Does 10/7 round magazine restriction negatively impact women/elderly/physically disabled persons?

[theotherwaldo]

I'm not normally left-handed but I am forced to shoot left-handed if I find myself in a shooting situation without my glasses. My right eye is seriously damaged.
Do I need an accommodation?

 

[dogtown tom]

Ah, but they don't apply to everyone. They carve out exemptions for the civilian police and the bodyguards of the politicians and the influential.

Again, again, again...…...to be discriminatory a law must discriminate based on sex, religion, race, national origin or disability. An exemption for police officers is not "discriminatory" under Federal law.

 

[Jim Watson]

Wasn't there one of those fast tracked repressive laws that they had to go back and amend to carve out an exemption for cops?

 

[dogtown tom]

That is true.

But the level of impact would be greater.

So?
"Level of impact" isn't illegal.

Requirement to report to courthouse for jury duty negatively impacts everyone but the impact is greater for jurors with disability requiring accommodation not necessary for jurors without disability - https://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Microsites/Files/CJS/Other/Juror with Disabilities Final Report.ashx

Again, so what?
If I have the flu am I not "negatively impacted" by having to report to jury duty?
If I'm 90 years old, need a walker and a nurse to report for jury duty the judge cannot prohibit me from serving.....that would be discrimination.

You seem to be unable to differentiate what is legal and an inconvenience vs what you simply disagree with.

In similar manner, restriction on ammunition capacity negatively impacts all gun owners but the impact is greater for smaller stature female, elderly and physically disabled gun owners with weaker upper body/hand strength. Being female alone may not be a significant factor but since there are differing physical endurance/performance requirements to the point where sporting activities like Olympics have separate gender categories may express disadvantage for female gun owners against male attackers.

Again..…...SO WHAT?????
Life is full of things that don't go your way, rules that you don't like, instructions you have to follow or being told no, we don't serve hot dogs at McDonalds. "Negatively impacted" doesn't mean diddly squat.

As there are accommodations (some mandated by the government) for people with disability to perform activities of daily living,

Again, you need to read the ADA ink I've provided. "The government" doesn't mandate ANYTHING in a persons activities, only in accommodations that must be provided under the ADA. And as the ADA is about accessibility, not what a person does on their own time for recreation or self defense, you are simply barking up a tree that does not exist.

there may be a need for accommodation for people with upper body/hand weakness to perform self defense/self protection activity of operating firearms.

And people with weak grip strength need someone to open the pickle jar. Children need help crossing a busy street. Grandma needs the volume turned up on her iPhone.
NONE, NONE, NONE of those "accommodations" are required under any law.
You seem to believe because someone has a disability, a weakness, or isn't on the same level as everyone else that they need special dispensation. They don't and no law requires it unless there is a law that does.

We have already discussed such accommodations as AR pistol stabilizing brace and ambidextrous controls. And ammunition limit to 7/10 rounds, IMHO, has greater negative impact and consideration should be given to producing firearms with smaller grip, lighter trigger, better recoil control/management systems, etc. to include binary trigger.

Again, you confuse what is an "accommodation" under the ADA with anything related to firearms. AR pistol braces are not "accommodations" in any sense. An accommodation would be allowing a teacher to read aloud to a blind student in a test for comprehension, or permitting additional time in test taking (required under IDEA) or wheelchair ramps in public buildings, handicapped parking or restroom facilities (ADA).

Anyone who has fired a firearm without hearing protection, especially in confined space can tell you it is not a pleasant experience. Yet, gun owners are likely to fire their firearm without hearing protection in self defense situations which will likely affect their ability to hear, see and focus not to mention experiencing pain. Accommodation for this is needed for every gun owner and detachable or integrated noise suppression is the answer to allow gun owners to fire their firearms without being negatively impacted or injuring their hearing temporarily and permanently.

Nonsense. Not that silencers should be removed from the NFA, but absolute nonsense that you think it an "accommodation".

Just as government protects people with disabilities to perform activities of daily living,

Only as prescribed by the ADA. Tell us again where in the Americans with Disability Act that firearms or self defense is mentioned.

shouldn't protection be afforded to allow smaller stature female, elderly and physically disabled gun owners with weaker upper body/hand strength to fulfill their need and desire to protect themselves?

