A) Eric Harris at Columbine used mostly 10 rounds magazines - yet wasn't impaired in firing almost 100 shots. No forceful opposition gave him plenty of time.
B) Seung-Hui Cho at VA Tech fired 174 shots changing magazines 17 times - almost all being 10 round magazines. Also without any resistance
C) The gun control advocates like to cite Jared Loughner's fat fingering a magazine and being disarmed as an excuse why everyone should be limited to 10 rounds or less. Fact is, he dropped his magazine which caused the break his subduers took - yet Holmes in Aurora had a jammed gun, was tossing grenades yielding several long pauses in shooting and no one of the scores of people accosted him. Its dubious at best that it will reduce any death tolls more than impair the law abiding as follows in D).
D) A homeowner in the dark, or CCW holder in the dark is going to be FAR more often affected by having to change magazines when faced with multiple attackers than the infrequent occurrence of a mass shooting by a crazy person who happens to drop a magazine. It will be fatal for them as their attackers WILL be taking advantage of any weakness, whereas the murderer chooses the time and place to their advantage.
E) People defend themselves at home and outside the home several times a DAY whereas we see these mass shooting incidents a few times in a year. (http://gunssavelives.net/category/self-defense/
is one site tracking such things, avg appears to be 1-2 a day reported there; I saw a post someone put up with the relevant sources from news media in late January and it showed 4-5 per day nationwide over a period of 2 days).
F) It only takes one bullet to kill someone, but often takes many to save a life.
Even a small .22 can be fatal in up to a few hours, but to stop someone with a knife or gun you must often hit them several times within seconds to prevent incurring fatal injuries yourself.
G) One doesn’t need a high-capacity weapon for hunting or sport shooting, but they do for personal protection. Police carry firearms for personal protection, and they select high-capacity handguns as well as assault weapons because experience has proven that they are the best choice for that purpose. If the police — the professionals — choose such weapons to protect themselves and their charges, why would a citizen not need the same type of weapon to protect their lives and property? (quoted in part from letter to editor http://www.dailyprogress.com/opinion...9bb30f31a.html
H) Under the primary purpose of the 2nd Amendment (resisting tyrannical/oppressive government troops), repelling foreign invasion (just ask ranchers on the southern border about drug gang problems), defending against looters/rapists/murderers after natural disaster, defending against rioters burning/killing and against multiple assailants - high capacity magazines are essential.
I) The officeholders take an oath, almost all of which talk about defending against enemies foreign and domestic. Those that support bans such as this are in fact AIDING our enemies who can only be dealt with by force, and that force being plentiful enough to neutralize the threat. Aiding the enemies of the people of the United States is part of the definition of treason. I would expect those policy makers to honor their oath, not the whim of the day by socialist engineers who wish to consolidate the power the people hold to the state alone.
Q) Why is there no talk about the common link with prescription psychotropic drugs that almost every mass killer was on. With the increased attention to mental health disorders, if current treatments are used they will create MORE mass shootings as these drugs will wind up being prescribed more frequently. It MUST be addressed despite the loss of political donations from pharmaceutical companies and psychologists professional lobby. Media won't cover it because of loss of advertising dollars from pharmaceutical companies as well.