Top Categories

Why Do You Need High Capacity Magazines?

Following up on our Why Do You Need an Assault Rifle post, today we discuss high capacity magazines. Why do you need them?

First off, let’s make sure we’re all on the same page. Most gun control legislation currently being debated wants to, among other things, limit magazine capacity at 10 rounds. To people who aren’t familiar with firearms and their use in self-defense, 10 rounds often sounds like a lot. To these people, high capacity means anything more than this seemingly arbitrary 10 round limit, when in fact, the “high capacity” label is erroneous.

For example, I carry a Glock 19, which is a 9mm handgun with a standard capacity of 15 rounds. That is, the magazines that come standard with the gun each hold 15 rounds (unless you live in a neutered state). They are not high capacity magazines. A high capacity magazine for a Glock 19 would be a 33 round magazine, which isn’t very practical for day-to-day concealed carry, but makes for a good time at the range (for the uninitiated, less reloading = more fun).

Second, it’s again important to point out that need is both irrelevant and relative. Irrelevant because the Second Amendment says nothing about having to justify a need, and relative because everyone classifies a need differently.


I think this discussion is important because it not only pertains to the current gun control debate, but it also pertains to concealed carry and home defense. The question can be asked this way – is a revolver (which hold 5 or 6 rounds typically) good enough for concealed carry and/or self-defense?

To better illustrate the points I’ll make, watch this short video about a recent home invasion involving a woman who defends herself and her children with a .38 revolver.

Video Illustration



If you watched the video, you should already see where I’m going with this. This woman is not only a hero, but she’s also lucky. She shot the guy 6 times, emptying her gun, and that was only enough to psychologically stop him. This distinction is important: her attacker lost his will to fight, not his ability to fight, as is evidenced by the fact that he was able to get up and run away.

Had he chosen to continue the attack, she and her children might not be alive today.
Had there been multiple attackers, she and her children might not be alive today.
Had she missed, she and her children might not be alive today.

These are just some of the reasons for “high capacity” magazines. To those of you who carry a gun for self-defense, or have a gun for home defense, the above story should also illustrate some points to you about carrying a reload and what types of guns you should choose. Perhaps a future post.

The bottom line is this: limiting magazine capacity to 10 rounds limits my ability to effectively defend myself and my family.


17 Responses to Why Do You Need High Capacity Magazines?

  1. tommaerling January 9, 2013 at 3:36 pm #

    Sad you have to do all that explaining, but awesome, spot on job. Now if only the anti-s were able to comprehend.

  2. ORGO (@orgogroup) January 9, 2013 at 3:36 pm #

    Many Police officers carry three loaded magazines – one in the gun and two on the belt, They obviously know how dangerous it can be confronting one or more assailants.

  3. Rob G January 9, 2013 at 5:02 pm #

    I need them because I’m deathly afraid of hearing the sound of “click” from my own gun.

  4. Frank Sharpe January 9, 2013 at 5:10 pm #

    I have the magazines of my choice because I’m a free man – the end.

    • Brandon January 9, 2013 at 6:12 pm #

      Well said.

  5. Allan January 9, 2013 at 6:52 pm #

    Because it’s the “Bill Of Rights” not the bill of “needs”

  6. Obscura January 9, 2013 at 7:00 pm #

    Limiting magazine capacity is an infringement on our rights.

    The founding fathers were ass kicking veterans who wanted to insure that we remained armed to the teeth. If Washington or Jefferson were invited to the Piers Morgan show, it would end with fisticuffs or a duel.

  7. Dillo Dynamics January 9, 2013 at 9:07 pm #

    Well said. It’s about being able to have the most effective tools to defend yourself with.

  8. Geronimo January 10, 2013 at 7:15 pm #

    I need a high capacity magazine because:
    1. Deer are not mentioned in the second amendment, and they are not criminals. 2. Criminals have them. 3. Because i or my liberal neighbors may come under attack by numerous criminals and I WILL need them for their defense as well as mine .

  9. TobiasMp3 January 10, 2013 at 10:43 pm #

    Who the hell are you people defending yourself against. Christ, you all sound like bunch of trigger happy fools. If you’ve got people breaking into your homes every day, you need better police not more guns.
    If you really want to stop some mother f&$@3r from breaking into your home start off with better locks and have a shot gun ready. Are you people that Scared? And if so, scared of who? Some of you must live in a really shitty neighborhood and/or have some shady friends or relatives. Better off using a shotgun. PUMP Action!!! That way you won’t have grandma killing the baby next door while trying to kill an intruder.
    SURE IS A SAD WORLD YOU (we) LIVE IN IF YOU BELIEVE YOU (we) NEED TO CARRY A GUN ANYWHERE (but camping)-I allways take one when I’m camping. (No walls or locks on a tent).
    Even if it’s your right to carry doesn’t mean limits shouldn’t be placed on usage. You have a right to a speedy trial (5th) and a jury of your peers (7th) as well as the right not to testify against yourself (5th) as well as others. Does that mean we should go out and test these rights because we have been afforded them?
    If you’ve got gray hair? No fricken wonder! If you don’t, you will soon! Peace out. Love thy neighbor! Especially if she’s hot.
    I hate guns! Fun at the range but I’ve seen to many deaths from there use. From accidents to suicides. I still have night-mares from some of them. I really don’t mind responsible ownership. Sorry for my rant. I like to believe people are fundamentally GOOD, that’s all. Practice Gun Safety. NEVER POINT AN EMPTY GUN AT ANYBODY. I’ve seen more empty guns kill people then I care to remember.

