Monday, February 7, 2011

Inane Pomposity of the Day

Why do I need more than 10 rounds? Simple. Because I wanted 12, or 15, or 30. Not to mention that if round 12 saves my life then 10 just ain't gonna cut it. The moment someone brings up "need" in a gun control discussion you can be sure they mean to restrict your rights. At that point any any technical or practical justifications for your needs plays right into their hands. You've allowed them to put you at the defensive and frame the debate for their benefit. Don't make that mistake.

I commented:

Mike you live in a total fantasy world. "Not to mention that if round 12 saves my life then 10 just ain't gonna cut it."

A tough-guy fantasy world born of fear and insecurity and covered over in bluff.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.


  1. Mikey, go take some classes. Go put in some quality time at the range honing your eye hand coordination until it becomes automatic, a muscle memory.

    Frankly, if you need that damn many rounds outside of a major shootout at the OK corral from a fictional action adventure movie of some kind, those extra rounds are not going to do you any good - you'll need a SWAT team, not a bigger clip. If it takes you that long to swap out a fresh clip with the usual number of bullets for a new one, you're too clumsy and inept to have a gun without being dangerous. (Hint - practice helps with that too!)

    If you haven't hit what you are aiming at with one clip, by the second clip, you're just stupidly hoping to get lucky with subsequent shots, and can't reliably hit the broad side of a barn at close range. You'd do better, in the words of my combat pistol instructor, to simply throw your gun at the bad guys; you have a better chance of doing damage that way.

    In your argument Mikey, you're conflating your ineptitude into a full blown right wing gun fetishist paranoia.

    I think I'll go post this on the original site as well; lets see if Mikey has the cojones to let it through...

  2. ROFL - chicken little MikeW deleted your first comment on his blog.

    It should be interesting to see what he does with mine. I identified myself, and my blog.

  3. No, what Mike W. *thinks* he wants is to go into combat.

    In reality, of course, Mike W doesn't really want to be a soldier--he merely wants the respect afforded to soldiers, without having to submit to the whole discipline thing.

    It's a fantasy harbored by many gunloons. They think of themselves in terms of a Die Hard movie--one hero battling a whole army of baddies.

  4. Regardless of why Mike W thinks he needs them or why you think he does not. Just answer this:

    Why is 10 rounds safer than 12 rounds? Why is 12 rounds more dangerous than 10 rounds?

    Why is "10" the magic number?

  5. First off, it's the bill of RIGHTS, not the bill of NEEDS. There is no need to justify why one needs more than 10 rounds for legitimate purposes, and suggesting that one NEEDS a reason to own something goes against the very idea of liberty.

    You can find such arguments all day to limit anything we freely own:

    - Why does anyone need a gas tank bigger than 10 gallons? Gas stations aren't any more than 80 miles apart, and you can always carry extra cans.

    - Why does anyone need books longer than 100 pages long? You could split it up into smaller books and read it just as easily.

    - Why does anyone need any knife blade longer than 3" long? You can cut just about anything with a blade that length.

    There's absolutely no reason for the number "10" except that we have ten fingers. It's a wholly arbitrary number with no logical sense behind it.

    To top it all off, is there any study that shows criminals that WANT bigger magazines couldn't get them? Is there any evidence that has shown that legally limiting magazine size effects violent crime in any way whatsoever?


    Such an argument is illogical at its core.

  6. I am copying here my response to Mike W. who commented on

    We seem to have a three-way-blog discussion taking place! Whooo hoooooooo!

    First of all, welcome Mike W.! Agree or disagree, you are appreciated here, but that appreciation takes the form of being challenged as to the soundness of your logic, and to produce the sources of your facts.

    That challenge is not an accusation that you are lying, or making up facts, only that we do not expect anyone to take them on faith. Further there are instances where critical examination of fact sources elaborates on the conclusions of the people who provided them, either pro or con.

    Second, facts are facts; perhaps you should read this, as I also copied you by email:

    Delaware has not supplied any names to the federal data base of individuals who are dangerously crazy - dangerous to themselves or others. So you shouldn't be feeling quite so very safe if you are in Delaware. (Delaware is second, after Alaska, on the graph.)

    As to buying a gun in another state - not every gun sale requires the purchaser to be a state resident, only to have ID, but what I had in mind was an individual who moved to another state and became a legal resident without their pertinent paperwork tracking with them about being either a criminal, drug user, dangerous psychiatric patient, etc. in the data base.

    Or don't you believe that people are mobile, between states?

    This is also true of private sales at gun shows, where following the rules and regs are demonstrably uneven and frankly, lax to non-existant far too often.

    FatWhiteMan - the number is an approximate figure for a standard clip for ammo, in contrast to a larger. I'd be happy with 9. Frankly, I expect to hit what I shoot at in fewer than that. If you need more, you might want to consider spending more effort aiming or taking your shot at the right time, and less just spraying the air in the vain hopes of hitting something - much less the correct thing, and ONLY the correct target.

