I'm not sure I entirely understand this argument. People have a really hard time shooting where they're trying to shoot and that's a good reason for them to be able to shoot more bullets easily? Doesn't the fact that people have trouble hitting a target make it more likely that an innocent victim will get shot by someone inadvertently?
Well, it certainly makes for a better argument of a round similar to the 5.56 or .223 like the AR-15 shoots to prevent over-penetration from the .30-06 or .300win mag or .308 that so many of the non-evil, hunting rifles use. Pistol rounds typically don't have the energy to pass through your sheetrock, exterior siding, 50 more yards to the house across the street, through his exterior siding and sheetrock and still deliver a lethal hit. Certainly plausible, but not likely. Gramp's hunting rifle will still kill in the house behind the house across the street if it bypasses too much solid material (2x4 studs, bookcases, coat closets etc).A self defense shooting is to prevent
imminent danger. Yes, it is possible for someone else to be hit inadvertently by misses. It is a lot less likely than the innocent victim being hurt / killed, and why they are shooting in the first place.
No matter how many times you guys argue it, the idea that 30 round magazines are necessary for home defense is always going to strike me as absurd, sorry. You were much better off arguing that the absence of these magazines would not prevent mass shooters from doing maximum damage. At least then you had some examples to stand on. Here you have only ridiculous conjecture, and it just doesn't fly.
I tried last night, and nobody would take the bait about effectiveness in high-cap mags in self-defense being as helpful as high-cap mags in mass shootings are harmful. My premise last night is that in an equal number of mass-shootings vs and equal number of multiple-perp home invasions, the numbers game between lives lost vs lives saved could be equal (though so small either way that more laws / less liberties was not justified).The point I was anxious to jump on was that
there were 38 mass shootings in 2012 according to the Brady campaign (6 of them were in Chicago alone). There is no mention as to how many of those were committed with rifles, pistols or shotguns and whether high-cap mags were used or not, and I'm too busy and lazy to look up all 38, mostly because it has nothing to do with my current point, and can't be compared to the other side since there are no numbers available.
For home defense shootings (we'll ignore the defensive shootings outside the home where 20+ round mags are less practical), a study of 482 home defense shootings from 1997-2001 showed that multiple conspirators were involved in 36% of the incidents. There are no statistics for "home invasions" because it is currently being reclassified by many jurisdictions at it's own type of offense. Right now, the best we have to go on are the estimated (during Clinton era D.O.J. investigations) 1.5 million defensive uses of a firearm. 52% of times it is in the house. So, 52% of 1.5 million is 780,000. The gun is actually fired an estimated 28% of the time.
So, by best estimates, a gun is fired, in self defense, in the home, approximately 218,400 times a year in the US. If (as noted above) 36% of those involved multiple assailants, then 78,624 times a year you introduce the potential to need more than the proposed 10 round limit, and I've already stated my reasons for a single mag vs multiple mags by the home owner.
My point is, that it is MUCH more likely for someone to defend their home against multiple attackers than to be involved in a mass-shooting. If we're near equal or at least such a small total amount of lives per incident, shouldn't the incident that occurs at an extremely higher rate be the incident considered when proposing / justifying laws that restrict liberties?
Never let a tragedy go to waste!
That's why Piers won't shut up or stop interrupting. It takes an ##### like Alex Jones just to get a word in.
"They have never been used in self defense, only to kill people" 
Did you even watch the others?You call me paranoid, I call you irresponsible and foolish with you and your families lives.
