r4nd0m 4 Posted November 16, 2016 Didn't see this posted anywhere else so I figured I'd post it. If it is, mods feel free to take this down. This state is out of control. What are they trying to accomplish? NEWSFLASH, criminals don't obey the laws. I wish I could get up and leave this state, unfortunately I am stuck. http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/11/nj_ammo_sales_still_have_loopholes_commission_says.html#comments Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Old Glock guy 1,125 Posted November 16, 2016 Yet another example of ignorant thinking by liberal politicians. How many rounds would someone bent on destruction need, maybe a few hundred at most? 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted November 16, 2016 They are not ignorant, don't make that mistake, they know exactly what they are doing. 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alex V 99 Posted November 16, 2016 Oooooooof coarse they did. Is anyone surprised? Man this state is effed. I guess the Hitlary ammo buy panic is just going to turn into the NJ Sucks panic. Oh well, looks like I'll keep ordering more. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
revenger 472 Posted November 17, 2016 I wish I got a picture of the postman trying to carry my order from my bullet supplier to my front door the other day, I guess they don't keep hand trucks in the little mail trucks. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jackandjill 683 Posted November 17, 2016 I read couple of pages and see the usual theme. Original: "Prior to this investigation, New Jersey had among the strongest gun control laws in the nation but no restrictions on the sale of most firearms ammunition. " Translation: We passed bunch of gun control laws, but the crime continued. ---------- Original: "It seemed contradictory that access to guns was severely restricted yet effective limits on obtaining the bullets – the projectiles that make firearms deadly – were completely absent. " Translation: We told everyone that a gun is deadly. But looks like its actually "projectiles". Question: Does it mean we can all now carry guns on the street without the "projectiles" ? ---------- Original: "In response to the Commission’s findings and recommendations, legislation was enacted in 2008 which permitted the legal sale of ammunition only to only individuals with State-issued firearms credentials proving gun ownership or official paperwork demonstrating intent to purchase a firearm.1 Commission investigators recently tested that law, however, and found that while it does make it more difficult for anyone not a gun owner to legally obtain bullets, the measure does not nearly go far enough to ensure that ammunition sales are free from abuse. " Translation: So we made even more laws restricting sale of ammunition, but for reasons beyond our comprehension, criminals are still roaming the streets. --------- Original: "Gun violence is a persistent problem. ....Statewide, murder by gunfire increased by 12 percent in 2016, according to an analysis of New Jersey State Police data. Those statistics are far higher in areas where gangs and drug distribution activities are prevalent. " Translation: There is a problem. We made laws. We made more laws. Still, doesnt seem to be working. So .... lets make more laws. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cereza 106 Posted November 17, 2016 ETA: A better way of putting it… related discussion: http://www.njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/83089-s2496-nj-senator-seeks-photos-on-firearm-ids/ The Senate bill is nothing though. Read A1738: http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2016/Bills/A2000/1738_I1.PDF They are proposing LOTS of changes to the current statutes, naturally including technology not in place, and of course with no discussion of how to pay for their new requirements: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted November 17, 2016 They are not ignorant, don't make that mistake, they know exactly what they are doing. Precisely. Always remember to keep their end game in mind.... "Confiscate...Confiscate....Confiscate" 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bhunted 887 Posted November 17, 2016 [emoji867][emoji867][emoji867][emoji867][emoji867][emoji867][emoji867][emoji867] Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Emortal 6 Posted November 17, 2016 Stock up while you can Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
myhatinthering 462 Posted November 17, 2016 won't pass amazing that states get away with this as sc has already codified that ammo is included in shall not be infringed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silence Dogood 468 Posted November 17, 2016 So let me see if I have this straight; It is racist to require photo ID for voting since minorities do not generally have photo IDs - but - It is perfectly fine to required photo IDs for ammunition purchases. OK, yeah, I think we all 'get' that one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silence Dogood 468 Posted November 17, 2016 The legislation is devious because it requires EMBEDDED information on the FPID that likely cannot be read by internet ammo sales outlets. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted November 17, 2016 This will most likely only hurt nj business. The 4 year re liscense is more dubious. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Howard 538 Posted November 17, 2016 It is racist to require an ID to exercise a right, well that is what Democrats claim when they don't want ID for voting and the 2nd Amendment is a similar right. Drain the swamp!!!! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,569 Posted November 17, 2016 What would a photo on a FPID actually do? If you currently can buy ammo, then hand it to someone without a FPID, nothing changes with a photo. Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted November 17, 2016 Did anybody catch the cover page on the actual report? "Armed and dangerous ten years later"? Give me a break! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SmittyMHS 603 Posted November 17, 2016 It is racist to require an ID to exercise a right, well that is what Democrats claim when they don't want ID for voting and the 2nd Amendment is a similar right. Drain the swamp!!!! What he said! We should use that as a mantra. Anyone (politician or not) that's for a photo FID should be labeled as a racist. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJM981 924 Posted November 17, 2016 How about a carry permit with a photograph? I can then use that to buy ammo. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YankeeSC 1,204 Posted November 17, 2016 I think the current MO is to just label anyone or anything you don't agree with as racist. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sota 1,191 Posted November 17, 2016 as long as SGammo and other online vendors don't care to ask for any forms of ID. I had that fight with a vendor not too long ago, demanding a copy of my FID and DL for shotgun ammo. I told them to piss off. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bzer1 15 Posted November 17, 2016 Drain the swamp!!!! Nothing will change until we figure out how to stop the stupid in this state. As long as people keep electing far left radicals we'll always be behind the 8 ball. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alex V 99 Posted November 18, 2016 The only hope for this state is a stacked SCOTUS and lots and lots of lawsuits. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted November 18, 2016 The only hope for this state is a stacked SCOTUS and lots and lots of lawsuits.Now my question is who to back/fund/donate. I've heard so much crap about every group. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hairless_Ape 76 Posted November 18, 2016 They've been emboldened by what happened in CA on election night. The only thing that surprises me about this is that they aren't trying to add even greater restrictions on ammo sales. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indianajonze 379 Posted November 18, 2016 Nothing will change until we figure out how to stop the stupid in this state. As long as people keep electing far left radicals we'll always be behind the 8 ball. have to say even i'm losing hope of this ever happening. reasons: 1) i really thought nj had a better than fair shot of voting trump. didn't happen. 2) mayor of passaic (democrat of course) going to prison for bribery. ok, you say, shit happens. then you read that this is the 2nd consecutive dem mayor of passaic to go to prison, and the THIRD OUT OF THE LAST FOUR mayors of passaic (all dem) to go to prison. these ppl don't care about anything. it's democrat all the way, everything else be damned Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indianajonze 379 Posted November 18, 2016 They've been emboldened by what happened in CA on election night. The only thing that surprises me about this is that they aren't trying to add even greater restrictions on ammo sales. that state is a bad example. it is radically left (alt left, heh) and every one of the passed laws are patently unconstitutional and unenforceable. you cannot put the bill of rights to a vote... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sota 1,191 Posted November 18, 2016 that state is a bad example. it is radically left (alt left, heh) and every one of the passed laws are patently unconstitutional and unenforceable. you cannot put the bill of rights to a vote... Actually, you can, if the populace decides to do so. California has decided to Island themselves. Short of cutting them off from services with the rest of the Nation, what methods do you want to use to force their compliance? If the People of California choose to act outside the bounds of our Republic and its laws, how will you force them back in line? Should they be forced back in line? Or perhaps they should be cut off? See that's the thing... if the wolves decide to eat the sheep, and the sheep either aren't armed or refuse to shoot/kill the occasional wolf to remind it that there's supposed to be an uneasy detente, then the wolves will just run roughshod over the sheep without care or concern. 4 Boxes: Soap box, Ballot box, Jury box, Cartridge box. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJM981 924 Posted November 18, 2016 Actually, you can, if the populace decides to do so. California has decided to Island themselves. Short of cutting them off from services with the rest of the Nation, what methods do you want to use to force their compliance? If the People of California choose to act outside the bounds of our Republic and its laws, how will you force them back in line? Should they be forced back in line? Or perhaps they should be cut off? See that's the thing... if the wolves decide to eat the sheep, and the sheep either aren't armed or refuse to shoot/kill the occasional wolf to remind it that there's supposed to be an uneasy detente, then the wolves will just run roughshod over the sheep without care or concern. 4 Boxes: Soap box, Ballot box, Jury box, Cartridge box. BS. We are not a democracy, but a constitutional Republic. I forsee some illegal gun laws being ruled unconstitutional if Trump gets to replace a liberal judge. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indianajonze 379 Posted November 18, 2016 Actually, you can, if the populace decides to do so. . No. The populace has no say in changing or amending the Constitution and can take no vote to manipulate it. Constitutional changes require strict congressional approval and the support of the vast majority of states. I'll let you research the requirements but a vote by the stupid citizens of CA doesn't cut it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites