The reloading pause fallacy

[Glenn E. Meyer]

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.

[okie john]

I suspect that most of the folks who believe that a reloading pause will save lives think that the shooter is only using one mag, which he’ll have to drop and re-stuff by hand. I really don’t think they understand the nature of the problem.


Okie John

[LSP552]

I doubt many think a mag ban will save lives. It’s just a gun control measure with good marketing and is an incremental step that the “do something” crowd thinks they can get instead of just coming out and saying no one except the police should own a handgun.

It about putting the frog in the pot before you turn on the burner.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

That's mixed. I'm sure some naive folks think that but the more sophisticated ones are adapting the suggest strategy.

A good example of the changing tactics is with rifles. Note that the usage of 'assault rifles' is fading for military style semi auto or the like. After each incident where an AR was used, the media would say an assault rifle. The gun world would respond with pedantic vigor that it isn't an assault rifle as it is not a fully auto in the style of the Sturmgeshundeintboomerbanger. The rest of the public yawned at that. It was a useless response.

Surprised no one has suggested banning carrying of extra mags as 5 is enough.

[Bergeron]

If you're a physically fully developed adult, having any kind of weapon and the motivation to use it puts you at huge advantage against the population at large, particularly if they don't have an ability to carry personal firearms.

Some Chinese info on stabbings, for instance:

https://newrepublic.com/article/1519...hool-stabbings

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School...10%E2%80%9312)

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...des-180949953/

Substituing Winchester 1894s or Ruger No. 1s into the hands of past killer's hands would change most outcomes barely at all, while putting holstered Glock 19s into the waistlines of even a small fraction of the victims would produce hugely positive changes in outcomes. The enemies of the 2A traffic in fear and disinformation, but we already know that.

[willie]

The other side will invariably say that 20 round magazines are neither needed nor legal for hunting use. Be prepared to explain why a 10 round magazine is not adequate for home defense or concealed carry. When the high correlation value is given between mass shootings and high capacity magazines and between these shootings and AR's, be prepared to defend your position without saying the need to protect against government tyranny. Why? Because you would be shooting cops.

We will have more mass shootings; public opinion is not on our side; we must have arguments that go beyond what we preach to each other; and we must have good lobbyists. Not seen before is the anti gun movements at the state level. Their momentum will transfer to anti gun efforts in Congress. As these movements continue, social acceptance of guns decreases.

[GJM]

I do not favor magazine bans, but I would be careful with this argument. Watching people at a USPSA match reload a PCC shows a wide range of proficiency reloading, and for every Max Leograndis, there are a bunch of less skilled carbine shooters looking like monkeys humping a football when trying to reload a long gun on the clock. If I was taking on a bad guy with a carbine, I would hope he had to reload often, not just for the obvious reason, but because of the probability of him inducing a stoppage.

[HopetonBrown]

The shooting of Gabby Giffords was cited in a news article I read recently as a reason for capacity limits. The killer fumbled his reload and was struck with a folding chair and tackled when he dropped his spare magazine.

[whomever]

"When the high correlation value is given between mass shootings and high capacity magazines..."

That's certainly something that's said a lot, but it's a little weak when you look deeper. Gary Kleck did a deep dive. Here's a snippet from the abstract:

"News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than
six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were known to have been used,
occurring in the United States in 1994–2013, were examined. There was only one
incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when
he tried to reload."

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf...25107116674926

As with any research, you can find things to quibble about, but it's a more realistic analysis than most.

Moreover, let's imagine we have the perfect (but unarmed) defender - one who is young, fit, trained in empty handed skills, has the right mindset, and happens to be within 21 feet (or whatever you think 'jump the gunman while reloading' range is) when the shooting starts. That defender has three choices:

A)Run like heck.
B)Immediately attack without waiting for a mag change.
C)Hang out near the shooter, waiting for a mag change.

Option 'C' seems like a good way to get shot while biding your time waiting for the mag change. It's not that things could never work out - maybe our hypothetical defender is in good cover, but without a clear escape route, and is thus nearby at just the right moment. But 'is theoretically possible' is a far cry from likely.

And it cuts both ways. Suppose our reasonably skilled armed defender is minding his business at the mall when a whacko with an AK starts shooting 75 yards away. Our defender has a clear shot and a good backstop. Do we want that defender to have a 7 round or 17 round magazine? That's not going to be common either, but it's also not impossible.


As an aside, Judge Benitez makes a pretty strong case for normal magazines in the recent Duncan v. Becerra decision. As judicial decisions tend to be, it's long but very worth reading:

http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/...ntiffs-MSJ.pdf

[olstyn]

Watching people at a USPSA match reload a PCC shows a wide range of proficiency reloading

Reloading a carbine is definitely less intuitive/instinctive than reloading a pistol, but I can't imagine it takes a giant amount of practice to at least gain basic proficiency. Since PCC shooters really only ever have to reload when the course of fire specifies it, they don't get anywhere near as many "under stress" reps as pistol shooters in the same competitions, and that's probably why a significant portion of them look clumsy. I feel like for most, reloading a carbine on the clock is like shooting a pistol weak hand; it's something done rarely, if at all. If people bothered to practice it, I don't think you'd see anywhere near as many clumsy-looking reloads.