Leaderboard

Although it is certainly prudent to want to protect one's property and possessions, there seems to me to be one glaring omission that makes the entire argument moot. Owning/driving an automobile or having a job is a privilege. Owning a firearm is an inalienable right, or at least started off that way a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.

AP Acknowledges NJ Gun Laws Don’t Stop Bad Guys Posted at 2:00 pm on December 16, 2019 by Tom Knighton The Associated Press, like most other so-called “news” organizations, hasn’t exactly been fair to gun owners. That said, the AP does seem to try a bit more than most to hide any anti-gun bias in and amongst their reporters. It’s still not difficult to find, mind you, but they look to me like they’re trying to some degree. Most of the time, anyway. So, I’m only a bit surprised by a report out of the AP over the weekend that argues something we already knew. It seems that it’s news to some just how New Jersey’s gun laws didn’t manage to do diddly to stop the Jersey City gunmen from acquiring weapons. I’m also not a bit surprised that they jumped on it as a federal issue rather than a failure of gun control laws. The problem is, criminals are going to get guns one way or another. If they can’t import them from another state, they’ll find somewhere else to get them. As I’ve noted before, guns will always end up in the hands of those who want them and don’t really care about the laws surrounding them. They’ll continue to end up right where you don’t want them. But the AP’s headline is actually the most accurate part of the whole story, something you won’t really get from the body of the text. It read, “Shooting shows New Jersey’s gun laws aren’t stopping imports,” and it’s right. They don’t. Nor did the federal laws against smuggling guns into states that have outlawed it. Murphy’s “name and shame” plan assumes the pro-gun states can be shamed. The truth is, though, those states already know that disarming criminals will take a whole lot more than just passing a couple of laws, so why burden their own law-abiding people because New Jersey can’t keep a handle on their own? Criminals are going to smuggle guns. Laws won’t stop them because, hello? Criminals! It’s kind of what they do. The question is, will someone like Murphy ever figure that out? https://bearingarms.com/tomk/2019/12/16/ap-acknowledges-nj-gun-laws-dont-stop-bad-guys/?utm_source=badaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=bc1d86e1053dd21c60a121534def959c I highly doubt it!

Good for them. A 2A win in any state (or territory) is indirectly a win, for us. We want broad acceptance of firearms and a growth in firearms culture, and this new law aids that goal.

What other "RIGHTS" should people need insurance for?

The first sentence of that paragraph sums things up... and sort of undermines your following argument, IMO. Targeted community-based crime-fighting solutions, better funding of police gang units, and any number of other ideas that actually target those who commit crime (better still, that prevent them from taking that path in the first place) make far more sense than punishing legal gun owners. And if you put your "woke" cap on (and recognized your own "white male privilege" for just a sec, dammit!), you'll see that measures like this would just heap on more fees and thus disproportionately impact lower-income folks (many of whom also live in dangerous neighborhoods with high crime rates). Does that sound fair to you? But, the 2nd and 3rd sentences (sections in boldface) totally obliterates your argument.. because violent crime, gun crime and firearm deaths have NOT been steadily increasing! And you've been on these forums long enough to know it's quite the opposite. We have been on fairly steady downward trajectory since the 90's - and are at near 30 year lows in violent crime. Facts are important. This article outlines some credible sources. https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/careful-panic-violent-crime-and-gun-crime-are-both-dropping-charles-c-w-cooke/ It was published in 2015... but there have been no dramatic swings in the trends since then. So, why do you (and so many others!) still believe and vocalize that we're in the midst of a "gun violence epidemic"? Well, look no further than the "coverage" by the media and well-organized activists funded by zealots like Bloomberg. I truly believe that if the MSM started to cover ANY topic - fatal lightning strikes, for example - with the same regularity and fervent hysteria as they cover gun homicides, I'm sure most of the public would see all of those news stories and actually think: Wow! Lightning strikes must be on the increase. Why is this happening? What can we do? The ability of media to "shape" anecdotal evidence and present it as "reality" is pretty staggering. Don't fall for it.

I say enough with senseless gun laws. We should make it illegal to kill people.

