Oh, that........sorry, but it happens.

Rounds designed to kill humans en masse, are not.

I don't know where you live, but where I live? none of that is necessary.

I don't WANT to live where that is necessary, where 100 round magazines are taken as normal.

I have nothing against guns, and own them. I am comfortable with guns. I am not comfortable with 100 round magazines.

But instead you declared that owning an AR format rifle was compensating and threw in the invalid need canard.

100 rd mags (or any snail drum type) is nothing more than unreliable bling. No one competent would even consider using one. I have a snail drum magazine that I use as an example of what not to buy in the firearms classes I teach.

The .223 Remington existed before it was modified slightly for military purposes. It was not designed to kill humans en masse. It was a light target and hunting round.

The real issue is if the shooter is a threat to society. If they are not, who cares if they have a ridiculous and unreliable magazine. If they are, they should have no firearms at all.

I don't own an AR, I have a Mini-14 and its a working rifle, not an object of worship. Lives in a scabbard on the ATV when I am out on my property. However, functionally it is indistinguishable from an AR. What am I compensating for?

Might as well start somewhere.

Now that is a statement.

We can not solve the real issues so we are going to do something ineffective so we can say we did *something*

That is horrible government and piss poor leadership at best

And it might be news to some here, but the AR-15 is the single most popular civilian rifle in America, much more so than those "acceptable" old fashioned hunting rifles.

Household ranges...absolutely. 200 yards, not so much.

AR format rifles are indeed the most popular in the country. Some attribute to to veterans for whom it was the only rifle they ever shot, which makes a fair amount of sense.

I have one to greet unwelcome intruders for that reason.

Don't come by. Not that I expect you to anyway, but call ahead, my dear .

the status-quo. Lots of people are sick of the rationalization why Americans need so many guns.

We all want to get the guns out of the hands of the crazies except for the NRA and gun dealers. And when ways are suggested, they keep getting shot down (no pun intended) but the gun "enthusiasts". But the gun "enthusiasts" dont have any solutions.

Cutting down the total number of guns in the country would help. Closing the loopholes would help. Making it more difficult to buy guns would help.

One of the best posts I've read all weekend.

"Stop people who are crackers from getting them"

Uh, what?

Is a racist term for white people. Did you not know this?

If so, you certainly shouldn't be trusted with a gun.

with 100 round clips unless you have the intent of killing a lot of people. Do you deny that many people who display aggressive, irrational behaviors also suffer from other psychological problems? The penile deficiency example given is just one of many, and I doubt it was meant to be exclusive of all the others.

There is a reason for single fire firearms. The only reason why someone has a 100 mag firearm is to kill a bunch of people. You nailed it, leveymg.

And apparently they are prone to jam.

They are usually cheaply made and don't match the specs from the weapons they go in.

You are taking their rights away if they can't build an arsenal strong enough to decimate a third world country, when many would be happy to have a hand gun for self defense, a rifle for hunting, and a shotgun for... well, everything else.

To discuss 100 round magazines.

Well let's discuss some flamebait around here, my friend.

Many gun owners, including me, see no need for high-capacity magazines. An AR-15, however, is a .223 rifle, that's it. My father owns much deadlier deer hunting rifles which most people think are okay, because they just have a plain wooden stock. The pistols Holmes used are, imo, much "deadlier" than the .223.

me? I don't have a 100 round mag. I do have a 50 round mag and it's quie a bit of fun, but I don't use it often.

As for other people owning them? I'm completely fine with it. I don't feel necessity or requirement is a prerequisite for someone to be allowed to own something. That's not how a free society should function.

I understand.

It's cool.

Shooting PEOPLE scares me, and disgusts me.

Because alot of people (nearly everyone, in fact) don't like shooting people either. They like to shoot targets and other inanimate objects.

I'm not an owner.

and had wild pigs on our property, and threatening both our family and our animal friends.

Nearly blew my shoulder off, but the hog was huge as hell.

My question was about when handguns, shotguns, and rifles are not sufficient, when you might need something more than that.

not a rifle.

Still the kick hurt like hell because I'm a rather small woman. Had to, though, because the wild pig was about to kill our cat.

.20 I know that much.

Used mainly for hunting. I just called a relative who is a PT gunsmith and asked him.

I am not the biggest knowledge base on guns, but it nearly tore my shoulder off when I hit the pig.

Nasty work, that gun did, but stopping power that was necessary.

It seemed like it weighed about 10 lbs.

Different rifles, shotguns, and handguns depending on the activity. For example a good trap shotgun (sport) does not work well as a duck hunting shotgun.

