The reloading fallacy

[GEM]

This is a great piece on Karl Rehn's blog about the stupidity of magazine capacity bans because, the reloading pause can give the average person time to charge the shooter.

http://blog.krtraining.com/the-reloading-pause-fallacy/

Well documented with research and performance data. It also points out that the better response is to shoot the bad person, if you look at times.

Years ago, I did a little test with some IDPA shooters. It was told to us that we should throw our lap tops in class at the bad guy. So we went to the range with an old, nonworking lap top. I sat at a desk and the shooter (a good IDPA shooting LEO) stood next to me facing a target. At the beep, I had to stand, fold the computer and toss it at another target. While I was doing that, the officer easily got off 6 shots at a moderate pace. You can't throw the lap top that far anyway. Easy to dodge and shoot the thrower.

In a large classroom, you would have to be an Olympic shot putter to get to the shooter. In a middle or far row, you would just bean the first row.

 

[Elkins45]

When I changed school districts I had to take a comprehensive safety class that included an active shooter component. The instructor told us to stack a few of the strongest kids up against the door frame to swarm the shooter if he broke the lock. They were supposed to grab his arms and legs and drag him to the floor. The remainder of the class were to all throw their books at the shooter.

Because I was a science teacher I had a heavy metal fire extinguisher mounted near the door. My plan was to cave his skull in with it in addition to all of the above. But I would rather have had a gun.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

The problem that I see when people argue that there's no point in a magazine ban because the shooter will just reload so fast you can't get to him anyway is that the other side almost invariably counters with "Well then why are you worried about the magazine capacity anyway? If you can reload that fast it doesn't matter what the magazine capacity is."

And there's some truth to that argument we can't have it both ways

 

[Jeff White]

The whole “reloading pause” is just another lie the antis are trying to convince an uneducated public is true so that they can ban “something”.

The goal is disarmament one small step at a time. No one with any training or experience believes that magazine capacity makes any difference.

The idea that one can best be protected from an evil doer with a firearm by not having a firearm of their own is simply insane. A society that is unable to cope with certain realities is not healthy.

 

[Sistema1927]

The problem that I see when people argue that there's no point in a magazine ban because the shooter will just reload so fast you can't get to him anyway is that the other side almost invariably counters with "Well then why are you worried about the magazine capacity anyway? If you can reload that fast it doesn't matter what the magazine capacity is."

And there's some truth to that argument we can't have it both ways

Granny with only one good hand can't reload quickly enough to protect her from her attackers.

The Mom with a child tucked under one arm can't reload at all while trying to protect her family from her attackers.

The young woman with her cell phone in her hand while on the line with 911 can't reload as she attempts to protect herself from her attackers.

Any and all of these can be used as examples.

 

[edwardware]

Arguing that a weapon, or feature of a weapon, shouldn't be banned because it isn't dangerous is utterly back*wards!

We bear arms because they are deadly weapons.