crackaloon

So shooting small animals....that's bad. Maybe he was impersonating an air marshal....that's bad too!

That's not true.

I'd like to hear a reasonable arguement in favor of this law, as it should apply to 10rds in a magazine and no gun present. He's not a gun runner, not an ammunition supplier, and the clearly visible in the door is very thin.

Absolutely! His behavior is what "hero" is all about.

Okay seriously now. After spending some time in college I would always strive for perfect writing. I enjoyed reading different styles, and I began to notice some stand-outs. When two things are being compared, and are essentially equal in every way, the writer's bias can be clearly seen in the organization. Describe one thing with perfect structured writing, while describing the other with inconsistancies and jumbled thoughts. A reader couldn't pick one particular sentence that said anything bad. One thing would just look better than another in general. I've even seen things that are clearly positives easily overlooked because of this writing style. Don't think that stories that could be used as pro-gun examples are poorly written by mistake. When there is no way around reporting on something remotely pro-gun you'll see this over and over. That is why pro-gun news outlets seem so clear, while traditionally anti-gun news sources suddenly seem so jumbled and confused when covering the same subject. Readers get a feeling when they read. Nobody should think that the feeling you're getting is only brought out by the subject matter when a writer is involved (or a talented editor).

Okay....I guess the neighbor shouldn't be charged. Provided his pistol didn't hold more than 15rds. I just worry about that poor guy tied up in the chair. He might have to sue his neighbor for shooting someone in his house and all the stress that caused.

Of course he would be brought up on charges. How would the neighbor have any idea that the neighbor didn't already submit to being tied up and exchanging shots with their guests? Clearly the neighbor's house isn't on the way to or from the range or a gun shop and he would have no business carrying a handgun into someone else's home.

That's very extreme. I'm sure they were raised in a poor area and their families had no money. The education system did not prepare them properly for this type of situation. Most likely shots would never have been fired and this would have been a run-of-the-mill home invasion robery. If the homeowners just allowed themselves to be tied up and waited for someone to find them everyone would be much better off. After all, are possessions and money really worth fireing a gun over? The criminals were supposed to be the only ones with handguns. That's where things went wrong.

Anti-gun people would just say that they were being tied up and that doesn't justify shooting the bad guy that wasn't tried in a court of law and sentenced to time served so that he would realize his mistake and never do it again.

BINGO, you're right on with that take on it sir.

He was lucky he didn't get more by NJ standards true. Is there justice in that sentence when there are violent criminals that we're 99% sure are going to repeat the same crime getting less time. This was a non-violent crime. It seems like a good time to add that scary guns are going to be a part of many many more traffic stops and every day situations should concealed carry become a reality. Will our jails be filled with j-walking 5 year sentences?

They're already keeping all those guns. What justice is being served by giving him 5 years, really. In my eyes it's more than a penalty, it's an injustice by any measure. While I think he should have avoided NJ, I just can't see 5 years as being a fair sentence.

Five years seems excessive for sleeping with guns in his truck. All the other stuff is him trying to avoid going to jail over stupid laws in NJ. He wasn't robbing a convenience store, which is too bad because he'd probably be home now. He was stupid, the gun laws here are stupid, and five years of his life is more than stupid. Five years of his life, when the judge could have just given him time served and told him not to return to NJ.

I slapped that on facebook too....great!

So, I'm going to the range and bring all locked in my trunk: 1) A gun in a case so it's not just flopping around in my trunk. 2) Ammo in a bag with magazines loaded. 3) Some stuff to shoot at, oil, tools, ect.. As long as a loaded magazine, or even one bullet, is not in the case with my gun I'm fine. Correct, right? To venture a guess...if someone got stopped with a gun within reach and ammo within reach that would quite possibly be considered a loaded weapon. You can't just carry a gun and drop the mag when you see flashing lights behind you and think you'll be charged with something less than having a loaded weapon.

Happy Birthday Maks!

Some BB guns have magazines that hold more than 15 bbs

Imagine if residents of NJ could carry, and crime went down. Entire lifetimes wasted on stupidity and senseless laws. Would a family from another state be more or less afraid to visit NYC or NJ (the dangerous places to go) if mom and dad had their pistols with them? Do people come here because they know only criminals can have guns? Lautenberg has been a waste of paper and tree huggers should protest against anything he slaps his stupid signature upon.

My link Link contains video links. I guess citizens of NJ just are not responsible enough yet. Maybe if we take the trash out and mow the lawn another year... Wisconsin Suspends CCW Training Requirement for Concealed Carry Permits In the eyes of the Republican-controlled legislative committee, Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen overstepped his authority when he specified that concealed carry applicants would need to complete a minimum of four hours of training before they could obtain a CCW permit. Yesterday, the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules voted to remove the minimum four-hour mandate from the CCW law, which went into effect on Nov. 1. From AG Van Hollen’s perspective, he was just providing clarity to an ambiguous portion of the law. When Van Hollen testified before state lawmakers he explained his reasoning for the four-hour minimum training requirement. He said the law called for training but did not say how much, he iterated the four hours of training wasn’t an arbitrary number, but an industry standard, and he noted that not having a minimum requirement would make it next to impossible for the DOJ to verify that an applicant had completed some training. Additionally, Van Hollen said that, thus far, the 20,000 CCW applicants had not found the requirement too onerous. Nevertheless, Republican committee members found the four-hour minimum mandate to be too restrictive. They voted to suspend that requirement in addition to a requirement that called for a signed statement from an instructor verifying successful completion of a course. "There's no reason why we have to micromanage how people obtain their concealed carry permit," state Sen. Glenn Grothman, (R-West Bend) told postcrescent.com. “Other states with no minimum training requirements haven't had any problems and there's going to be no problem in the state of Wisconsin either," he said. Moving forward, the DOJ will be "very liberal in accepting applications unless we have reason to believe there has been fraud or dishonesty or some aspect of the law has been disregarded," AG Van Hollen told postcrescent.com. And Democrats on the committee were rueful that AG Van Hollen’s mandate wasn’t upheld. "Without the provisions of four hours, we have a subjective standard that anybody is going to be able to meet," said state Rep. Chris Taylor, D-Madison. What’s interesting about this decision is that it may have serious repercussions down the road. Some have argued that having no minimum training requirement may actually be worse than having a four-hour mandate because it leaves the door open for future legislators to impose stricter requirements due to the ambiguous nature of the law, i.e. some unspecified amount of training is still required. Others suggest that this lax stance may jeopardize Wisconsin’s ability to enter into CCW reciprocity agreements with other states.

I laminated mine with packing tape in 1982, it's never been a problem.

I've been to that DMV, the one on Bay right? It seems like that cop is moonlighting, but it doesn't matter, I've always found him to be pleasant. He plays along with the whole check-in procedure they have there and hands out the proper papers to be filled out. The line there has to be straight though, because they have a lane. I'd like to add that that DMV is super fast and friendly.

The fiber optic sights come on the hunter model. Sorry, I'm on my phone. The difference between the standard hunter and the talo was only the grip the last time I checked.

I never had the target model. It's a hunter and I believe that a barrel swap requires a pistol permit, as that is where the serial number is located.

The Talo will be online, but I bought a stainless, fluted barrel new in SS last year.

I noticed something disturbing. The announcement was made that cameras would be in every lane. The day this went into place, not only was there no live toll collector at the Forked River toll, but 5 trooper cars where there for morning rush hour. I don't know if they were giving toll tickets or running red light tickets, but it doesn't matter (yeah 3 cars pulled over when I went through). I have ezpass, but what about people that always pay in cash at that toll and coincidentally cameras are installed when the toll taker is on vacation? I'm not much for conspiracy theories, but when it smells like it, and looks like it, why do people have to taste it?