PDM

I've been shooting for 6 years now. I've taken a number of pistol courses, basic through advanced, and have a pretty good grasp of the fundamentals. I am, however, still having trouble shooting quickly with accuracy. How do I practice so that when I press the gun out from a low ready position or after a holster draw the sights are already lined up or close to being lined up? I've read about "natural point of aim" but I'm not sure how that applies in terms of practice and shooting proficiency. To complicate things a bit, I shoot right handed but am left-eye dominant which means I need to turn my head quite a bit to get a good sight picture. I shoot using a modified isosceles stance, with my left foot forward and body "bladed" slightly -- almost a cross between a chapman and isosceles stance -- to help line up the sights. That may be part of the reason it takes longer for me to get a good sight picture.

An airgun would be no different than any other "firearm" in NJ when it comes to local no-discharge laws (unless the local ordinance specifically exempts airguns), correct? So, if my town prohibits discharging of firearms within town limits, I could fire my airgun in my backyard or even in my basement. Correct?

Just curious, why would the lack of a forward assist and/or dust cover have any relevance to defensive uses that 99.9% of civilians might encounter. If something goes bump in the night or there is a zombie uprising and an AR is my go to gun , I can't think of a single reason why the M&P sport would be limited to a range toy or any less effective than any other AR in a defensive scenario.

I have an M&P Sport. Great rifle. You absolutely do not need the forward assist or dust cover for your purposes. Mine ran flawlessly through a carbine course (300+ rounds) and has never hiccupped at the range. I don't think when all is said and done you can build a rifle for the same price (I paid $625 last year). I put a magpul forend and vertical grip on it and an Eotech, so for roughly $1000 I have what for me is a well balanced, comfortable AR with a top end sight. If you have a burning desire to spend the time and effort in building the gun, by all means do so. But the only reason to do it is the enjoyment/education in building the gun. You won't save any money and, IMO, won't wind up with a rifle that is "better" in any meaningful way.

This is a fantastic summary of the state of play of 2A cases at the Supreme Court. Apparently, the Court has not rejected the Lane case re interstate sales of handguns. They have not yet decided whether to hear the case. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/10/28/1250584/-60-Cases-and-Counting-What-Gun-Case-Will-SCOTUS-Take-Next

I believe cert was denied.

Bob Gordon's re-election in Dist 38 was the most painful. He came very, very close to losing. If you remember, he is the little troll who pushed a 5 round mag capacity bill and ranted "no one needs more than 5 round to kill a deer" at a gun control rally. Sorry, but I think Republican legislative victories in heavily Democrat Districts are virtually impossible in this state. I spoke to a political professional about this after the last election where strong candidates put on a good effort in District 37 and still go crushed by Weinberg, Johnson and Huttle. He said it is a long term, structural problem -- there are simply too many registered Democrats in these areas, and state Republican organizations (eg, the Bergen County Republicans), which aren't that strong to begin with, won't waste resources in these Districts. IMO, there are two possible ways to make headway: 1) put forward an exceptionally charismatic Republican candidate who is a moderate (a RINO if you prefer) with lots and lots of his own money to spend; 2) run a stealth campaign as a Democrat (still need exceptional charisma and money, because the local Democrat machines have a lock on things). Neither is likely to succeed. That is just reality.

As for private clubs being so safe, I belong to one in North Jersey (won't name it here). On more than one occasion I've been next to one of the older members who was trying to adjust a sight on a LOADED .22 target pistol, which involved him muzzle sweeping people more than once. On one of those occasions he put two rounds into the table in front of him and continued on his way as if nothing happened. Luckily there was no ricochet. And this is a club where people can be a pain in the ass about range procedure, but apparently that is applied selectively to new guys. Contrast that to public ranges (like GFH) or what I consider semi-private like Cherry Ridge, where you normally have ROs on the firing line observing everyone. It all depends on the range -- I don't think you can generalize. That said, I'm not crazy about the idea of gun rentals generally.

kwadz -- I've got to say, that was a pretty good rant. Look around the country -- there's pressure on in almost every state. New Hampshire, Colorado obviously, I'm sure we'll see Florida hit with some gun control proposals soon. Very good points.

Hey Horny, we may already have lost our support. Could be that cert is denied because one or more of the 5 justices in the Heller majority have had enough of 2A issues and don't want to go any further.

How about this, how about that. Anything can happen. We can have stormtroopers kicking down doors one day. Who knows? My basic question is, are we moving forwards or backwards? A Federal carry permit would put us in a better position that we are today. Would it be perfect? No. Do I have faith in legislators? No. But if that's our concern we'll never support any laws, even if they help us, because we hold out for a 100% purist, absolutist win. The perfect is the enemy of the good. And it's very nice to say that you won't support any further laws "without a S Ct decision to bind them" but it looks like we probably won't be getting another S Ct decision on the 2A, so we need to live with that. We didn't have a 2A decision for 60 years or so until we had Heller. Oh, and don't be so sure that if the S Ct hears one of these carry cases it comes out the way we want. For all we know, the reason these cases aren't getting cert is because one of the 5 Heller majority justices (perhaps Kennedy) is not on board with further expanding the 2A. I suspect that could very well be the reason.

I've said this before but been shot down: what's needed is a federal carry law, but not the reciprocity bill that was floated last year (which would have done nothing for us in NJ or other restrictive may issue states). Rather, we need a law that would grant a permit on a shall issue basis, with background check and qualification test requirement, that is good in all 50 states. This should shut up politicians who moaned and complained about the reciprocity bill because it would grant reciprocity to people with permits from states without training requirements. It would NOT pre-empt state law and thus would not present any states rights problems. In other words, constitutional carry in the 4 states that permit it would be valid as would all less stringent state permit requirements. Current reciprocity arrangements would remain in place between the states. Current state permits would remain valid. The federal permit would simply provide an option for people who don't want to worry about the hodgepodge of laws when carrying across state lines AND would provide relief to people in places like NJ who can't obtain a permit. As a constitutionally protected right, a federal law protecting that right is completely warranted.

I agree, with one caveat. Grass roots 2A and conservative activism has exploded in NJ in the last few years, thanks in large measure to NJ2AS and gunforhire, which I believe has pushed the ANJRPC in the right direction. Look at the surprising pushback on the gun bills; the turnout in Trenton; Lonegan's surprisingly successful campaign (even if he doesn't win, he's done much, much better than anyone expected). I think we are moving in a good direction. Yes, a governor like Buono would set us back, but I don't think it will be as easy to steamroll gun owners in this state. It really is going to be a continued slow process, a grass roots slog, but I think it is possible to continue to make progress even though it is fairly clear that we won't get any help in the courts.

Can Drake be heard this year or will it be next year? Would be interested in hearing from anyone knowledgeable as to chances of Drake being heard (is Drake the last?). Seems pretty slim. Looks like the naysayers and pessimists about NJ concealed carry are going to be proven correct.

Why couldn't you also ship the long guns to an FFL here in NJ and take them all in one transfer? Only need an FID card and no OGAM -- can transfer them all at once.

Can anyone recommend good party boats that go out from a location not too far from Northern Jersey or at least the right town(s) to focus on. Thanks.

On the East Coast, the only benefit to Utah is Pennsylvania (for now). That's a big deal I guess, but if you are planning on driving to Florida there is no difference (other than that you need Florida in Florida).

I'm not an expert in administrative law, but I believe that, since the permitting process is essentially an administrative procedure that was wrongly placed in the hands of judges, changing the administrative code with a direction from the AG on how to interpret justifiable need could at least cause some judges to issue more permits, case precedent notwithstanding. I would be very interested to hear what Nappen or another NJ firearms lawyer has to say about it.