    • Brandon January 11, 2013 at 6:25 am #

      You’re a sad, hypocritical fool…

    • Fletch January 12, 2013 at 5:20 pm #

      You have NEVER seen an EMPTY gun kill anyone, unless you are talking about pistol whipping someone to death… in which case you sir live in a much worse neighborhood than I.
      “There is no such thing as an ‘accidental’ discharge.”

  10. JS January 12, 2013 at 10:41 am #

    Gun Deaths Reduction Act – Step One

    No haggling over gun possession/ design*.. or 2nd Amendment**.

    Simply Outlaw Possession of any magazine/ clip (or other device) capable of feeding more than 10 bullets; (similar to silencer/ suppressor ban).

    30 Days to turn in or destroy, after which federal/ felony; $10,000 fine, prison time, loss of gun ownership right.


    1. 40% to 75% fewer bullets fired per incident.. and numerous ‘reload breaks’ (Tucson)

    2. Hundreds to thousands fewer gun deaths, injuries annually.

    3. Over $1/2 Billion less cost to economy from gunshot deaths each year.

    * Semi-automatic hunting rifles, pistols and assault carbines have the same RPM (rounds per minute) firing rate if fed from high-capacity magazine; all are semi-automatic, auto-loading weapons. Auto feed drums of 6-50 rounds for shotguns also have no functional purpose other than mass-murder.

    ** 2nd Amendment permits individuals to possess a muzzle-loaded, single-shot, flintlock fired weapon. Revolvers didn’t even exist until 44 years after the amendment; magazine/ clips, 100 years later.

    • Brandon January 12, 2013 at 10:46 am #

      LOL…you don’t actually believe that nonsense do you? Surely not…

    • Fletch January 12, 2013 at 5:22 pm #

      LOL Someone didn’t watch the video….

    • aj January 14, 2013 at 2:22 pm #

      Mexico has strict gun laws and they haven’t seen the “results” that you claim.
      The 1st amendment permits freedom of speech on TV or the internet even though TV or the internet didn’t exist until after the amendment. Restricting the right to bear arms to flintlocks based on similar logic is silly.
      There are sound reasons for high capacity magazines for self defense. There are a number of situations where the response from law enforcement would likely be too slow to ensure the my safety. Natural disasters, riots, civil unrest are possible or I may just live in a rural area where response takes time.
      There is no way to know how many attackers someone may have to defend yourself, your family or your neighborhood from until help arrives.
      Another reason is purely intimidation. Bad guys are much less likely to attack what appears to be a well defended site.
      Also, outlawing possession of any magazine/ clip (or other device) capable of feeding more than 10 bullets seems seriously restrictive considering many weapons have STANDARD magazines that hold 15 and higher capacity of 33+.

  11. Knight January 15, 2013 at 9:08 pm #

    Better police? I have full faith and confidence in the ability of police to RESPOND to an incident that has been reported to or witnessed by them. I do not have confidence that they will be right there with me when the critical need arises. After all if I had an officer standing next to me every minute of the day I doubt I would ever need their service. Their presence is called deterrence.
    Locks? Locks keep honest people honest, they don’t keep a determined person/criminal out, maybe slow them down some depending, but generally speaking the deadbolt you have on your door doesn’t keep people out who really want to come in, just ask the police who serve no knock warrants. You my friend are your own first line of defense / deterrence from the would be assailant that wishes to do you or yours harm.
    I respect the fact you “hate” guns and further respect your right not to own or carry them. If the government wanted to force you to buy one and carry it, I would speak just as loudly that it is your right not to own or carry one. I however, expect the same respect in return; it is my right to own and carry; further it is my right to decide what is necessary for me in any given circumstance.
    As far as seeing to many deaths from their (GUNS) use, I say if we as a people are truly interested in preventing deaths lets start with those things that kill the most people and work our way down to firearms. 2010 Firearms deaths from all events – 4.7 for every 100,000 (thats four and seven tenths), 2010 Vehicle deaths from all events – 46 for every 100,000. that is fourty-six not 4.6. I have seen to many deaths from vehicle incidents, some still give me nightmares. I really don’t mind responsible ownership of vehicles as long as people know how to drive safely and obey the laws. I guess it is just the people who speed, drive recklessly, drunk, high, etc. If only people would obey the laws.
    Wake up folks, you are being manipulated through your emotions. Where our children are concerned we get emotional and it makes it very easy for people to take advantage of us in the name of safety for our kids. The younger they are the more emotional we become.