No.
EVERYONE should enjoy the same protections of the Second Amendment. If your state law prohibits ten round magazines, yet permits an exemption to the small of stature (that's laughable btw), female, elderly, etc., but does not extend that exemption to fat, 25 year old, six foot tall males.....well, there's discrimination right there. (Civil Rights Act of 1964)

I believe reversing 7/10 round magazine restriction should be expedited followed by hearing protection for gun owners along with technology to allow easier/enhanced operation of firearms to include binary trigger.

I think pretty much 90% of the firearms community would welcome a repeal or elimination of all state and federal laws restricting gun ownership and usage. But that wasn't the point of your thread.

 

[dogtown tom]

I'm not normally left-handed but I am forced to shoot left-handed if I find myself in a shooting situation without my glasses. My right eye is seriously damaged.
Do I need an accommodation?

What federal or state law do you think would have such an accommodation?

 

[LiveLife]

... you need to read the ADA ink I've provided. "The government" doesn't mandate ANYTHING in a persons activities, only in accommodations that must be provided under the ADA. And as the ADA is about accessibility, not what a person does on their own time for recreation or self defense, you are simply barking up a tree that does not exist.

Believe me, I used to work as a state Compliance Coordinator/Licencing and Certification surveyor which included applying and verifying ADA compliance along with local ordinances and state/federal laws and regulations.

Keep this in mind. Your comment about how government is not required/mandated to do anything ... That was the case UNTIL ADA laws were written. Then it was required/mandated.

Before, driving while talking with cellphone on your ear was not banned. BUT new law was written and now it is required/mandated that you cannot drive and talk with cellphone on your ear.

There are so many other activities that are performed now that is not banned or require accommodation ... UNTIL new laws are written to change that.

 

[theotherwaldo]

-I did ADA compliance inspections for the University of Alabama's Department of Space Management back in the 1990s. I was constantly surprised at how flexible the compliance requirements could be, depending on the population affected, the disabilities in question, the age of the facilities, the range of activities held at that time within the facility in question and even the remaining budget for the project in question.
Because of the odd variations in the application of the ADA regulations, my questions about the accommodations for my physical problems still stand - although I am not serious about whether or not any accommodation would ever come into existence... .

 

[dogtown tom]

Believe me, I used to work as a state Compliance Coordinator/Licencing and Certification surveyor which included applying and verifying ADA compliance along with local ordinances and state/federal laws and regulations.

Keep this in mind. Your comment about how government is not required/mandated to do anything ... That was the case UNTIL ADA laws were written. Then it was required/mandated.

I didn't say anything of the sort. You wrote: "As there are accommodations (some mandated by the government) for people with disability to perform activities of daily living...."
I responded: "Again, you need to read the ADA ink I've provided. "The government" doesn't mandate ANYTHING in a persons activities, only in accommodations that must be provided under the ADA. And as the ADA is about accessibility, not what a person does on their own time for recreation or self defense, you are simply barking up a tree that does not exist."
To be perfectly clear.....what daily living or recreational activities a person with a disability chooses to do...…..are his own free will. The "government" cannot mandate an accommodation ie "Joe Wheelchair is required to use his wheelchair when shooting at the public range".
The government, via the ADA can require a public gun range to provide wheelchair ramps, handicapped parking or ADA compliant restrooms....but cannot require any person covered by the ADA to take advantage of those accommodations.

That you have had anything to do with the ADA shocks me.

Before, driving while talking with cellphone on your ear was not banned. BUT new law was written and now it is required/mandated that you cannot drive and talk with cellphone on your ear.

Well what on earth are you talking about now?
First, that's not a Federal law, nor a law in every state.
And it has zippity to do with the thread topic.

There are so many other activities that are performed now that is not banned or require accommodation ... UNTIL new laws are written to change that.

Then YOU SHOULD KNOW that firearms usage or possession is not in any way, shape or form covered by the ADA.....'cause no current law exempts people with disabilities from Federal firearms laws or state firearms laws.

 

[dogtown tom]

Do you think Michael asked for an "accommodation"?

 

[LiveLife]

Let's get back to OP which was "Does 10/7 round magazine restriction negatively impact women/elderly/physically disabled persons?"

This should be a yes or no question.

If yes, what can be done about it?

If you are claiming no, I think many would disagree, especially women, elderly and physically disabled persons.

 

[dogtown tom]

Let's get back to OP which was "Does 10/7 round magazine restriction negatively impact women/elderly/physically disabled persons?"

This should be a yes or no question.

It's pretty darn clear that any limit on magazine capacity negatively impacts all gun owners within a state.

If yes, what can be done about it?

Stop electing anti gun politicians.

If you are claiming no, I think many would disagree, especially women, elderly and physically disabled persons.

Why are you limiting your "negatively impacted persons" to only women/elderly/physically disabled ?

What happened to weak and short statured?

I feel dumber for having participated in this thread.

 

[LiveLife]

It's pretty darn clear that any limit on magazine capacity negatively impacts all gun owners within a state ... Stop electing anti gun politicians.

Bravo! Finally!

Why are you limiting your "negatively impacted persons" to only women/elderly/physically disabled ?

What happened to weak and short statured?

I got tired from typing so much and had to go take a nap. You know, I am layman with limited mental stature.

 

[GEM]

This is a legit topic. If one feels dumber for entering the discussion, that's your problem. Clarifying how the ADA works is legit. However, when one wants to discuss how limited mags may deferentially affect a specific group based on some properties of that group, that's legit. If you want to add another group without the snark go ahead.

If for example, Joe Biden gets in and we are limited to double barrel 12 gauge - might one point out to Creepy Joe that the elderly, short of stature, young - may find this gun not optimal?

 

[dogtown tom]

Bravo! Finally!....

Finally? Go back and read my first post in this thread.

 

[jrmiddleton425]

If a woman, elderly or physically disabled person with weaker upper body strength has to select smaller caliber 9mm over 40S&W/45ACP, does 10/7 round restriction discriminate against them?

The short definition of discrimination is "treating one individual, or group of individuals, differently from another." If you COULD prove discrimination, in and of itself, that's not illegal. So, yes, the law might discriminate, but it discriminates against EVERYONE who isn't an active/retired LEO.

Now, let's talk about disability, guns, and caliber, and recoil. I will be 36 years old this month, and I have used a wheelchair for most of those years. I'm typing this with three fingers and one thumb. My right hand functions about 90% of normal and my left about 40% of normal.

My computer desk is within ten feet of at least fifteen guns.

Over the last twenty years, my preferences have crystallized into the following five guns: U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30 Model of 1917; U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30 M1, Glock 30 .45 ACP, CZ-75B 9mm Para, and S&W 27-2 .357 Magnum.

I wouldn't believe it if I hadn't experienced it, but guess what? I *feel* less recoil from an M1, than I do from an AR-15. Same deal with .45 and .357, as opposed to 9mm or .40.

So yeah, give me the heavier, slower bullet every time.

I did, and I would again, sign on to a lawsuit challenging the NYS 7-round limit, because there was no legally sustainable reason FOR the limit to exist. THAT is how you beat these laws in court.

 

[LiveLife]

I will be 36 years old this month, and I have used a wheelchair for most of those years. I'm typing this with three fingers and one thumb. My right hand functions about 90% of normal and my left about 40% of normal ... I would again, sign on to a lawsuit challenging the NYS 7-round limit, because there was no legally sustainable reason FOR the limit to exist.

Hopefully our win over 10 round magazine limit in CA will help you reverse 7 round limit.

discrimination

I already asked moderator to replace "discrimination" with "negatively impact" on the thread title. I hope to continue discussing the thread refocused on "negatively impact".

Let's get back to OP which was "Does 10/7 round magazine restriction negatively impact women/elderly/physically disabled persons?"

 

[toivo]

Wasn't there one of those fast tracked repressive laws that they had to go back and amend to carve out an exemption for cops?

NY "SAFE" Act. The governor skipped the three-day waiting period, claiming urgent "necessity." Kind of a joke, since the various provisions of the Act didn't take effect for two months to a year after passage. Then they realized they had forgotten to exempt cops, Oops ...

 

[TTv2]

The main reason I am opposed to any magazine capacity restrictions is that it does hamper the ability of a homeowner from having more firepower to defend their home, life, and property. I've thought about this and have looked at home videos of home invasions where the owner used a gun and the glaring thing that sticks out to me is they're usually using a handgun and only have one magazine with them- the mag in the gun.

Whether you have a 10 rd, 17 rd, or 33 rd mag, it's always one mag people have because typically, people don't have spare mags next to the gun in the nightstand. Hell, the .38 I have in a drawer doesn't have a speedloader or speedstrip with it, so this applies to me too and I'm WAY more of a gun person than the average homeowner as I reload, have black powder guns, etc.

