The NRA should use Chaicago and DC as examples of why you need large clip magazines. They bothe have strict gun laws.

Ummm maybe because the bad guys have 30 round magazines in their guns? You know, the ones who don´t give a fig about LAW?
Feinstein had no qualms about carrying a gun when SHE felt endangered..does she think she is a special class of royalty?

Answering #2......Yes, she does.

1. Sometimes you miss.
2. As the article points out, police files and combat after-action reports will tell you that a drugged-up assailant/enemy can be hit multiple times and keep coming.
3. It´s none of their damn business to tell me what I "need."

As a student of the Holocaust, there were train loads of unarmed citizens led to slaughter. PolPot had the same..

Outlaws have guns... With 30 rounds....

The odds are far higher that a 30-round magazine will be used by a criminal or by an unstable person than that they will be used by an upstanding individual to fight off such a perpetrator. It is a matter of where we choose, as a society, to draw the line.

A few years ago, many people put iron grates on their windows because they thought that would keep them safer from criminals in break-ins. What they forgot is that the iron grates made them more likely to die in fires when the iron grates kept them, and their children, from escaping. Yes, an iron grate is added protection...but it comes with a cost. In the case of 30-round magazines, yes, they can provide protection, but if they are in common supply, it is far easier for either criminals or mentally unstable people to get hold of them as well.

Nancy Lanza thought she was protecting herself by having the weapons that she had. Instead, those weapons killed her and many others. The author cites cases...but there are cases that make the opposing argument as well.

...in case you miss the first 29 times!

This is just a preliminary to disarming civilians.

I need a bunch of 30 round clips so that politicians understand there is a well armed populace ready to revolt if they take our freedoms. That is exactly why we have the 2nd amendment. It has nothing to do with hunting or home defense. Why do we sugar coat that???

You need a 30-round magazine and a whole lot more when it comes time to drive this tyrannical government out of power. That´s why.

Practically, so you don´t have to spend your time at the range reloading magazines. Go with a bunch on pre-loaded 30-rounders and you´re good to go. If you only have 10 round mags you have to either buy more of them (costly, since they cost nearly as much as 30-rounders), or waste time at the range reloading mags.

And don´t even get me started on zombies....

Nice fantasy #6, but the previous assault weapons ban (which included limiting mag capacity to 10) had ZERO effect on crime.

Over the last 20 years violent crime rates in this country have been cut in half, despite much more lax gun laws, concealed carry being allowed in nearly all states, and more overall gun sales where the norm is magazines greater than 10 rounds.

But go ahead and make things up if it makes you feel better.

Why does the government need millions of rounds of hollow point bullets?

Exactly, 30rd magazines are useful in exercising the rights protected by the 2nd Amendment. If facing civil disorder, riots, multiple assailants, or even a single assailant who is attacking with the advantage of cover, 30 rounds will certainly be useful.

Further, all those politicians who bemoan the evil of standard capacity magazines, would they also call for the armed guards that protect them and law enforcement to be encompassed by the same restrictions?

Back in your hole,troll.

One word...gangs.

It is not the business of someone who would deny me my birthright to decide what I "need". I will decide what I need. You decide what you need. That´s called freedom. I know its a foreign concept to many nowadays, but it seems perfectly natural to real Americans.

In the last election, the NRA endorsed Joe Manchin over conservative republican John Raese, who is a gun owner and strong second amendment supporter. Raese would also have been a more reliable vote with a conservative Supreme Court nominee than Manchin, who is going to do along with Obama. Sometimes I have to wonder how the NRA decides on who they are endorsing--and I´m an NRA Life Member.

Easy; failure to stop aggressive liberals, democrats and other Obama supporters and those cases when there are multiple aggressive liberals, democrats and other Obama supporters.

Newsflash: you are solely responsible for the safety of yourself and your children. This is a government that will not pursue obvious lawbreakers (armed New Black Panther Party members at the polling place, one of many examples) and that situation is getting worse.

Hey West Virginia, how are you liking your senator Joe Manchin now. I knew this man would turn on you guys.....it was just a matter of when.

Ding Ding Ding.....We have a winner and it´s #10

Must have when TSHTF.

Who´s to determine whether or not I ´need´ it!…..If I want it…….that should be good enough reason! What I choose to spend my money on should be nobody else´s business.

#6 needs to read #10.

