If we allow the pro restriction crowd to frame the debate we're done.

[RSillsbee]

One thing I’ve noticed during this debate on magazines is that the two sides aren’t even speaking the same language.

When the pro rights side of the house says “Extended Magazine” we mean anything larger than a standard factory magazine.

When the pro restriction side says “extended magazine” they mean anything over 10 rounds.

If we expect to win we need IMO to fight this subtle propaganda ploy aimed at making a normal magazine sound like an abnormal and excessive amount of rounds.

We can't allow the restrictionists to continue to get away w/ blurring the lines they're tring to cross

[RandomThoughts]

1. Magazine?

Isn't that something with articles and pictures in it that can create and sway public opinion on culture, politics, and many other thought topics?

I thought the things with bullets in them were called clips, but in the last few years people been saying they are magazines.

:shrug:

[Statistical]

6. No magazine is the correct term.

Somewhat snarky but good illustration

?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1279244330073

[RandomThoughts]

8. Ah, so it is about the construct of the object not the functionality.

That explains it.

[Statistical]

10. Well the functionality is different also.

A clip simply holds bullets together. A clip aids in the loading of a magazine (internal or external)

All semi-auto weapons have a magazine.
* Some have an internal fixed magazine.
* Some have an external detachable magazine.

You can use a clip to load either one. Since multiple external magazines can be loaded in advance using clips to load external magazines is useful but not essential. Unless you want to load a weapon manually in a firefight the use of clips with internal magazines is essential.

Many older weapons had internal fixed magazines. You *can* load them manually one round at a time. A clip simply makes it easier and faster to load. Most modern weapons use external box magazines. Rather than the magazine being an integral part of the the weapon it is removable. You still need to load magazines but you can load multiple magazines for a single weapon and simply change magazines as needed.

You can use clips to speed the loading of internal or external magazines. When in the Army you shoot lots of rounds from 30rnd box magazines (M4/M16). Well loading hundreds or thousands of rounds manually into those magazines is kinda pain in the ass so ammunition is provided on a 10 round clip. Using a stripper clip you can load up magazines much faster.

This is likely far more info than you wanted but magazine (technically external box magazine) is the correct term.

[RandomThoughts]

12. language changes with usage.

although that is a technical explanation, and interesting to know that jargon.

Most usage of the word in popular culture is clip.

That shows that military people are not making the scripts for movies.

[Statistical]

14. True. When people say "clip" I know what they are talking about.

Still it is sad when legislators or "experts" use slang or ambiguous terms.

For example a ban on 30 rnd clips wouldn't do what most people would assume it would do.
1) I don't think there are any 30 rnd clips.
2) You could use multiple 10 rnd clips to load a single 30 rnd box magazine (a fact anyone in the Army is very familiar with).

[GreenStormCloud]

17. No, it is about the functionality.

Consider the difference between a "gas tank" and a "gas can". The gas can is just a container for gas. The gas tank holds gas that is fed directly into the engine. The clip is a holder for cartridges. The magazine is the device that feeds the cartridges into the gun.

External magazines can be preloaded and swapped out as needed. Using standard capacity magazines ("Standard" varies from gun to gun) one can reload very quickly and reliably. Extended magazines are often slower to swap and are more prone to failure.

[Statistical]

19. Gas can vs gas tank. Very good analogy. You explained it better in a sentence

then I did in 3 rambling paragraphs. Got to remember that one.

[GreenStormCloud]

37. I need to give proper credit for that one. I think I saw "euromutt" use it. N/T

[MicaelS]

33. Simple way to remember....

A Clip loads a magazine.
A Magazine loads a gun.

[sharesunited]

2. But restricting a gunman's ability to keep shooting is an absolute good!

The burden falls upon anyone claiming the contrary.

[Statistical]

7. No. That isn't how our legal and legislative system works.

The burden on proof is always on the government when it wants to ban/restrict/infringe.

This applies to any Constitutionally protected right.

[sharesunited]

13. Child porn is not protected by the 1A. Limiting firepower is an even easier case to make.

[Statistical]

16. The burden of proof was still on the government.

We do have a system of due process.

You statement was 100% false.

[Callisto32]

21. Bullshit.

You can't make kiddie porn without committing a crime. That is a major part of the reason it receives no protection.

I can have a magazine of any capacity, that was made and acquired by me without harming anyone.

Analogy fail.

P.S. If we limit magazine capacity, what will you do about belt fed weapons? Mills and sewing machines will have to be severely restricted too!

[sharesunited]

22. Mere possession is a crime. No production required. Deemed harmful by its potential to harm.

Analogy succeed. Indisputable.

[RC]

24. Circular reasoning.

Kiddie porn is a crime. Therefor it receives no protection. It receives no protection because kiddie is a crime.
Then you go to a red herring.

Fail.

[Statistical]

25. I think your brain misfired.

Having sexual contact with a child is a crime.

One can't produce kiddie porn (even if it were legal) without breaking existing laws.

The Supreme Court ruled there is no protection because the underlying act is in itself illegal.

Much like if you video tapped yourself murdering someone you couldn't then say you have a Constitutional right to sell/distribute the video.

[RC]

27. What did I just say? We agree.

[Statistical]

28. No this is what you said...

" Kiddie porn is a crime. Therefor it receives no protection. It receives no protection because kiddie is a crime."
Which is circular reasoning.