The difference of 10 rds vs 17 rds is significant and in the case of a mass shooter it's insignificant because the same BS story that they Anti's spout is always "OH, IF HE HAD TO RELOAD MORE OFTEN THAT WOULD GIVE PEOPLE TIME TO TACKLE HIM!"

I watched the NZ mosque shooting, nobody was running to tackle the shooter, they were huddled against walls or running away. I'm sure it was the exact same thing in the Pulse nightclub, Columbine, and the one in Florida last year; 99% of the people are running, 1% are keeping a cool head trying to minimize casualties and fight back.

Heck, we saw last year with the Parkland, FL shooting that 10 rd mags were still able to cause the deaths of many people and a few months later there was a shooting in Texas where a revolver and a shotgun were used and 10 died (funny how the media didn't cover that school shooting as heavily as Parkland.)

Unfortunately, we live in an increasingly less intelligent nation where people don't understand specifics and logic, they react completely on their feelings and don't care to know the details, they just know "something must be done." We've had almost 100 years of anti-gun laws in the country and it hasn't completely stopped gun violence, but we've seen studies that crime rates are at record lows, so I fail to see where the meat is in regards to how "hi capacity" magazines, guns with threaded barrels/flash hiders, collapsible stocks, and bayonet lugs are causing higher death tolls in mass shootings.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I watched the NZ mosque shooting, nobody was running to tackle the shooter, they were huddled against walls or running away.

You only saw the video of the first mosque (Al Noor) shooting where one person attempted to get at the shooter. I don't know that there is video from the second mosque (Linwood Islamic Center) where the shooter was tackled and disarmed. https://www.foxnews.com/world/new-z...-friend-tackled-gunman-and-grabbed-his-weapon

Attempt to disarm while reloading....
http://www.activeresponsetraining.net/marysville-washington-school-shooting

Tucson, Giffords' event, tackled while reloading...
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pat...s-stopping-gunman-reloading/story?id=12577933

Seattle Pacific University shooting pepper sprayed and tackled while reloading (cool video)...


Waffle House shooter tackled while needing reload...
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timot...who-tackled-the-waffle-house-shooter-n2473404

New York New York Casino shooter tackled during reload...
http://retardzone.com/2007/07/09/iraq-vet-tackled-and-stopped-shooter-in-las-vegas-shooting/
http://articles.dailyamerican.com/2...2_1_steven-francis-zegrean-casino-nevada-jury

There are some other incidents, but I don't have time now to sleuth them, but these are some good examples of actives shooters taken down while reloading. There are a lot more where the active shooters were simply tackled.

So it isn't total BS as you suggest. People with the proper mindset and opportunity take advantage of the situation when they can, bet it during a reload, malfunction, or when the shooter is otherwise distracted.

Mag capacity most certainly can matter, be it in self defense or acts of aggression. You can't say that it matters in one and not in the other.

 

[LiveLife]

Can we stick to OP issue of "Does 10/7 round magazine restriction negatively impact women/elderly/physically disabled persons?"

Thank you.

As to active shooters being rushed while reloading, absolutely applies to home owners defending their lives as 7/10 round magazines require more frequent reloads than large capacity magazines and they could be rushed by intruders.

 

[Jeff H]

If for example, Joe Biden gets in and we are limited to double barrel 12 gauge - might one point out to Creepy Joe that the elderly, short of stature, young - may find this gun not optimal?

Joe Biden is a moderate. He doesn't scare me 1/2 as much as this Pete Buttigieg guy who openly says that "shall not be infringed" really means "reasonable restrictions".

 

[Gridley]

Joe Biden is a moderate.

He's really not. "F" from the NRA, for example. He's what we've been conditioned to believe a moderate is by the gun-grabber extremists.

He doesn't scare me 1/2 as much as this Pete Buttigieg guy who openly says that "shall not be infringed" really means "reasonable restrictions".

Granted, he probably won't be the worst candidate. The fact that he's the 'lesser evil' on RKBA doesn't mean he isn't 'evil', nor does it make him a moderate.

Based on his actions, I'd barely call Trump a moderate.

