Need a little help with hi-cap mag argument

[Ronin13]

Okay, so yesterday I got into a debate with the old man about guns, and he came in today and wanted to chat more about it. And he kinda stumped me, because outside of "because" I couldn't really come up with anything good for it. He said: "What is the purpose of a high capacity (50+ rounds) magazine? Outside of killing a lot of people without reloading what is the purpose?" He then went on to say "What if the gun owners were to compromise, throw everyone a carrot and say 'okay, we'll allow a law that restricts 50+ round magazines and makes them illegal, and that's all.'" Of course on this I said if you compromise on one thing they'll try to get you to compromise on everything, like that whole saying "If you give a mouse a cookie... he's gonna ask for a glass of milk." The Brady Bunch has a no retreat, no surrender policy on taking our guns away.

So, what is a good argument, a solid, rational, logical argument on hi-cap mags (again talking 50+)? I for one am for them, but I can't come up with a good argument supporting it, and I could use some help.
Thanks!

[Great-Kazoo]

Did you fire the liberal secretary yet? Regarding the capacity of magazines, since they are not illegal, there should be no issue owning them.
Would your father "compromise" with clients who only want to pay X amount for ins? Of course not. Remind him with the new health care law this is one of the "slippery slope" thing that could happen to him and the ins industry.
What does your dad drive? Does he need a truck as a hybrid can do the same thing, etc etc etc.
STOP arguing with your dad. Take him shooting. Bring the mags, BUT load each of them to no more than 5-10 tops. See how he likes reloading every 5 minutes.

[DFBrews]

Zombies.

Ask him wetter there should be a governer on cars that limit it to the speed limit only. Or a horse power limit. How about a square foot limit on the size of a home or the amount of land that you can own.

[HBARleatherneck]

delete

[Mazin]

Shooting sports.

[cofi]

Shooting sports.

this is the only decent argument ive seen

[Rucker61]

If the assumption is that high capacity magazines are only for killing lots of people, are reduced capacity magazines any less dangerous? How many people should we allow killers to shoot at one time before it's the magazine's fault and not the shooter's?

[funkymonkey1111]

this isn't russia--you aren't limited to what you need here--it's what you want--and that's damn good enough for me.

[asmo]

So would belts containing 300 rounds be okay but magazines containing +50 rounds not be okay? Makes sense to me.

[dwalker460]

reloading a magazine is not a particularly effective way of stopping people from shooting people. However, reload enough 30-rounders at a day on the range and see how much you start liekling the idea of 100round mags.

Also, hi-cap mags can be a real PITA, they are heavy, take forever to reload, and can be more prone to feed issues, which I guess could be considered a good thing.

How about just responding that if someone is shooting at you, who cares how big a mag he has, shoot back first and check mag size later?