JohnKimble

Believe it or not, that sick old man has alot of energy!

Gary's partner Frank Pisano is also A+++ Nappen is a salesman. Straight up. Aitken is not our posterboy. I have had questions since his 'plight' began, but was happy to scream to let him go as the sentence seemed crazy and could NOT set a precedent. If that happened, we would be a pretty nervous bunch in NJ when it comes to handguns. Long guns, thankfully are more liberally treated.

All I can add is ....BOTH!

BTW, I believe you can open carry in cali as long as the gun is unloaded. You dont have to show ID. But you can have loaded mags on your belt. Did you look into this?

Having flown to Fl twice with a handgun and once to AZ for a hunt with an AR-10 and a handgun. Newark is spotty. Once you declare the gun you should ask the person if they know how to do this. I was asked to hand over the keys once on the way down to WPB, and I declined. She told me she had to take the key and gun to the TSA. Again I declined and informed her that is not the correct procedure. She called the cops over. The Port Authortity cops came over,(3 of them) the TSA lady told them I did not want to hand over the keys to my gun, and the cops told her I was not supposed to. They just wanted to see it was unloaded, but I was not asked anything about if I was legal in NJ or FL. I had it stripped so it was obvious it was not loaded. At that point TSA supervisor came over and apologized and actually followed procedures, xrayed and on my way. The cops were cool, they knew the law. I asked if they had received training due to recent court cases. Once officer told me that they were aware of how to do it and I was correct and it was no problem, and they were on their way. When I went to AZ to hunt I was not asked to show the rifle as it was in a steel case with 3 locks. I took the extra precaution of printing out the airline's contract of carriage which states the manner in which guns can be transported. I recommend doing that. Other than that, I have had no problems and I should never have any problems because the second amendment makes it legal for us to keep and bear arms.

Why would the police even know you were carrying a gun in the first place. You dont have to be searched if you are not doing anything. Just go to the range. Be discreet dont show any ammo or anything. Afterward go home and clean your gun. My point is most legal questions can be avoided by obeying the law. This is a great board! Love the questions. More of us should pose these questions to our elected class.

I use slugs to take out bear...dont you think thats overkill? A .45 or some buckshot is waaaay more effective in an HD situation..unless you have about 300 yards between you and the neighbor...

