10 Rounds Are Good – Unless Your Attacker Has 15

10 Round vs 15 Round Magazines
10 Round vs 15 Round Magazines
AmmoLand Gun News
AmmoLand Gun News

Washington DC – -(Ammoland.com)- As gun grabbers continue to push for a ban on magazines that hold more 10 rounds, one question begs to be answered…

What are law abiding citizens with 10 rounds to do when attacked by criminals with 15, 20, or even 30 rounds?

  • Are they to lie down and say uncle?
  • Are they to hand over their wallet and their car keys and beg for mercy?

This is not hyperbole. Obama traveled to Minneapolis on Monday to say magazines that hold more than 10 rounds ought to be banned. He stood in front of row after row of police officers and described magazines that hold more than 10 rounds as “weapons of war.”

But he did not bother explaining how law abiding citizens with only 10 rounds are to survive in a 30 round world.

Obama, and those who think like him, live a theoretical existence where 10 rounds looks sufficient on paper. Therefore, they presume it must be good in reality. However, in the real world, the law abiding citizen who is limited to 10 rounds is at least 5 rounds light, and may actually be 15 rounds behind before gunfire is even exchanged.

Think about it this way–in the hands of a law abiding citizen, a magazine of any capacity is a defensive tool. And because Obama's ban will only affect law abiding citizens, any limitation he achieves will be a limitation on the ability of law abiding citizens to defend themselves, period.

AWR Hawkins writes for all the BIG sites, for Pajamas Media, for RedCounty.com, for Townhall.com and now AmmoLand Shooting Sports News.

His southern drawl is frequently heard discussing his take on current events on radio shows like America's Morning News, the G. Gordon Liddy Show, the Ken Pittman Show, and the NRA's Cam & Company, among others. He was a Visiting Fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal (summer 2010), and he holds a PhD in military history from Texas Tech University.

If you have questions or comments, email him at [email protected] You can find him on facebook at www.facebook.com/awr.hawkins.

  • 11 thoughts on “10 Rounds Are Good – Unless Your Attacker Has 15

    1. One of the better arguments for high capacity magazines would be the Newhall Massacre, and the 1986 FBI Miami shootout. These shootings are well documented on Wikipedia so I need not elaborate except to say that both of these shootings were perpetrated by men who had no regard for human life.
      In total 2 FBI Agents and 4 CHP Officers lost their lives and when you get down to the raw facts it points to the agents and officers facing criminals who had superior fire power and the willingness to kill.
      Make the first round count is a fine sentiment but in a firefight with a criminal element shooting at you the world as you know it becomes a totally different reality; one that, unless you have trained for, you will find extremely difficult, if not impossible, to deal with. Even then sometimes all the training is forgotten when the first round is fired.
      The Second Amendment gives us our rights, but with rights comes responsibility.
      Seek out sanctioned professional training whenever and wherever you legally can. Paper targets don’t shoot back. Criminals do and to some criminals you are nothing more than an annoying fly on the wall, and unless you have a police officer living next door you are pretty much on your own.

    2. There are many cases where a so called “high capacity” magazine was Not enough to stop One person.
      As a police firearms instructor, there is (one of many) case that the officer was attacked in a traffic stop. The criminal was armed and after he started shooting at the officer, the officer began shooting back. The officer hit the guy 12 out of 16 rounds, but the guy continued and when the officer fired his last round, the guy jumped on him before he could reload. During the now hand to hand fight, the guy was delivering hard punches to the officer, who drew his back up gun and shot him 6 more times, ending the attack and killing the criminal. The last 2 rounds were contact wounds to the neck, and the officer had a ban concussion from being hit in the head.
      Everyone should have the best chance of beating a violent criminal, and this officer admitts that he almost lost, and he is well trained.
      Obama will try to disarm the public, then try to disarm the police, so we are all in the same boat. Obama and the other Political Elite must be fought, and they Must lose.
      The Political Elite want to disarm us, while they own and carry guns, and if they don’t exempt themselves from the law like they always do, they will just ignore the law.

    3. Give a mouse a crumb, and he’s going to want a cookie, then he’s going to want a glass of milk…As the old saying goes. Any free-thinking American should be able to see what’s happening here, pro-2nd or not. We give them an inch in this and it’s the beginning of the end. Look at the 4th Amendment, now it’s fine to be executed by the Gov’t because you clearly are senior leadership in Al Qaeda, but they’ll never have to prove that in any court of law. Anyway, I digress.

    4. “What are law abiding citizens with 10 rounds to do when attacked by criminals with 15, 20, or even 30 rounds?”

      Shoot better than a criminal.

    5. “What are law abiding citizens with 10 rounds to do when attacked by criminals with 15, 20, or even 30 rounds?”

      Make the first one count…that’s what – wouldn’t matter then if they had five to your one.

    6. Don’t you see. When we turn in our high capacity magazines the criminals will be in that same line to hand theirs in. Obama said so himself. And they will promise that if there are 2 of them with 10 rds. each, and one of you with 10 rounds, they will be gentlemen and only one of them will attack you. Obama said so and you know you can take that to the bank. It’s good towards paying for your funeral, too! It just don’t get no better than this.

    7. I wonder if any of those police officers felt a little bit embarrassed or hypocritical as they stood there with their own high-capacity magazines that they know damn well can be critical in a self-defense situation? Or did they feel the least bit put out that Obama referred to their carry rigs “weapons of war” with “no legitimate use” that “do not belong on our streets”?
      Does Obama realize the slight he is delivering to the police of this nation? Probably not, but then again, he wouldn’t care.

    8. What do you do when a gang of 4 or 5 armed thugs are doing a home invasion? 10 rounds is an invitation to disastor. Why shouldn’t law abiding citizens be able to have any weapons of war they want. What about collectors of WWII weapons?

    9. Surely his Secret Service detail can remove the larger magazines from use as well. After all, 10 rounds is adequate: Obama said so himself. And why would the Secret Service need the weapons of war? Their job is only to protect him; not fight WW3.

      This argument ought to be extended to the police as well. After all, they don’t need weapons of war either, do they? Are they planning on warring on us? I would certainly hope not.

    Leave a Comment 11 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *