As far as reload time thats still time not shooting. Thats the point even if minimal with an AR. Sandy Hook they say benefitted because he had to reload giving people time to get away/react. Havent you argued on this board you could have made a difference at aurora by waiting for him to reload or react to a jam? It may not be much but that fraction is an argument that maybe saves one life if not more and one inocent life is worth the burden.
Criminals still getting them is 100% true. And like weve debated numerous times laws arent for the law abiding and they arent for the criminal aspect, its more like the ametuer criminal. The guy that wants to do harm but still goes to a store to buy his weapons, aka aurora, SH, etc. It is a very small sample and it is a "burden" for law abiding for that small percentage but i still think some laws make sense that dont infringe on the 2nd. Background checks dont which is why i support them so strongly. <10 i may see reasoning for but im actually apathetic about it. My whole point with this was that there is an argument, that clearly two avid gun owners disagree with but i think there is reasoning there for it.
Aurora, IIRC, his AR jammed on him right away and he switched to a shotgun. Could be wrong though.
Its under that circumstance I said wait for him to reload. It's time consuming to reload a shotgun, thus you have a chance to return fire and / or escape.
Now if he used an AR the whole time, that 1-2 seconds is nothing and changes the whole dynamic.
The last time I went to my local gun store, they sad it was easier to get a full glock then a mag... and they didn't have any idea when complete glocks were coming in. they didn'tthink that they would be able to get spare mags in the next YEAR, or MORE.
Instead of starting another thread, I'll just post this here.
Report: Suspects not licensed to own guns
Two guys who were hell bent on killing people didn't own their handguns legally, so lets make it tougher for the people who already follow the current laws to own guns :grbac: