fslater

The Supreme Court has established that the Second Amendment is an individuals right as was the unquestioned given when it was made part of the US Constitution If I'm not mistaken, in 1791 when the Second Amendment was ratified, a musket was an assault rifle and ball and powder its ammo? I may be wrong, but I have never heard or read anywhere that in colonial times muskets/assault rifles or the amount of ball and powder one could possess or carry being regulated? I have also been under the impression that in that time it was Common to carry a handgun in any fashion one desired without and type of permission or registration being acceptable? If these things were intended to go unchecked at the time they were implemented, how is interpreting them in any other way today justified? A facet of todays population may say, times have changed. If this argument is sufficient to rewrite or abolish one protection of the Bill Of Rights shouldn't the others be examined as well i.e. Freedom Of Speech, Freedom Of Religion, Civil Rights? Until that time comes how is the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed words that could possibly be interpreted as anything other than what they say?

reimbursed

But they have said it and got away with it...… During the federal AWB and the existing one in NJ..... All that's allowed is a detachable mag and 1 evil feature...…. That being the pistol grip. They're getting away with saying the pistol grip is a feature that makes it significantly identical to an M 16 Is sad but true (The fact that they get away with it that is)

Just my opinion.... But if its satisfiably modified to 10 rounds, is no longer an operable 15 round mag.

What I'd like to see published is the court depositions to show the rest of the country how a law abiding Joe goes to prison for 5 years on a technicality when a punk that commits armed robbery plea bargains the whole fact that he had and used the gun to rob away?

I don't think it passed both houses yet either...…. But with the bunch in Trenton only a fool would have doubts its not a shoe in. I'm just hoping with murphy and company down there they'll take enough rope to hang them selves.

"IIm not a lawyer, but the way the statute reads, the part is illegal prior to manufacturing." As I said... in the scenario I'm implying, the lower was obtained and made legally outside NJ. I've seen nothing in past or even S2465 that would be illegal about the person who made this firearm legally in another state, from bringing it to and keeping it in your NJ home. Is this the case or did I miss something? Also re: only the 80% being banned by S2465 or all the other bits and pieces? Anybody got the definate answer to that?

Maybe someone more knowledgeable than myself can shed some light on the issue. 1) Where they talk about parts capable of building, are they referring to unsterilized, unfinished receiver castings or all gun parts (barrels, stocks, triggers, handguards, sights ect)? 2) Would / How would this effect a situation where someone who prior to this law taking effect finished an 80% lower in another state and brought it into NJ as a firearm they legally owned? As far as I can see previously there was nothing illegal about this. Does this new law have any retro provision that would now make that firearm illegal?

All this debate is giving me a head ache...... Why not simply look at it this way..... What would happen if you or I had done the same thing?

Hi Everyone I just Read the article in the Political report in Shooting Illustrated about The July ruling By the US Court Of Appeals that found DC's "good reason" to be granted a CCW unconstitutional. Wouldn't the conflicting rulings between the DC Federal Court and the Jersey District Federal court force the SCOUS to a hearing to resolve the conflict? This is old news from back in July I'm just hearing about now. If its already been discussed please direct me to the thread. Thanks

So if a cop gets snagged doing something illegal or a NJ cop gets caught up in a bad shoot and is found guilty this is another charge thrown in or again it only applys to Joe Smo and not members of Club Privliged?

I agree. After the next appointment is made, going to the supreme court would be the best thing in the world. The desicion will set a president for anything in the future

There may get to be 5 or 6 pages of debate or given the venue cridisism of the AMA's paper. But the bottom line is...... What would you expect from the JAMA, there a liberal orginization that reports the same bias one sided infomation as main stream media. They are birds of a feather

As far as NJ changing from the extreme far left, unless there's a major demogaphic change (which I don't see happening except futher liberal/left) the liberals in trenton are here to stay. Thats just a fact of life. Get used to it or move. NJ is not going to have a blue majority in this generation. The only silver lining is after the next Supreme Court Judge is appointed some NJ 2A cases may be heard or Judgements may be made at a National Level on infringement that will apply to NJ. Now is the best chance we've had in a long time. In a few months the stars will be in alingnment in DC atleast