Sipsey Street Irregulars The gathering place for a merry band of Three Percenters. (As denounced by Bill Clinton on CNN!) Wednesday, February 9, 2011 A Call to All Second Amendment Activists: There is a way you can help to shine the bright light of truth on the Project Gunwalker Scandal. If you want to watch the cockroaches run for the baseboards, shine a light. How to make the Congressional Research Service work for us for a change. Congress moves in mysterious ways to the uninitiated and by processes that are to the outsider obscure and arcane. For example, when an anti-firearm Congresscritter is thinking about whipping up some new restrictive anti-gun laws, he (or she, i.e., Rep. Carolyn Maloney), calls on experts at the Congressional Research Service to write a report that analyzes and summarizes the proposed legislation, so it can be circulated to other Congresscritters (or, more specifically to their staff people who have the advantage over their bosses of having a modicum of intelligence). CRS reports on banning or registering .50 caliber rifles are an example. The Congress routinely relies upon CRS reports to obtain legislative and policy information, and to prepare materials in support of Congressional hearings. But these reports are not available to the public, although any Congressional office can obtain them and circulate them to whomever they please. This happens on a selective basis. It is not the best reflection of transparency and democracy, but like others who are directly denied CRS reports, we can work around that. It should be emphasized that CRS reports such as described here are not classified, and can be freely distributed to anybody. But CRS will not do so. A relatively new CRS report, “Gun Control Legislation” by William J. Krouse, Specialist in Domestic Security and Crime Policy, is a different sort of product---it is not a "custom" request report, and is referred to generically as an "Issue Brief" intended to give an overview of a particular issue, in this case gun control legislation. CRS has issued several of these Gun Control Legislation reports, which are updated periodically. Issue Briefs deliberately avoid taking positions on proposed legislation, as well as the social and/or political issues underlying them, and are intended to be bipartisan and neutral in content and tone, but are intended to reflect recent a current legislative agendas, give equal space to opposing viewpoints---and let the Congress sort it out. CRS previously did a report entitled "Gun Trafficking and the Southwest Border" by Vivian S. Chu, CRS Legislative Attorney and William J. Krouse, dated 29 July 2009. My information is that this report was requested by anti-firearm Congresscritters, at least in part, to boost the ATF program known as Project Gunrunner. To be fair, CRS takes seriously its role to provide balanced, unbiased information, obviously a difficult task. Yet in November of last year the U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General Evaluation and Inspections Division released a report titled "Review of ATF’s Project Gunrunner" which was extremely critical of ATF's performance. Now, as we know, Project Gunrunner has led to the Project Gunwalker scandal and the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry on 14 December 2010. Senator Grassley has been put in touch with whistleblower ATF agents and has sent two letters to Acting Director Melson, one on 27 January and one on 31 January. Here is what you can do. Each of you has a Congressman and two Senators. Sit down and write a letter containing the facts set forth above: 1. Cite the 29 July 2009 CRS report, Gun Trafficking and the Southwest Border, noting that it supports Project Gunrunner. 2. Cite the November 2010 DOJ Inspector General report, Review of ATF’s Project Gunrunner, Evaluation and Inspections Report I-2011-001, November 2010", which criticizes Project Gunrunner. For example, the IG determined: ATF has not provided Mexican law enforcement with intelligence it requested on firearms trafficking patterns and trends, including trafficking routes and distribution points where guns are crossing into Mexico. 3. Cite the allegations that Senator Grassley has identified in the foregoing letters (download, print them out and enclose them with your letter). 4. And this is the action item that no Congresscritter can deny he/she lacks the power to do: demand that they request the CRS for an immediate update of the 29 July 2009 report that includes (A) the criticisms of Project Gunrunner, (B) the major criticisms of Project Gunrunner identified by the Department of Justice Inspector General, and © appropriately contextualizes the allegations stated in Senator Grassley's letters. This is something that they can do with a quick instruction to one of their aides, and a short letter. Ask that the Congresscritter confirm by mail that they have done this service for their constituents and actually requested the update. We can use the CRS system to more fairly update the status of Project Gunrunner in ways that are likely to be more informative than, for example, anti-gun articles in the Washington Post that ignore what isn't working. CRS can make an important informational contribution to these issues by providing a substantive, balanced, bipartisan and objective update of the 29 July 2009 report Gun Trafficking and the Southwest Border, which is now seriously out of date. OK, got it? Now circulate this to every Second Amendment site on the Internet you can think of. Write those letters and make the system move for firearm rights and not against it. The simple act of doing so -- of thousands of us doing so -- will build consciousness throughout the Congress that this scandal is here, it is happening, it cannot be ignored and it is not going away until they deal with it. Mike Vanderboegh The alleged leader of a merry band of Three Percenters Here is the link to the original post. http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2011/02/call-to-all-second-amendment-activists.html

After watching the CBS news story...and kudos to CBS for picking this up...I am mad as hell... This has ERICH VON HOLDER all over it... I hope Senator Chuck Grassley keeps hammering away... 2 guns that were part of this 'program' were found at the scene of the murder... I am really thankful that the US GOVT is so damn sloppy... Gun owners like us need to ask questions of our senators on this one. Here is summary to piss you off even more... http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2011/02/updated-summary-narrative-condensed.html

The way it reads, yes you are correct...NJ would **** out a brick the size of Brick City, Newark if this passes...which I hope it does...

Recently a buddy and I have been having this conversation around the language in NJ's self defense law. Since nobody is allowed to carry a gun here, a little oddity stands out to my friend's analysis of the law. Look at the bold part...does that mean if an officer of the law is illeglly using force on someone, that person could use deadly force back on the officer? It seems 'out of whack'...anyone else have any thoughts on this language? 2C:3-4. Use of Force in Self-Protection. a. Use of force justifiable for protection of the person. Subject to the provisions of this section and of section 2C:3-9, the use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable when the actor reasonably believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion. b. Limitations on justifying necessity for use of force. (1) The use of force is not justifiable under this section: (a) To resist an arrest which the actor knows is being made by a peace officer in the performance of his duties, although the arrest is unlawful, unless the peace officer employs unlawful force to effect such arrest

I have a 'keep honking, Im reloading' on my bumper... I really dont care what anyone, cops included thinks...my rights are my rights.

I will do you one better.... http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7357550n&tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea%3BcbsnewsMainColumnArea.1

I dont know this to be true. If you cant find it in the compendium (NJ fish and game mag) You can hunt overnight with the $2 permit. I have only used Tshot

I think what someone else said, common sense was the culprit here. Sounds kinda stoopid to leave guns by the door and windows. I keep mine loaded, but out of sight...but just in arms reach... Sounds like he was a stupid person...