Now obviously I am an outsider when it comes to US gun issues. As a Canadian, I have a different perspective on the firearm debates, and some posters are right when they say that Canada is an over-regulated country-a nanny state with some restrictions on freedom of speech. Consequently some of the fight may have been beaten out of me because of my place of birth in a forgive-him-for he knows not what he-does (or says) kind of way. But the beauty of a Farago site is that even foreigners can enjoy a freedom of expression, as long as they don’t turn into name-calling a***oles. Anyway, the debate about mega-clips caught my attention. The concept of anybody outside of a war zone that actually needs a 30 round clip plumb evades me . . .
Sure I would like to be able to match capacity with a psycho with a big clip and an even bigger mentally unbalanced chip on his shoulder. That is a worst-case scenario that is a no-brainer. At a basic level, we are all survivalists in a fight or flight kind of way.
But the actual need for a giant clip is still a head-scratcher for me. Most of the posters on this site seem to be responsible and insightful gun owners. And I am not saying that simply because you are much better armed than me.
It also seems like most of you are pretty good with your weapons of choice. So why would you need a 30 round clip if your accuracy with a weapon would take out a bad guy in a regulation clip? My assumption is that most situations would not be against a small army of bad guys.
The answer seems to be that any ground given on gun issues is ground lost forever. The second answer seems to come from the Boy Scout mantra: Be prepared. Both answers have a certain degree of validity to them.
But if I saw a guy walking along with a 30 mag addition to his pistol, I would avoid that guy like a plague. That just seems like overkill to me in more than one sense.