When are the times you need automatics or semi-automatics?

I can't think of a single instance where I need a semi-automatic. But I'm dumb. I just used a gun in a situation where it needed to be used. I'm too dumb to understand when guns need to be used.

Only revolvers aren't and bolt-action rifles.

Military assault rifles which have selective fire ie automatic fire are rifles, which are not available to us. VERY few civilians are ATF approved to have them, and the Feds knows who has them.

So, handguns, rifles, and shotguns are enough.

What's the need for what he had?

Note also that the AR format is the most popular in the country, multiple suppliers, many accessories. Variants even fit under the repressive CA laws.

And I don't think most people do either.

One does not need a 1TB drive and the argument can me made that its mostly like use would be illegally copied music and video.

I, and a lot of people I know, do in fact need 1 TB drives.

Plus, can you tell me how a 1 TB drive is a tool? I mean, I have some empty bookshelves. Do you equate that with having "extra" or excessive firepower?

it strikes close to home for many.

I have a hard time believing that without media, that a TB drive is required for a home personal computer. That does not mean I don't support people having them. if they want them.

How old are you? You still haven't provided any persuasion that your analogy makes any sense to anyone other than yourself.

Semi automatic is the norm today for rifles and pistols. Shotguns is still a mixed bag with pump being the largest.

Automatic weapons are unavailable at this point.

I needed the shotgun for the big wild hog that was going for me, and my family. The hog was HUGE. I don't regret for a second shooting it, because it was going to kill the cat, me and everybody.

That a few voted for the zombie apocalypse

Purportedly started as a marketing lark by the head of the company and has since gone viral.

OMG.

Hornady makes high end ammo. Very good stuff, most of it with a red plastic tip (their trade dress color is red). They used a green tip and redid the box. The story is that the head of the company is a SciFi fan and he did it as a joke. No one anticipated how it would go viral.

Like a lot of deer rifles, varmint guns, plinksters. The huge dumb mag is something different, and that is why your poll is seen by some as being a "push poll."

I personally don't see a need for a mag over 12, but that has nothing to do with a specific gun, but mag capacity. Most firearms are semi automatic, except for bolt-action rifles and revolvers.

Understands that a small caliber bullet isn't necessarily a problem.

It's the fact that there are 100 of those tiny bullets with little recoil that causes issues.

Those rifles don't come with that magazine.

Nearly tore my shoulder off, because I'm about 110lbs.

I still see no reason, after using that to defend out property from a wild pig, why I would need a 100 round magazine rifle.

Feel free to tell me why, but I do not get it.

I don't think the things are that practical myself, and they're prone to jamming...but I wouldn't stop someone from buying one, any more than I would stop them from buy a magazine with a capacity of 75 rounds, or 50, or 30, or 20, or...

Are practical.

100 Round magazine rifles are designed to kill people. Repeatedly.

Again. A shotgun is practical.

Some are even magazine fed like AKs.

The 100rd magazine is not why people will be killed. Its the shooter. Magazine size is irrelevant.

I can get 100 rounds on target faster with standard AR magazines than the perp in Aurora. The difference is that I am not a threat to society and he was.

Upon availability. I am with you that shotguns, handguns and rifles need to be available - I have proof that they save human life.

I am not convinced that civilians need access to 100 magazines.

Saying that I do not believe in high numbered rounds does not mean that I do not believe in self defense.

I believe *DEEPLY* in self defense, but not at the expense of society, like high capacity magazines.

He simply kept reloading. Magazine bans are absurd.

Kel Tec KSG, holds 14 rounds.



Saiga-12 with a 20 round drum.



I've been toying with getting one of these as a possible replacement for my current home defense weapon, which is also a shotgun; the Mossberg 590. It only holds 8 shots, so either of the other two would be arguably more effective.



100 Round magazine rifles are designed to kill people. Repeatedly.

That's not a criteria for banning a firearm, at least in my book. A bolt-action 1903 Springfield rifle is designed to kill people repeatedly. Would you ban that?

Just because it's pretty sexy. The first two, eh...

Because you don't like their looks?

Earlier you said you didn't want a gun to be able to shoot more 100 times without reloading. Now is 20 or 14 times too much?

which is essentially a don't regulate me thread.

as evidenced by the evolved shot gun pics.

i wouldn't trust -- not 1 goddamned gun owner -- for nothin.
and i don't trust the police -- i sure as hell ain't trusting you.

we are in some new place with guns and gun owners -- this ain't your grandpappy's crew.

And you would do well to trust me, because I am saying that we need magazine limits.

I love you, xchrom.