This is what I said (summarized):
"Child rape/molestation are existing crimes. Kiddie porn requires breaking existing laws in its creation thus it is not protected".

If there were no laws against child rape, sexual abuse, or molestation then Child Porn WOULD be protected speech.

[sharesunited]

34. Possession of photos of murder victims is not a crime. Why the difference?

CP is deemed harmful in and of itself, because of its potential to harm.

[NewMoonTherian]

39. Now this is an interesting statement.

What do you mean by CP's potential to harm, in and of itself? Do you mean that psychological harm is done to those who view it? The only reasons I have seen for laws against CP are the harm to the children depicted. This may be the first valid, thought-provoking thing I've read from you.

[Callisto32]

20. Absolute good?

Your thinking is extremely narrow.

I present you with a situation:

Kodiak bear is bearing (lulz) down on you, is limiting the amount of rounds you have an absolute good?

[sharesunited]

23. Only a relative good, I guess. When factoring in the risk of a bullet resistant bear attack.

[Callisto32]

40. Bears are naturally bullet resistent.

Ask a bear hunter, or person who was being attacked.

Guns aren't the magical death sticks you seem to think they are.

[Atypical Liberal]

31. It all boils down to this.

But restricting a gunman's ability to keep shooting is an absolute good!

It all boils down to this: Are you willing to restrict the right of everyone in the hope that you will also restrict a gunman.

For you, that answer is yes. For me, that answer is no. Your mind is never going to change, and neither is mine. The only place it will be settled is at the ballot box.

[guitar man]

32. "restricting a gunman's ability to keep shooting "

How are you going to do that, with a law?

The "gunman" you're referring to would be a murdering criminal that doesn't give a damn about the law. If he wants a high-cap magazine he'll disregard the law and get one off the black market. And yes, there would be a black market, prohibition always creates black markets.

[sharesunited]

35. It's poor public policy to make something like guns and ammo readily accessible.

They need to be scarce and difficult to obtain.

[guitar man]

36. not gonna happen

especially with something like a magazine, it's a simple sheet metal box with a spring in it, not difficult to make at all. Even guns themselves, it's old technology, they are pretty easy to make. Laws simply aren't going to stop people from having them.

The better solution is to work on our society. Start by getting rid of the stupid war on drugs. I bet that would put a huge dent in violent crime statistcs. Better schools,more and better jobs, more opportunity, more equity and equality, infrastructure... Would there still be violent crime? Sure there would but I bet those numbers would look vastly different if we wrestled the reigns away from the corprocrats.

[msongs]

3. yes free nukes for everyone w/ no restrictions, as allowed by the second amendment nt

[RSillsbee]

4. I f you can find a serious post in the gungeon advocating that

I will sell every gun I own

[cleanhippie]

29. How do you ever expect to be taken seriously with your nonsense, drive-by posts?

[Ron Green]

5. I got over my firearm jollies during my 3 years in the Army. I wish more guys would have

done that.

[GreenStormCloud]

11. How do you propose that I protect myself from violent crime?

I am a senior citizen with a disability. I can't outrun or outfight a young male mugger. Why do want criminal thugs to have such an advantage over me. Our do you live in a fantasy world with no violent crime?

[RC]

26. Either you are paranoid or you need to move.

I am currently living in Kansas City. I hear gun shots several times a week. I don't feel any need to have firearms around. I even walk around in reasonable safely at night, as do the neighbors.

[GreenStormCloud]

38. So your answer is to deny the reality of crime.

Can you give me an ABSOLUTE GUARANTEE that I will never have to defend myself from violent crime?

[Hoyt]

30. Great post. Short and to the point.

Maybe we need to put folks who haven't gotten their firearm jollies on the equivalent of "saltpeter."

[Statistical]

9. My prediction.

Nothing happens this year or next.

1) NRA is a hugely powerful lobbying force.
2) Democrats are still stinging from losing control of the House
3) The 2012 Senate election will already be tough (23 Democratic seats up and only 10 Republican ones).

If Democratic party has a long shot chance of retaining control of government in 2012 and that is without stupid gun/magazine bans passed. With it we are looking at 1996 all over again. There are too many reasonable/moderate Democrats who are realists and won't let that happen. Yeah the rabid 10% of the party will push for it but nothing will happen.

If it does then it is game over for Democratic party for at least next 2 or 3 election cycles.

[jeepnstein]

15. Some people don't see it that way.

They are so blinded by ideology that they're more than happy to toss their party into the dumpster just to prove a point. It's one of the most frustrating parts of being involved in politics. You always have these people who are willing to send everyone over the top just to get their way. Problem with that is most voters aren't willing to follow that kind of leadership.

[Statistical]

18. Some people are....

but they are a minority.

some politicians are but they are a minority.

There was 10 years of opportunity to extend the worthless AWB. Nobody did. The same ole suspects proposed it each year and it went nowhere. After 1996 90% of the party wanted nothing to do with worthless feel good (and politically expensive) bill.

The gun grabbers will try (they have been trying for 4 decades). They will always try. McCarthy has propsed her bill every single year since AWB expired and after every tragic event she could find. My prediction is that attempt will go nowhere just like the last 47 times.

The bad news for the party is even that attempt will be used against the party by the NRA although passage would be far worse.