A little late to this game... however, I love (in the loosest sarcastic interpretation) reading the summary of these BS bills... Last I checked, I didn't need a license to possess anything, let alone a firearm. The latter has always been contingent upon a person free from any criminal conviction. Technically, I believe a FPID is required only for eligibility at the point of sale, and not to show lawful possession. And now exactly how many cars have been seized by LE for those driving either completely without insurance or failure to exhibit documents... both of which will no doubt result in a summons to begin with... Not to mention that this pesky little thing called the Fourth Amendment gets in the way (well, we hope so - after all, this is the PRNJ)... what probable cause of a felony having been committed is there for a judge to sign off on a search warrant to justify the seizure? I was wary when government mandated (or attempted to, at least) that I purchase health insurance, something far from being enshrined in the Constitution. To attempt to force someone to pay for a product to exercise a Constitutional right is - as was mentioned earlier - akin to a poll tax. Criminals really are a protected class in the state these days... un-fn-believeable

I further question this State's mandation of lability insurance after they fined the company that has liability insurance for the NRA. They want insurance, but only on their terms, which tells me it is not about safety.

OK, I admit... I'm thoroughly confused!! Umm, AVB, do you realize that there's roughly 500 people a year in the U.S. who die of accidental shootings? And that experts estimate a few thousand more (at most) are injured in gun accidents? And yet, you're actually proposing that ALL 100 MILLION gun owners in this country should be forced to buy liability insurance (to possibly provide payment to perhaps a few thousand families)? It's not that I lack compassion for those families, of course, but legislation IMO should be restrained, reasonable and it should provide a solution proportionate to the problem. Your suggestion is NONE of that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with gun owners choosing to buy liability insurance. But, based on the numbers, the real beneficiary of a mandatory program like the one you're suggesting would be: the insurance industry itself! (And possibly some local/state governments who would, no doubt, find a way to build their own additional fees onto the process, leeches that they are.) I'm sorry to say, AVB... you haven't thought this one through. Your intentions might be good... but remember, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

@AVB-AMG should those who can’t afford insurance be denied the right to defend themselves?

NOTHING - But you did stop scrolling....................... Merry Christmas! JT

Never would I have thought I would see the day that a fellow gun owner would support a law, that once again, does NOTHING to prevent gun related crimes. Yet here we are.

So while you have to have 6 points to prove who you are, Juan and Consuela do not!

PHIL SMURPHY

Why didn’t I think of that!

healthcare is not a basic human right

Red Flag Warning Door Hangers! Free to ALL GunForHire Family! #GunForHire #redflag #knockknock #comebackwithawarrant #civilrights #billofrights #constitution #dueprocess IMG_1234.MOV

At the end of the day, there is no doubt that vaccines can be problematical for a number of children. That being said, they prevent some terrible diseases in a majority of children. This is not debatable. My mother lost three of her older siblings to diphtheria in the early 1900s. I was a "Polio Pioneer", getting the Salk vaccine in the early 50s during a major outbreak. If people want some sort of religious exemption from vaccination for their kids, they need to have their own schools where their kids can't infect other kids.

Amazing that there can be any negativity towards something so positive.

I think many vaccinations should be done, but no one should be forced by the state. The flu and chicken pox vaccines I do not agree with. Flu my kids got out of. Chicken Pox I was not able to get around. MMR should be seperated out and certainly not given with other vaccines at the same time. At the same time kids who are not vaccinated the state should be allowed to exclude from going to public school, and private schools should be allowed to exclude them as well. Don't want to vaccinate then home school. This law doesn't seem to force children to get vaccinated just eliminates the religious exemption for them to attend school if not vaccinated. I see no issue with this one. There is a choice. Also unlike the liability insurance for firearms ownership which is an infringement on a Constitutional Right there is no Constitutional Right to Education in America.

@AVB-AMG please cite an example of when someone has walked into a hospital and wasn’t treated in this or the last century? Hippocratic oath... say uncle

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nj.com/news/2019/09/nj-fines-company-1m-for-backing-nra-insurance-program.html%3FoutputType%3Damp&ved=2ahUKEwicteSix7rmAhXQUt8KHVaMAmAQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw0_LUKgDfugHX2annXx7R7d&ampcf=1

Ha ha! @AVB-AMG! An example of rational debate! say uncle!