When Feinstein and the rest of our glorious leaders give up their security guards and the police and FBI only have revolvers then maybe we can talk about not allowing automatic weapons. Until then we have a right to defend ourselves from predators and an immoral government

The lofty ignorant telling us what we need. The liberals deciding for the masses what is best for them. Hasn´t this been their arrogance all along, from how large our carbonated drinks should be (ala New York), where and when, or even if, we can smoke, and whether or not we can display the American flag?

These arrogant hacks are obsessed with micro-managing the lives of free Americans. It is time for them to understand that they serve US, not the other way around. Better yet, it is time for them to go!

If you are free, then it is because you WANT one.

And why does anybody need 200 cable TV channels? It´s called choice. It´s called freedom.

30 round magazines are easy to fabricate. If they were outlawed, thousands of illegal factories would spring up.

Why does anybody want to take away that choice from me?

Communists are always quick to judge what you need, all leading up to taking what you have.

Why do I need a 30 round magazine? Because they don´t make a 40!

We all want to live in a country where only the government has the guns.

/s

I just know that large capacity clips wouldn´t be available to gangs and druggies if they were banned. After all, didn´t DC´s and Chicago´s bans on handguns work beautifully? But the judges went and struck down those bans, so now Chicago has become a dangerous place since then. Maybe if we politely asked all the gangs and other illegal gun owners to give up their weapons they would? In the liberal´s world, anyway.

A 30-round magazine is essential when defending yourself from Zombies.

Several here have hit the nail on the head:

Whether we "need" anything or not is not the question. The 2nd amendment "shall not be infringed."

Does anyone need:
1. a house bigger than 1500 sq ft
2. a boat
3. a personal plane
4. more than 2 cars
5. a hot tub
6. paintings and expensive art
7. paying $10 for a movie ticket
8. $200 shoes
9. vacation trips outside of the USA
10. dining out

..and the list goes on.

We have these things because we are a free society (although less so every year).

Freedom is worth fighting for !

Because there are more than 30 Holders People in the feral gangs roaming our streets.

We need 30 round magazines for the same reason we need 17 oz soda`s.

15 in a Glock is not high capacity
30 rounds in a .223 is not high capacity

"High Capacity" is having a Gurkha armorer beside you feeding you belts of .50 ammunition so you can continuously fire until the barrel glows.

That´s high capacity.

Because the purpose of the Second Amendment was NOT for hunting, sport, self protection from the criminal element - it was for one purpose only. Which is why this government wants it to go away.

Why does anyone need a car capable of going 140 mph? And (nuts with) cars kill a lot more school children than do (nuts with) guns.

Ignore #6. Seminar poster.

Congress and their stupidity!!Let them go about like normal people without security guards and see what their "singing" will be. Who are they scared of? Their constituents, who put them in their position? Given what these incompetent bums are doing in DC, they should be scared of their own shadows!!

Do I have to ´spalin everything to you?

"Why Does Anybody Need
a 30-Round Magazine?"
Because the Sporting-Goods Store was out of 40 Round ones.

Excuse second post. democrats priority is amnesty. Gun control on back burner. Amnesty ensures GOP never wins another national election. When GOP is out of business radical gun grab to be carried out.

I don´t need a 30 round magazine to protect myself from criminals. I need one to protect myself from Diane Feinstein.

Once again, the liberals are taking over the debate and steering it toward the idiot land- What possible bearing on the issue does ammunition capacity have? A man with a single shot derringer can kill an innocent person- a man with a sword, or baseball bat can murder as well until he/she gets exhausted! What difference if the guy has three or twenty ten round magazines or a single 30 round mag? For a trained shooter,reloading a magazine takes lass time than it does to aim and pull the trigger!

This article should be mandatory reading for congress critters. It´s about time that someone calls out the elephant in the room... why the right to bear arms exists.

It´s tyranny, stupid!

Because I want them!

You notice the argument centers around ´need´. False premise and not worthy of response, other than the fact, need has nothing to do with the right to bear arms.

It´s called the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of "Needs".

As #4 and others say, the primary reason is because in real-life situations you may MISS entirely or miss anything vital, the perps may be moving, you may be injured, lighting may be bad, a firefight may go on for minutes or longer, etc.

May I point out that the design use of assault weapons is not to shoot six year olds in a classroom.

Because the Bad Guys are using them!

Link to article:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/why_does_anybody_need_a_30-round_magazine.html

Link to contact Senator Joe Manchin:

http://manchin.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact-form

Link to contact Senator Feinstein:

https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/e-mail-me

One must remember that Mexico has VERY tough gun control laws. How is that working out for them?

Answer: Over 15,000 people killed per year by the drug cartels alone.

Way to circular firing squad, #15. If #6 is a troll, then so am I. There may be good answers, but he or she brought up some valid points. Not everyone who occasionally veers from the party line is a subhuman and probably vote pretty much the same way you do.

And p.s. - what is a seminar poster? Does that mean their questions foster a seminar-type atmosphere where people actually learn something rather than constant echo chamber? Because the whole country needs to learn the answer to these questions - might as well start here. #11 was a good answer, I thought...

Why does any journalist need anything electronic to enjoy their 1st amendment right?
Why can´t they use the simple printing press as Ben Franklin did?

/s off/

It has nothing to do with need. It is part of the 2nd Amendment.

As #61 says, journalists don´t need electronic media to exercise their 1st Amendment rights.

People don´t need a lot of things. That doesn´t mean that that we should allow the nanny state to control our lives and what we do.

Anyone else happen to see Allisyn Camerota this morning on Fox and Fools? This anorexic commie leaped into the discussion on guns and was even worse than she usually is...could barely contain herself as she pretended to be part of a Q and A staged to frame her pro"get the guns" stance. She got so wound up she nearly spit on her herself. Kilmeade and Doocy clearly have their marching orders and served as stooges. There is no longer a difference between the networks, CNN and FOX. It´s down to degrees of bad and all are worthy of being turned off permanently. Seeing Doocy and Kilmeade knee bending to the hateful and caustic democrat"Allie" was revolting. That Camerota is a demonRAT is no surprise—what´s surprising is how open and brazen she has become and one can only assume that is with Ailes´/FOX blessing.

Well, somebody ought to address the real issue, so I guess that´s me.

The 2nd Amendment does not say "the right of the people to keep and bear such arms as their betters think they should...."

Never forget: the 2nd grants nothing. It recognizes an inalienable right to armed self-defense that is of even higher-provenance than the Constitution itself, and is therefore beyond the reach of the gov´t established by that Constitution.

Don´t get lost, don´t go off-track, by accepting the debate terms the Left lays down. Got it?

An invalid premise will often be challenged out here. Nothing personal.

As for me, there are certain areas where I will not permit "society" (translation: liberals) to "draw my lines" for me. Unfortunately, I´m stuck with this one in California. Don´t let it happen to you.

It is called the Bill of Rights not the Bill of Needs!

Short answer...because belt fed weapons are not available.

If they are going to ignore the 2nd amendment and get rid of those magazines, then next they will ignore the 1st and get rid of a bunch of other magazines.

Give libs an inch, and they´ll take a mile. So 30 is bad? What is OK? 10? 6? Barney Fife´s one?

Calling all Liberals with NO appreciable brain waves (especially ones masquerading as members of Congress)...BECAUSE!!! And then comes the 2nd Amendment!

It is simple.
Because a belt-fed machine gun is too hard to get.
Why does any Member of Congress need $200,000 a year?
Can´t they live off their lobbyists?
Why does Zippy need $400,000 a year? All his expenses are paid. By us.
And where are those hollow-point rounds for the Feddies?
Are they afraid of something?
Besides, David Gregory does NOT want guns in schools. Except for the school where he sends his children, which is an armed camp. (Sidwell Friends School)
Guns for me, but not for thee, is the liberal cry.
A skilled sniper, who practices every day, may make every shot count.
The occasional gun user, on the other hand, misses a lot (but then so do the New York City Police).
There are disadvantages to large magazines, of course. The spring travel is such that the last few rounds may jam.
Oh, well.

Good essay. I also took the 4 Day Defensive Handgun course. There are so many variables involved in a lethal force situation, and FrontSight makes you think about all of them. I took the course because I do own firearms and I wanted to be sure that I was responsible enough to use them.
But the left will never stop trying to disarm us. You can quote facts, figures, statistics to them, and they will stick their fingers in their ears, because they don´t want to hear any logic.
It´s gotten to the tipping point, and we have got to stop apologizing about who we are as Americans and 2nd amendment supporters.
NO MORE COMPROMISES.

As one who has my concealed carry license (and carries all the time), I do carry a handgun that has 17 rounds in the magazine (with another magazine in reserve). Why? Because I am not a police officer and this isn´t Hollywood. If I were to be in a situation with more than one perps, the odds are high that I will need every available option if I make the choice to engage. 17 rounds is not a lot when you think that half of those could miss their target (in a situation where people are moving and firing). I think it is the height of arrogance for Washington, D.C. pols and writers to limit my freedom to protect myself.