LikeLike

LikeLike

Not sure if they psychologically empower them, 30 rd mags aren’t new to the market nor to mass shootings after all. I do think the “Columbine effect” is in play though. If you are going to get the new “high score” you need to maximize potential lethality, even if in practice equipment choices have less to do with that than target selection.

For example, the Vegas shooter set up his situation so the bump stocks and magazine capacities were almost secondary to the final toll. He picked a concealed, elevated position firing down into a confined crowd.

Shooting at ground level inside a building the crowd nearest you provides human cover for those in the the back to flee away from where they know you are. In Vegas every one of his targets was effectively in the open and unaware of which way safety lay, in many cases unaware of what was happening at all so the herd panic effect didn’t set in for vital seconds. Even once aware, they were so densely packed and constrained from escape by the venue perimeter that a “miss” had a high chance of hitting the person next to them. Some reports mention his having the rifles on “tripods,” if so, it would require little effort to keep all the rounds in the beaten zone without even needing to aim.

The copy-cat effect is what I fear, as that festers and new methods come to awareness, say bombing, chasing “means control” will become less relevant. If the Austin bomber had different intentions, even his marginal skill could have easily replicated the Centennial Olympic Park bombing in any number of packed Austin venues.

LikeLiked by 1 person

David,

I agree. Though the burden of actually supporting those arguments is on those raising them.

An unsupported but reasonable response to the “tailing off” factor would be to note that as targets in the immediate area flee or die they become fewer and harder to hit, and moving to pursue them or to engage new groups can eat up time that would allow reloading in comparative safety (the potential unarmed interveners in the immediate area having been injured or fled). I looked at Port Arthur and even in his first engagement at the Cafe he used one AR mag at very close range firing from the hip and still only had a rate of fire of 1-2 shots a second (29 shots in 15-30 sec). After that it dropped as the crowd outside had started to flee.

Magazine mechanical failures are a potential issue, but, given most of these shooters plan and practice, their testing mags for reliability, just as you or I would for carry magazines, would make that something to be hoped for, not reliable enough to form a basis of policy. And, as Kleck noted, that opportunity doesn’t seem to have been used often in the past. Though the “Run, Hide, Fight” training might change that, as air passenger reactions to hijacking have similarly gone from “comply” to “fight to the death” now that the stakes are known. In any event, the common practice of having a second gun lessens that window.

LikeLiked by 1 person

To me, this issue is more symbolic than real. But symbolism works both ways: these LCMs look evil to gun controllers. Do they empower mass shooters psychologically as well? I recently posted that question to Scott Lilienfeld, who I was conversing with on another topic but he said it wasn’t his field.

I don’t have a problem with drawing lines in the sand somewhere. The 1934 NFA has not been a huge burden on gun owners. I just wish those lines made some quantifiable sense rather than being all show and political theatre.

LikeLiked by 1 person

LikeLiked by 1 person

What David said.

LikeLiked by 1 person

I haven’t looked at the Kleck study recently, but one issue that was raised is one you hint at Matthew, which is whether the rate of fire is fast to start then tails off. If you look at total rounds per total minutes of incident, that will produce a slower overall rate of fire on average.

The other argument that may make sense is, sure, you can bring 9 10 round magazines instead of 3 30 round magazines, but more magazine changes might make for more mechanical failures. AND if we go the route of armed responses to active shooters, then every magazine change represents an opportunity.

I don’t personally believe banning ARs or LCMs will dramatically change the death/injury rate, but these are arguments that should be addressed in response to those who do.

LikeLiked by 2 people

The “high-capacity mags are inherently more ‘something'” claim may not hold up in practice. Kleck recently did an analysis of mass shooting events and many of the higher total round count events, given the time involved before intervention and frequent use of multiple weapons, didn’t _require_ the use of higher cap mags. Nor in many cases even a semi-auto’s higher potential rate of fire.

we’ve already seen the “lethality” difference between revolvers and semi-auto handguns is not what we’d expect in practice.

The data that would be useful would be to break down the actual rounds fired in each phase of the event, and the time between each, to see if the same approximate number of shots would be possible with any other given weapon system.

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1525107116674926

Putting a spare gas tank in your pick-up doesn’t make it an 18-wheeler.

LikeLike

Indeed, designed with a 30 rd magazine as a military tactical rifle. If deranged civilians keep shooting up schools, theatres, and churches with these rifles, its inevitable that we will all pay a regulatory price. We let just about anyone drive. We don’t let just about anyone drive an eighteen-wheeler.

LikeLiked by 1 person