Florida school shooter’s AR-15 may have jammed, saving lives, report says - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=spazthemax;53173179]Because this one instance means that no one would use a larger mag to mow down people But what fun is there in making sense?[/QUOTE] In a situation like this where there's one armed man and a gaggle of unarmed victims, even a bolt action rifle would be very efficient at taking many lives. I think you fail to understand the efficiency of firearms and how easy they can be to manipulate.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;53173377]I don't support magazine capacity bans but because someone killed [x] people with low capacity magazines doesn't mean he couldn't have killed [y] people with regular or high capacity magazines.[/QUOTE] don't you point out their null hypothesis!

What's the cause of jamming most of the time? Bad reloading, mishandling, faulty ammo?

[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_tower_shooting]Just a small reminder that bolt action rifles have been used before.[/url] And yeah... That guy was just as scary, if not more terrifying do to his knowledge. The guy picked off officers thanks to small gaps in between masonry.

[QUOTE=_Axel;53173922]What's the cause of jamming most of the time? Bad reloading, mishandling, faulty ammo?[/QUOTE] In so far as I'm aware its usually just shitty maintenance, allowing dirt and shit to get in to important area of the gun or magazine.

The solution is easy. Allow fully automatic rifles and high capacity magazines. However, the manufacturers have to make the rifles and magazines as unreliable as possible so it'll jam in case of a shooting.

[QUOTE=joost1120;53174048]The solution is easy. Allow fully automatic rifles and high capacity magazines. However, the manufacturers have to make the rifles and magazines as unreliable as possible so it'll jam in case of a shooting.[/QUOTE] the G36 is now the only gun allowed in the US

[QUOTE=spazthemax;53173179]Because this one instance means that no one would use a larger mag to mow down people But what fun is there in making sense?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=CG-105;53173513]Magazine capacity limits aren't supposed to stop mass shootings, they're supposed to make it more difficult for a shooter to cause casualties. If he fumbled a reload or the gun jammed up as a result of improperly loaded magazines, that is a direct result of the fact that he had to reload more often and/or properly load more magazines. Given 30+ magazine capacity, he may have very well killed even more people. Try again.[/QUOTE] Please refer to this. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCSySuemiHU[/media] It makes no difference, this is all within margin of error and if someone has a gun, they'll have very likely shot it a lot, know how it works and reloading is 2nd nature, but even then an unskilled person, it again makes no actual difference, its all within margin of error. As for the fumbling argument, this can happen with any reload and as said before, if they've had some hours put into shooting their gun, the chance of fumbling is extremely low. The magazine capacity argument is just dumb and based off uninformed decisions, and besides a gun is [I]more likely to jam with high capacity magazines than it is with low and standard capacity.[/I] [editline]3rd March 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=_Axel;53173922]What's the cause of jamming most of the time? Bad reloading, mishandling, faulty ammo?[/QUOTE] Its most commonly poor quality ammo or the magazine, modern standard magazines are rarely the problem though, its usually its like the old GI style steel mags with the original followers (ones without the newer anti-tilt design), cheapo plastic mags and high capacity mags that are prone to cause jams, due to a range of issues related to the build quality and springs. More rounds in a mag past its original capacity, the more prone it is to jam. Having less rounds in a mag actually makes it more reliable, ironically.

[QUOTE=Ridge;53173164]Only 10 round mags. There goes any legit argument for full capacity magazine bans.[/QUOTE] The article is about how the shooter only having 10-round magazines may have severely hampered his ability to kill more people, and you say this proves that there is "no legitimate argument" for full cap magazine bans.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;53174246]The article is about how the shooter only having 10-round magazines may have severely hampered his ability to kill more people, and you say this proves that there is "no legitimate argument" for full cap magazine bans.[/QUOTE] Are you somehow missing the part that explicitly says it's far more likely the gun and ammunition being bargain trash were bigger factors than any issues related to reloading ? Like, it makes one quick mention of how the shooter may have fucked up reloading, but it immediately also says that the weapon itself was falling apart, reloading aside. Had the weapon not been garbage and the ammunition been more relevant, he still would have had 150 more shots to fire before actually running out.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;53174246]The article is about how the shooter only having 10-round magazines may have severely hampered his ability to kill more people, and you say this proves that there is "no legitimate argument" for full cap magazine bans.[/QUOTE] [quote]Michael Limatola, a weapons expert and consultant based in New Jersey, said jamming is a weakness of rifles like the one Cruz used. They “are prone to this type of problem if not cleaned thoroughly,” he said.[/quote] Or maybe it's because he used a bargain bin rifle and that's why things didn't go worse than they were already :thinking:

[QUOTE=Reagy;53174154]Please refer to this. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCSySuemiHU[/media] It makes no difference, this is all within margin of error and if someone has a gun, they'll have very likely shot it a lot, know how it works and reloading is 2nd nature, but even then an unskilled person, it again makes no actual difference, its all within margin of error. As for the fumbling argument, this can happen with any reload and as said before, if they've had some hours put into shooting their gun, the chance of fumbling is extremely low. The magazine capacity argument is just dumb and based off uninformed decisions, and besides a gun is [I]more likely to jam with high capacity magazines than it is with low and standard capacity.[/I] [editline]3rd March 2018[/editline] Its most commonly poor quality ammo or the magazine, modern standard magazines are rarely the problem though, its usually its like the old GI style steel mags with the original followers (ones without the newer anti-tilt design), cheapo plastic mags and high capacity mags that are prone to cause jams, due to a range of issues related to the build quality and springs. More rounds in a mag past its original capacity, the more prone it is to jam. Having less rounds in a mag actually makes it more reliable, ironically.[/QUOTE] I've seen this video put forward as an argument against magazine capacity restrictions before and it always strikes me as odd given that it shows the more inexperienced shooter taking longer to put their rounds on target with more magazines. That's kind of the whole case for mag restrictions right there. And that's even given the benefit of a no-stress environment where the demonstrators are clearly counting their rounds and pulling mags off a table in front of them.

[QUOTE=CG-105;53174616]I've seen this video put forward as an argument against magazine capacity restrictions before and it always strikes me as odd given that it shows the more inexperienced shooter taking longer to put their rounds on target with more magazines. That's kind of the whole case for mag restrictions right there. And that's even given the benefit of a no-stress environment where the demonstrators are clearly counting their rounds and pulling mags off a table in front of them.[/QUOTE] The people who commit school shootings are also known to have obsessive behavior, more often than not they spend a lot of time training and preparing. They're not exactly inexperienced most of the time.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;53174625]The people who commit school shootings are also known to have obsessive behavior, more often than not they spend a lot of time training and preparing. They're not exactly inexperienced most of the time.[/QUOTE] They're usually not experts either. When you got experts doing spree shootings you get shit like the Las Vegas shooting instead, which is far from typical.

[QUOTE=CG-105;53174616]I've seen this video put forward as an argument against magazine capacity restrictions before and it always strikes me as odd given that it shows the more inexperienced shooter taking longer to put their rounds on target with more magazines. That's kind of the whole case for mag restrictions right there. And that's even given the benefit of a no-stress environment where the demonstrators are clearly counting their rounds and pulling mags off a table in front of them.[/QUOTE] Are you sure about this? [t]https://i.imgur.com/zsz5h3w.jpg[/t] Top is 15rd, middle is 10rd, bottom is 6rd. That 17.6% time increase of Christy's SEEMS significant, but it barely added any additional time to each individual reload. If she were an active shooter, she'd be totally unphased by the need to reload more, unless she was in an active firefight. [editline]3rd March 2018[/editline] Like yeah, the the need to reload more could give more chances for the shooter to fumble somehow (jam, dropped magazine, etc) but I'd rather legislation didn't rely on completely random chance to have an effect.

[QUOTE=elowin;53174704]They're usually not experts either. When you got experts doing spree shootings you get shit like the Las Vegas shooting instead, which is far from typical.[/QUOTE] It really doesn't take an expert to swap a magazine, it just takes repetition.

[QUOTE=CG-105;53173513]Magazine capacity limits aren't supposed to stop mass shootings, they're supposed to make it more difficult for a shooter to cause casualties. If he fumbled a reload or the gun jammed up as a result of improperly loaded magazines, that is a direct result of the fact that he had to reload more often and/or properly load more magazines. Given 30+ magazine capacity, he may have very well killed even more people. Try again.[/QUOTE] Consider both the dude in Arizona who shot Giffords, and the dude in the theater here in Aurora, both had their large capacity magazines jam (33rd mag in the Glock in AZ, 100rd mag in the AR in Aurora), disabling the weapon. Those high cap mags saved lives by being shit.

[QUOTE=Ridge;53175292]Consider both the dude in Arizona who shot Giffords, and the dude in the theater here in Aurora, both had their large capacity magazines jam (33rd mag in the Glock in AZ, 100rd mag in the AR in Aurora), disabling the weapon. Those high cap mags saved lives by being shit.[/QUOTE] Well there's a solution. Legislate semiauto weapons by requiring all of them to use this kind of magazine. [img]https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/ak-mag-100-rounds.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Ridge;53175292]Consider both the dude in Arizona who shot Giffords, and the dude in the theater here in Aurora, both had their large capacity magazines jam (33rd mag in the Glock in AZ, 100rd mag in the AR in Aurora), disabling the weapon. Those high cap mags saved lives by being shit.[/QUOTE] If you go on gun enthusiast message boards you'll often find subjects discussing the best reload methods and they often suggest loading less bullets in a magazine than its actual top capacity in order to facilitate reloading, especially in the case of the AR-15 which can be at first rather finicky to reload since some people have a hard time actually telling whether the mag is properly seated. Given it's only a matter of one or two bullets, but fitting less rounds into your magazines [I]can[/I] improve how quickly and easily you get to reload a gun. [editline]4th March 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=eatdembeanz;53175368]Well there's a solution. Legislate semiauto weapons by requiring all of them to use this kind of magazine. [img]https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/ak-mag-100-rounds.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv3VC4B4Dw4[/media] The bottom plate essentially ends up sliding off due to recoil and the whole thing gets hopelessly jammed.

[QUOTE=Ridge;53175292]Consider both the dude in Arizona who shot Giffords, and the dude in the theater here in Aurora, both had their large capacity magazines jam (33rd mag in the Glock in AZ, 100rd mag in the AR in Aurora), disabling the weapon. Those high cap mags saved lives by being shit.[/QUOTE] Then what's the point of them if they're shitty? You're relying on faulty products to save lives.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;53175754]Then what's the point of them if they're shitty? You're relying on faulty products to save lives.[/QUOTE] They aren't THAT shitty, but that's exactly why the military doesn't make them standard issue. You never see soldiers with an extended capacity magazine, outside of automatic riflemen, the majority of which either use dedicated machineguns (M249, etc) or specially modified versions of their standard rifle (RPK, MG36, M27 IAR, to name a few.) But even those don't usually come with the babykiller 150 round extended AR-15 CMAGs you see in the news, rather they usually use 45 round stick magazines.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;53174246]The article is about how the shooter only having 10-round magazines may have severely hampered his ability to kill more people, and you say this proves that there is "no legitimate argument" for full cap magazine bans.[/QUOTE] Didn't you used to ban people for not reading the article before replying?