TexasCHLforum.com

Oldgringo wrote:Hey guys,

The question on the table is not need. The question is, what purpose do hi-cap handgun mags serve? And please remember, I'm just askin'... BTW, My SA XD SC 9mm has a 13 round mag.

Does it need a purpose?

pbwalker wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:Hey guys,

The question on the table is not need. The question is, what purpose do hi-cap handgun mags serve? And please remember, I'm just askin'... BTW, My SA XD SC 9mm has a 13 round mag.

Does it need a purpose?

Did you really want to ask that question out loud, especially after the Tucson and Ft. Hood massacres?

AndyC wrote:It's a valid question; if something has to have a "need" or a "purpose" as an excuse for ownership - well then, so much for things like art and music, alcohol, religion, fast foods, fast cars, boats for people who don't make their living from fishing or tourism, toys for kids, etc, etc.

Second - if we have have to justify a "need" - who do we have to justify it to and what criteria will they use? Are we going to be slaves to the Kommisar of Needs?

well stated I SO agree

I was just thinkin' I've never used my fire extinguisher, I bet almost no one has , hence they really aren't needed, lets suggest a law banning them.

Oldgringo wrote:

pbwalker wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:Hey guys,

The question on the table is not need. The question is, what purpose do hi-cap handgun mags serve? And please remember, I'm just askin'... BTW, My SA XD SC 9mm has a 13 round mag.

Does it need a purpose?

Did you really want to ask that question out loud, especially after the Tucson and Ft. Hood massacres?

I sure did and the question stands unanswered. Are you blaming high capacity mags for these massacres?

Tamie wrote:When you consider 300 million people in the USA and how few murders of strangers are committed by people without a prior criminal record, civilian gun ownership is very safe. Maybe the answer is to control convicted criminals instead of controlling guns or baseball bats.

Maybe control democrat socialists??????????

Seems to me we would be much better off. Besides isn't controlling democrat socialists and criminals the same thing?

Anygunanywhere

philip964 wrote:ABC news seemed to be pointing at high capacity magazines. I bet this will be the "target" for lawmakers.

NBC and others keep calling them high capacity "clips".

Why the need for 30 rds Mag? Let a swat LEO respond. In short, the more firepower that one has to defend self, family, home and property, the better. If I carry a pistol that has 13 rds mags, and accept 17 rds magazine, you bet find me buy both.

In other words and for the dummies, just say: "for zumbies control"

AndyC wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:The question is, what purpose do hi-cap handgun mags serve?

They hold more ammo - period.

+1 (in the tube)

I told my dad that this incident was going to be politicized, but I have been amazed (ok, maybe not) at the speed and bias that has happened. The victims are not even burried yet.

I may bulk order hi-cap mags for investment purposes.

Y'all know that Auburn is leading Oregon 16-11 at the half? WAR EAGLE!

We might as well get braced. Legislation banning hi-cap mags is coming as well as a waiting period on handgun purchases - mark my words.

No PB, hi-cap mags did not kill the many innocents at Ft. Hood and Tucson. Lunatics driven by their religion and personal demons, with hi-cap mags, killed the people.

The politicizing of this horrendous incident was a given and it ain't over yet - by a long shot.

Half time is over. Let's see what we see.

Oldgringo wrote:No PB, hi-cap mags did not kill the many innocents at Ft. Hood and Tucson. Lunatics driven by their religion and personal demons, with hi-cap mags, killed the people.

And drunks behind the wheel of a car killed over 6,557 Texans in the last 5 years. When should we start to call our legislators to ban vehicles?

RPB wrote:<SNIP>

I was just thinkin' I've never used my fire extinguisher, I bet almost no one has , hence they really aren't needed, lets suggest a law banning them.

I wish I could say that.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The ONLY limits should be practical. I.E. carrying a B57 Tac Nuke is impractical (cannot lift it much less carry it) and close proximity during discharge would be mutually destructive.

pbwalker wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:No PB, hi-cap mags did not kill the many innocents at Ft. Hood and Tucson. Lunatics driven by their religion and personal demons, with hi-cap mags, killed the people.

And drunks behind the wheel of a car killed over 6,557 Texans in the last 5 years. When should we start to call our legislators to ban vehicles?

And what would have happened if the victims were armed?

pbwalker wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:Hey guys,

The question on the table is not need. The question is, what purpose do hi-cap handgun mags serve? And please remember, I'm just askin'... BTW, My SA XD SC 9mm has a 13 round mag.

Does it need a purpose?

As Democratic icon Kennedy stated; "Don't ask Why.... ask Why Not?"......