.GOP, Dems Inch Toward Compromise on Magazine Clip Limits
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cc868/cc868edc984e23bc8a6b9f687e84af8080088939" alt="banghead :banghead:"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44c0d/44c0dfa59c9ce4ca3faaa4029765db8b091ee23b" alt="mad5 :mad5"
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/lawmak ... de=127C6-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
.GOP, Dems Inch Toward Compromise on Magazine Clip Limits
We all know it takes VERY little time to change a magazine, and with only a little practice, a person can get pretty fast at it. And the FACT, that during the Columbine shootings, the dude used a bag full of 10-round magazines. "Evidence"...in their own addled (and politically motivated) minds, maybe.Evidence suggests that a ban on magazine size would indeed reduce the number of those killed in mass shootings, largely because of the difficulty in changing clips, particularly among amateur gun users.
We can't all be Jerry Miculek.sjfcontrol wrote:I saw a YouTube video where a guy fired six shots, reloaded, and fired six more. All in just under 3 seconds.
Oh, did I mention he was using a REVOLVER?![]()
![]()
By the way, if he could keep that up, that's 240 rounds per minute.
That was it!Andrew wrote:We can't all be Jerry Miculek.sjfcontrol wrote:I saw a YouTube video where a guy fired six shots, reloaded, and fired six more. All in just under 3 seconds.
Oh, did I mention he was using a REVOLVER?![]()
![]()
By the way, if he could keep that up, that's 240 rounds per minute.