then the demo begins.

They shoot a semi-auto, an AR, a pistol, and an over 100 yr old 1911.

 

This totally debunks the myth that magazines larger then 10 rounds need to be banned. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=b2Upjn5DR0o

 

[Hozzie]

The only problem I have is it is very clear for anyone watching that they do not shoot all magazine's to empty, therefore they don't have to rack the slide or press a release.  Not that it would make a huge difference, but it would affect the overall time.  I think if you are going to do something like this, at least make it where it is not as easy to say it was manipulated to show the desired results.  I also notice that he starts to shoot faster when he uses the smaller clips to make up time.  

 

I don't think most of the shooters involved in the shootings like Aurora and Newtown are so skilled that they are thinking about round counts as well they aren't going to have magazines sitting on top of a barrel for easy access.  

 

It may not make any difference to the lay person watching this, but I think it is obvious to anyone watching who has shot much at all that this also isn't a good test.  I don't personally think you can use this to say the facts are debunked.  Don't get me wrong, I don't think a magazine ban will affect any of this one bit, but we need to use comparable tests in my view to give any real strength to the argument.  This to me is just fabricated facts.  We don't need to manipulate the results to show there isn't much difference.

Edited February 28, 2013 by Hozzie

[TripleDigitRide]

Yeah, this is a very unrealistic scenario on almost every level. Not a very good argument.

[Guest Razz]

He also fires slower with the first run. Terribly unscientific test and should NEVER be used in the debate. If an anti notices trickery, and they will, the discussion gets shut down.

[BrasilNuts]

Is Jim going fishing?

[Guest RobThatsMe]

I think that the whole point of this, even after taking into account all the "yeah buts" as mentioned above, (which I tend to agree with), is that a person having the desire and training, can pretty much fire off about as many rounds in a given amount of time with multiple magazines as with a large single magazine.

 

It is also worth mentioning that many of these mass killings were indeed well thought out,

[2.ooohhh]

The New York Reload with the backpack full of revolvers was the most interesting bit to me. Proves that a demented and determined individual with some planning can almost always have a large advantage over even the best prepared common citizen.

[c.a.willard]

Not the most scientific, but it is still a valid demonstration.  Most peoples first runs shooting drills like this would be slower with gradual improvements in shooting speed and reloading speed througout the day. 

[Guest 556or762]

What no flint lock test? I dont know about that test, its interesting and to the average non shooter might make them think about gun control, then again the average liberal is NEVER wrong and NEVER listens to reason!

[Guest ab28]

The only problem I have is it is very clear for anyone watching that they do not shoot all magazine's to empty, therefore they don't have to rack the slide or press a release.  Not that it would make a huge difference, but it would affect the overall time.  I think if you are going to do something like this, at least make it where it is not as easy to say it was manipulated to show the desired results.  I also notice that he starts to shoot faster when he uses the smaller clips to make up time.  

 

I don't think most of the shooters involved in the shootings like Aurora and Newtown are so skilled that they are thinking about round counts as well they aren't going to have magazines sitting on top of a barrel for easy access.  

 

It may not make any difference to the lay person watching this, but I think it is obvious to anyone watching who has shot much at all that this also isn't a good test.  I don't personally think you can use this to say the facts are debunked.  Don't get me wrong, I don't think a magazine ban will affect any of this one bit, but we need to use comparable tests in my view to give any real strength to the argument.  This to me is just fabricated facts.  We don't need to manipulate the results to show there isn't much difference.

Wouldn't matter much. Reloading on empty for me is only slightly slower. Insert mag with left hand, pull back on slide with left hand, no need to hit the slide stop. For an AR, insert mag, then bump the bolt release with the same hand.

[battleop]

A tactical reload vs a reload on empty isn't going to make that big of a difference since that's something a criminal can do as well.  The only real problem that I have with the video is that he shot at a slower pace during the 2x15 string than he did on the 3x10 and 5x6 strings.  Her strings were closer to the same speed so to me that levels things out.   Either way you look at it 2x15 is only slightly faster than the 3x10 and 5x6 strings to the point where it makes no difference.   Honestly the only way you could possibly slow someone down would be to render the gun so that it becomes a single shot gun that can't accept a magazine which is completely impractical. 

[macville]

Try watching the new movie "Olympus Has Fallen". There is a scene where Gerard Butler changes a mag and is ready to fire in about 1 second. If an actor can learn to change a mag that fast, so can almost anyone. And heck, he wasn't even holding the replacement mag, he had to reach for it!

[Guest ab28]

Try watching the new movie "Olympus Has Fallen". There is a scene where Gerard Butler changes a mag and is ready to fire in about 1 second. If an actor can learn to change a mag that fast, so can almost anyone. And heck, he wasn't even holding the replacement mag, he had to reach for it!

Actually, a lot of the actors get some top tier training for their movies, so I'd say they are probably better trained than most gun owners. Stuff like personal training from ex-SEALs, ect.

Edited March 19, 2013 by ab28

[macville]

Actually, a lot of the actors get some top tier training for their movies, so I'd say they are probably better trained than most gun owners. Stuff like personal training from ex-SEALs, ect.

 

Yes, I know that, but they still don't train that much. The thing is that it's an actor, not an LEO or military person who is/should be seeped in it. A day or two of training isn't anything you and I can't do too. I know that after almost no practice I was able to draw a concealed handgun and fire accurately in 2.5 seconds on average. Switching a mag is even faster.