 

[TTv2]

You only saw the video of the first mosque (Al Noor) shooting where one person attempted to get at the shooter. I don't know that there is video from the second mosque (Linwood Islamic Center) where the shooter was tackled and disarmed. https://www.foxnews.com/world/new-z...-friend-tackled-gunman-and-grabbed-his-weapon

Attempt to disarm while reloading....
http://www.activeresponsetraining.net/marysville-washington-school-shooting

Tucson, Giffords' event, tackled while reloading...
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pat...s-stopping-gunman-reloading/story?id=12577933

Seattle Pacific University shooting pepper sprayed and tackled while reloading (cool video)...


Waffle House shooter tackled while needing reload...
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timot...who-tackled-the-waffle-house-shooter-n2473404

New York New York Casino shooter tackled during reload...
http://retardzone.com/2007/07/09/iraq-vet-tackled-and-stopped-shooter-in-las-vegas-shooting/
http://articles.dailyamerican.com/2...2_1_steven-francis-zegrean-casino-nevada-jury

There are some other incidents, but I don't have time now to sleuth them, but these are some good examples of actives shooters taken down while reloading. There are a lot more where the active shooters were simply tackled.

So it isn't total BS as you suggest. People with the proper mindset and opportunity take advantage of the situation when they can, bet it during a reload, malfunction, or when the shooter is otherwise distracted.

Mag capacity most certainly can matter, be it in self defense or acts of aggression. You can't say that it matters in one and not in the other.

The first video the guy looked move like he was trying to run past him to escape, not tackle him. There are certainly cases where shooters got tackled while reloading, but they're not common and it's entirely up to the physical capabilities of the person tackling the shooter if it'll be successful or not. Add a few conceal carriers to the mix and it can stop a mass shooting instantly and in NZ at the second mosque, there was an armed person there who took a few shots at the shooter and that stopped the attack there, the shooter fled after that.

Also, the ease of being able to travel to others states to buy 20, 30, 40 round mags in stores and bringing them back to a hi cap mag ban state does nothing to stop a criminal intent on murder, but it does everything to hamper the non-criminal from better defending themselves.

 

[LiveLife]

There are certainly cases where shooters got tackled while reloading, but they're not common and it's entirely up to the physical capabilities of the person tackling the shooter if it'll be successful or not.

Let's get back to the OP of thread in respect to shooter being rushed/tackled as ammunition run out and shooter has to reload.

In the video below (Full security video with details that many other media outlet videos left out), two women are robbed by a gunman with a shotgun. Even though they are armed, defenders are rushed/tackled by the robber. Having 7/10 round magazine restriction will increase the chance of being rushed/tackled as defenders' gun will run out of ammunition faster. Having large capacity magazines will increase the chance the defenders can keep shooting the attacker before having to reload.

Imagine if the defenders had different defensive firearms with large capacity magazines with binary triggers. Initial shots from the defenders could have stopped the robber immediately.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

There are certainly cases where shooters got tackled while reloading, but they're not common...."

You mean to say that people tackling mass shooters isn't common for an event that itself isn't common? You are the one claiming that the notion of it happening is BS. I simply demonstrated with multiple examples that you were incorrect. It happen. Those were just a few quick examples.

Let's get back to the OP of thread in respect to shooter being rushed/tackled as ammunition run out and shooter has to reload.

In the video below (Full security video with details that many other media outlet videos left out), two women are robbed by a gunman with a shotgun. Even though they are armed, defenders are rushed/tackled by the robber. Having 7/10 round magazine restriction will increase the chance of being rushed/tackled as defenders' gun will run out of ammunition faster. Having large capacity magazines will increase the chance the defenders can keep shooting the attacker before having to reload.

Imagine if the defenders had different defensive firearms with large capacity magazines with binary triggers. Initial shots from the defenders could have stopped the robber immediately.

Interesting that you use the argument that people are more likely to be rushed while reloading that TTv2 says isn't something that would be common. Can you find any incidents of good guys rushed while reloading? It would boost your argument significantly, because the video you provided of the robbery really has nothing to do with that issue.

Also, large capacity magazines have zero to do with initial shots. If the initial shots were effective, there would have been zero need for large capacity magazines, LOL.

Now we are adding binary triggers to the equation? Why not just go 3 shot burst or full auto.

LOL, in said video, the LACK of capacity saved the daughter's life.

BTW, that event happened in Tulsa. No mag restrictions there. They own the store. The gun they had was their choice. https://heavy.com/news/2018/02/tina-ring-ashley-lee-mom-daughter-tulsa-robbery-video/[/QUOTE]