    How many does it take for you to hit what you aim at?

  7. @Dog Gone,

    The number 10 is the approximate number of a standard magazine of ammunition? Sure, I have a Ruger .22 that holds 9 rounds in the magazine, But a Glock 17 holds 17 rounds in a standard magazine... Other handguns hold just about as much. Kel-Tec even makes a pistol with a standard magazine capacity of 30 rounds, all within the grip.

    Also, just because you hit your target doesn't mean they are going to go down immediately. Just like someone needing 12 rounds to stop an attacker rarely happens 9but DOES happen), someone going down in 1 shot happens more in the movies than it does in real life. There are plenty of cases where attackers have taken several bullets and keep on attacking - they may be dead and just don't know it yet.


  8. "A tough-guy fantasy world born of fear and insecurity and covered over in bluff."

    I live in the safest state in the Union and in a relatively safe part of that state. Yet the Crips and other gangs are here now dealing crack cocaine and heroin. There was an armed home invasion not too long ago not that far from my house. It is a reasonable precaution to keep firearms and "high capacity" magazines to defend myself and my family against the street gangs and their customers.

    As of now I only have 10 round magazines - time to go buy some "tough-guy fantasy world" 12 rounders. Of course, you can be sure there is no chance that I'll need that, not with so many new felons, crack heads, smack heads, meth heads, and rapists moving to town. Right?

  9. "At that point any any technical or practical justifications for your needs plays right into their hands. You've allowed them to put you at the defensive and frame the debate for their benefit. Don't make that mistake."

    I am on the defensive though - Mikeb and others are on the offensive. I mean that literally, as they are attempting to commit a series of serious criminal offenses such as conspiracy to violate the rights of American citizens.

    However, with the growing popularity of guns and the waning popularity of gun control it seems that Mikeb and the other anti-liberty activists will soon be on the defensive. The people are starting to catch onto the fact that your policies are ineffective at best and counter-productive to the extreme at worst, immoral, unconstitutional and illegal, unnecessary, foolish, etc.

    Perhaps more importantly from a practical standpoint more and more people are learning that they can learn to use a gun for effective self-protection, and they are learning that guns are fun!*

    *when used following standard firearms safety rules and procedures.

  10. So if a reduced capacity magazine of 10 rounds is sufficient for all defensive situations, then you are okay with banning standard capacity magazines that hold greater than 10 across the board, correct? And that would include the police as well?

  11. Orygunner, if I don't put something - more precisely someone - that I'm shooting DOWN in 2 or 3 shots out of say, half a dozen, from a .45, they're not going to stop with another couple rounds either.

    I don't know about you, but I was taught to take fewer shots not more, make damn sure they're accurate, and make them count. If you're firing off a lot of rounds that aren't hitting your target effectively, then slow down, focus, breathe, and wait until the right time, the optimum target presents.

    With the kind of stopping power in a .45, and the range at which a hand gun is reasonably accurate, I expect to be able to shoot through a lot of things, if necessary, to stop someone. Not everything, obviously, but a lot.

    No, I don't expect to have sniper accuracy, but rather I have realistic expectations of different firearms, standard load ammo, hot loads, etc.

    On Mike W's blog - which I'm enjoying - thank you MikeB - someone mentioned a riot situation. While a handgun is better than a stick of gum, that is more of a military situation or at least a very specialized authority scenario. If you're overwhelmed with the kind of numbers in a riot situation, and they'er determined, you need a different kind of weapon entirely, and probably don't have the defensive position to do much good with it anyway, if you're referring to a typical store front operation. You're better off having some kind of other security that you can use to safeguard the building - metal grates over windows and doors, etc. While nothing will stop everything, if you make it sufficiently difficult, mob opportunists will look for something/ someoen else where it is easier.

    These 'what if's' are for the most part pretty ridiculous, and as jadegold nailed it - out of movies, or exagerrated combat fantasies, not real life situations.

    It is a matter of realist vs. fetishist.

  12. I'm not to worried about ant restrictions on mag size.

    McCarthy's bill was DOA. It's not going anywhere.

  13. @Dog Gone, I agree with what you said completely, I was merely pointing out a reality that some attackers will take multiple rounds and keep on coming. Of course, if you're launching flying ashtrays at them (.45 ACP) it will likely take less shots than say, a .32 or .380 (which of course CAN stop an attacker if the shots are well-aimed).

    You just reminded me I need more practice time with my Kel-Tec P3AT. I only have 7 shots.


  14. I'm not convinced there's much difference between 10-round magazines and the 12-rounders. What I am convinced about is that Mike W., or anybody else who talks like he does, is a silly tough-guy wannabe. Of course there may be exceptions to that, but as a general rule, when I hear people talking like that, they're bluffing and pretending and fantasizing. I feel that way for the simple reason that real tough guys don't need to talk the talk and generally don't.