If the other49 states were subject to NJ standards cases thats hearings are rejected WOULD be heard by the SCOTUS and those standards would be found unconstitutional. Up to this point the court just rejects hearing NJ cases to ovoid offending one side or the other and the country outside NJ was oblivious. Put it in every states back yard and see what happens to NJ laws and standards in reguard to 2A

The following is just my wishful opinion.... Especially with AT LEAST one conservative supreme court judge coming in and the POUS backing the effort, I'm thinking/hoping for a shall issue case/ruling in the future. Even if the states have the right to reasonable restrictions, a ruling that denying a law abiding citizen CCW is infringement would be feasible? Even if that were not to come about down that path, I don't see why everyone from another state can carry in NJ, but the NJ citizen cannot protect himself may be a civil rights case if national reciprocity were passed.Who knows, If things were to go unimaginably good SCOTUS could even look at, stand your ground and castle doctrine. And no I'm not coming up with thoughts of this happening in NJ from sniffing glue.

Doesn't being required to be refingerprinted violate the no other forms clause in the statute?

Maybe they aren't going to send forms to your refrences untill 89 day from the time you submitted your ap?

I'm all for this. I'd love to see every PD in New Jersey trade in thier current side arm and replace it with the best smart gun available! EVERY Cop in the state would quit his job. Good sugestion Baraka. Or the other side of the coin, no gun manufacturers develop smart guns so you don't buy guns for the police at all.

I'd list it as the frame was originally listed. Its actually staying the same isn't? Your just having a slide assembely with barrel for another cal made no?

It's been Status Quo. Until his bid for President Christy could give a rats ass about 2A. Even now he's leaning more toward it, IMO just because he's looking for a DC appointment in the event Trump wins. I fear the next governor in NJ is going to be Sweeny, and you can imagine what will happen then. Its a fact like it or not this is an extreme blue state. And the only way to change that is through voting them out. The problem is by numbers liberals in this state far out weigh conservatives (another sad but true fact). I think the only hope for fair NJ gun laws/CCW is if the Supreme Court will decide to stop turning down 2A cases because their afraid of how loud the politically correct faction will jump up and down and cry. Another problem with that is if Clinton wins she'll make an appointment that will take 2A cases. But with who she appoints the decisions they make will not be good to say the least

Seems if a civil rights case were files on grounds that a politician or judges CCW app is de facto shall issue vs anyone else is no issue (or at threat of exposure only via federal court appeal some have been), would they not be force to release names and reasons as their defense? This same civil rights case would also expose them as guilty of the charge as there most certainly actually are. If some how a case like this were to go ALL THE WAY up the ladder the court would also be more prone to hear it as a civil right issue than a 2A

Sorry if I'm getting off subject here, but I grew up in Chicago and moved to Jersey 20 yrs ago. When I left, Chicago was a city In Illinois. Did it succeed from Illinois and become the 51st state when I wasn't looking?

Personally I think the whole reference thing is unconstitutional although I'm sure it has already be challenged and shot down. Firstly they are asking a lay person for a subjective opinion. Secondly they themselves are doing an investigation into your past (and in NJ even that becomes subjective ie questioned about dismissed and found not guilty arrests). And lastly your having to prove your character is good vs them proving its not to me is blatant guilty until proven innocent. But that's just my opinion

I know this stuff wouldn't happen, but my point is if the gun maker is being sued why couldn't or shouldn't the parties I mentioned? The CLEO that signed off on her FPID ran a background check on Mrs.Lanza and had no reason to deny her. How could he have known her son would grow up to be a psychopath? How could the gun maker have know the gun would be unsecured by the qualified owner and then stolen by a psychopath and used in a crime? No more than the CLEO but ones being sued and the other not. She could probably be sued for allowing her psychopathic kid to have access to her guns and ammo! What would suing her get them though? What it would get them isn't the point. The point is where does the responsibility for what happened lie? Its being placed on the least guilty party while the parties that where actually part or the chain of events go unmentioned.