Two points: 1. A security company in NJ needs to have a LEO as its head and there are other requirements. Can't just form one and hire yourself to get a carry permit. 2. Justifiable need is defined in the NJ admin code. This can be amended by the governor and attorney general. I believe that it is within the Governor's power to change the definition of justifiable need in such a way as to cause our "may issue" system to essentially function as shall issue, with the training and qualification requirement. He isn't being honest when he pins the inability to carry a firearm on the NJ legislature. He could change it -- or at least attempt to -- by broadening the definition of justifiable need in the Admin Code to include "a desire to exercise the right of self defense" and have the AG instruct judges accordingly. I don't think judges would necessarily be bound to follow this, but it would definitely help.

Curious what people think: say hypothetically that someone had 50k to spend towards obtaining a nj ccp. Could one find a connected lawyer offer to pay him for his time for help with the application and agree to pay a 50k bonus if the application is granted. Let the lawyer worry about how it happens. I'm obviously not looking for suggestions but am curious as to whether people think such a thing might work in this wonderful state.

Great piece. I came to the same realization a few years ago. I wrote a very balanced, moderate (probably too moderate for many people posting hear) letter to a local paper in response to an editorial claiming that all gun owners were "irrational and hate filled". Someone I knew -- a pediatrician -- came up to me and said "I thought you were a nice guy" and walked away. Others made snide comments. Not a single person had anything substantive to say. It is almost always impossible to discuss gun ownership issues with true "antis". For them it is an emotional, philisophical and moral issue and there is no room in their world for alternative opinions. Thankfully they are in the distinct minority. Most people I encounter are simply misinformed -- in the "Yeah, I agree people should be able to own guns, but why does anyone 'need' a semi-auto" type discussions.

Yet another vote for a CZ 452, or one of their other models of .22 (I think the 452 was replaced by another model). Great, great value and a superb quality rifle -- accurate, beautiful woodwork, good sights. Really the best .22 bolt action for casual plinking and small game hunting, and some competition as well.

Very well said Nickjc. We too often see gun rights advocates distorting the facts in order to counter the antis' propaganda. In the wrong hands. a .50 cal barrett presents a greater risk than a .308 for example. It has a significantly longer range and signicantly more terminal energy. Similarly, a 30 round magazine does present more of a risk in the hands of a madman than a 10 round magazine. Yes, someone with training can swap mags pretty quickly, but having a larger capacity magazine potentially makes a shooter marginally more lethal. If that weren't the case why would we care about owning normal capacity 20 or 30 round magazines. They are more effective -- both when used for good or for evil. We don't need to distort the facts to make our arguments: While a .50 cal is marginally more "dangerous" in the hands of someone intent on evil, it has legitiamte civilian uses and can be seen to be in "common use" to us SCOTUS's language. Even more clearly, semi-automatic rifles and normal capacity mags are most definitely in common use for lawful purposes, particularly self-defense. That is really the end of the analysis.

Maybe we'll hear less of the "RINO" crap now. A far right wing conservative isn't going to win the Whitehouse and sure as hell aint going to win the governorship (or a senate seat) in NJ. Chritstie is pragmatic and I've always liked him. We have become way too polarized in this country. As Christie pointed out the other day, Republicans need to win in order to govern and in order to win in this state they need to occasionally compromise and take moderate positions. I'm just very, very worried about what happens when Christie leaves office.

Thanks for noticing. Perhaps this is off topic for this thread and I don't want to highjack it, but the dual class system in this state -- retired police and privileged politicians vs everyone else -- is, to me an important issue in the fight for 2A rights. I hope there is more emphasis in the future in publicly exposing hypocrites like Wildes, Assemblyman Cryan and others who do everything in their power to take away rights from ordinary, hardworking people purely for political pandering purposes while enjoying those rights themselves. These people are worse than the diehard anti-gun activists like Loretta Weinberg who at least act out of personal conviction, even if they are horribly misguided.