most all police officers will be breaking law in march in NY

[The Dharma Bum]

I don't really think you have a realistic view of the scope of government power. Does the government allow you to look at gay porn and play video games or do you just do it, not really giving a shit about what the government says?

[RoyBatty]

If the question is "how often do gun shot victims survive multiple entry wounds past the initial encounter", the answer is, basically, shitloads.

Most recent popular example being early January of this year when the mother in Georgia landed 5 .38 caliber rounds to the face and neck area of an intruder, yet he still managed to flee, only to be arrested later. She spent her entire revolver, landing 5 and missing with 1, and with an empty gun and no defensive measures remaining for her, he was still standing, able to impose a physical presence.

http://amarillo.com/news/latest-news/20 ... er-5-times

Added, you can ask pretty much any qualified veteran of any war in the last 75 years if 7 rounds is functionally adequate in a life or death struggle, those folks who have sent high-powered lead down-range at an enemy combatant many times, only to watch the enemy keep returning fire long after they should have dropped. Like I said, it happens shitloads. As someone earlier points out, over 80% of the target area on the human body, once struck, is not immediately lethal or effective grounding force.

There's many utilitarian reasons that large clips exist, one of which being "stress fire correction" (if that terminology is still accurate), where even highly trained LEO'S and soldiers can become subject to "fog of war" effect and can easily spend rounds in futility before achieving a proper sight picture and mitigating the natural panic instinct. Since this is provable for even highly trained individuals, it certainly stands to prove an even more pressing issue for civilians.

It's great to refute facts merely because it's possible, but really it's only facile assumption to advance that a 7 round weapon should be enough. Sometimes it is enough, sometimes it isn't, full stop. The issue remains, how do Cuomo and Bloombitch rationalize imposing such arbitrary limits on folks, which would provably leave them at least potentially at risk of further harm? Of course they can't impose that restriction from objective perspective, only thanks to the reactionary based non-solutions that are gun control measures.

[PoS]

Im with Galt, cops should get the same magazines that civilians have. You give cops more bullets the more shots they will fire and potentially injure innocent bystanders, by giving them less then it will force the cops to take careful shots rather than just blast away.

Take a look at these moronic cops from NY, they shot up 9 innocent bystanders because they had all that ammo:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/nyreg ... d=all&_r=0

[John Galt]

[J.K. Gregg]

It doesn't matter if it makes sense. Here is how some on the left see it:

On one side of the equation, you have gun-clinging conservatives who dredge up fearful minute possibilities (like the one above) to justify ownership of bigger clips and machine guns. On the other side of the equation, you have 11k gun homicides per year, the worst of which are committed with just such machine guns, and just such large clips.

It's an equation that, for them, makes perfect sense to remove the bigger guns and bigger clips in the name of saving all those people.

[The Comrade]

[The Comrade]

[RoyBatty]

[The Comrade]

[John Galt]

about 650 rounds were fired at the north hollywood shooters. one had 20 and the other 10 in them (finally got through the body armor) before they stopped firing and then bled out because police didn't let the ambulances get them for an hour. you're gonna need more than a 7 round clip if someone comes at you wearing body armor. you can't tell me you know that these types of situations won't happen so you can't reasonably ban people from being able to protect themselves and others