Given all the other "free" crap the blue politicians hand out ... this idea is not all that crazy, especially since this is a constitutionally protected right. Equally protected and cherished as free speech and the right to vote. The constitution says nothing about health care, higher education, etc.

This is a response to what happened in Lakewood last year.

Actually that’s a perfect use of these” buy back programs! Free people have the choice to exercise rights. Those that choose not to can help those in need that want to. The 2nd Goodwill store! I love it! https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/aggravated-assault.xls firearms account for only 26% as the tool used in 2018 for aggravated assault. I chose aggravated assault as it accounts as 66% of all violent crimes as of 2018. so why are you for segregating a minority?

Unlike the right to keep and bear arms, none of these jobs are protected rights under the US Constitution. I have to maintain business insurance, it is not a constitutional right for me to own a business. Your argument is a false equivalence, and therefore invalid.

@AVB-AMG Based on all the responses above, you should have stopped right there. I see a pattern, do you?

AVB-AMG your legal opinions and reasoning in your multiple posts are flawed on so many levels that I would need to write a book to respond. Suffice it to say, I disagree with you for some of the reasons already expressed by others.

Picture a man with the twisted mind of a Democratic socialist, picture the mind of AVB-AMG.......Welcome to the Twilight Zone!

No

IMO - NO! A brace is only considered a brace when used on a Pistol or Other firearm. A Rifle is designed to be fired from the shoulder, and as such requires a stock. If you put an adj brace on a rifle - it then becomes the stock and as such has to be pinned to non-adjustable in NJ

I don't know - I never noticed the hat till you mentioned it........

Jeez, I guess they will go door to door in Camden , Newark, Passaic, atlantic city, checking ins. policies!!!!

And this is where 99% of shooting situations start. A criminal, by definition, doesn't follow CURRENT laws. Yet, you want to penalize law abiding citizens, and FORCE them to buy insurance.

Name one other item you need specific liability insurance to own. use of a car on private land does not require insurance. You also don’t need a drivers license. The best example is farms but there are others. I bring up CCW because it’s the only analog to insurance for cars.

Why? What exactly would This insurance cover? It’s illegal for an insurance company to cover illegal acts. So is this protecting against “accidents” with the firearm? Is that really the problem? Isn’t that already covered elsewhere? Comparing it to cars is invalid. Insurance is not required to OWN a car. Only to drive it on public roads. Your comparison may be valid for CCW but that’s not what your talking about.

This week on GunForHireRadio #447 Mark Cheeseman and Jay Factor share details of their monumental NJ Carry Case they is waiting at the US Supreme Court. https://gunforhire.com/blog/2019/12/15/the-gun-for-hire-radio-broadcast-episode-447/ IMG_1215.MP4

Vaccinations are one of the true success stories of modern medicine... I find it appalling that we're seeing major outbreaks of childhood illnesses that were nearly wiped out not long ago. Though I thought it was more the New Agey, paranoid anti-vaxxers driving that... than religious exemptions? Either way, though I don't think anyone should be FORCED to get their kid immunized, I also think that public schools have every right to deny admittance to anyone who isn't immunized without good medical reason. Having a certain percentage of the population vaccinated is critical to keeping these diseases at bay ("herd immunity"). It's not right that immuno-compromised children, those who can't be vaccinated for other medical reasons, or younger siblings too young to be vaccinated are left vulnerable to the ravages of these very serious diseases because some idiot believed the crap pumped out by IDIOTS like Jenna McCarthy (one of the most well-known anti-vaxxers). As far as the OP's post, if there are known medical problems with your BIL's child (I'm sorry to hear that btw)... I can't imagine there'd be any problem getting a reputable doctor to give a letter exempting the child from vaccination. If he's getting pushback... maybe get a 2nd opinion?

What happened to my body, my rights? It's not my problem of someone else's kid has something wrong with them, right? One kid gets a peanut allergy and all of a sudden 2000 students can't have PB&J for lunch. You think this is equitable?

NJ the ultimate sh*t show Yet another reason to leave...

Pork Roll........

Been that way since Tony Montana and the rest of the Mariel boatlift arrived.

U lazy boy. Taurus 692, I found it, no thanks to you! https://www.budsgunshop.com/mobile/product/100192/redirect