Jump to content

Fawkesguy

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    260

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by Fawkesguy

  2. Posted

    36 minutes ago, DAHL said:

    When all is said and done I believe that this unconstitutional law will end up being heard by the 3rd circuit court of appeals. At that point I believe that the court will rule in our favor but if it goes the other way the Bolshevics win.   Meanwhile I remain cautiously optimistic.

    Of course it will end up at the 3rd circuit.  It's just a matter of when.  

    • Agree 1

  4. Posted

    1 hour ago, MB24 said:

    On mine the side with the picture has "Employee of armored car company" but it is not checked. Doesn't mention anything about restrictions and doesn't list guns I qualified with. Just the armored car thing, picture, my signature and "this card may be laminated". Does that mean I can carry anything I own??

     Mine is exactly the same. From Raritan Township.  I assume we’re clear to carry any handgun we own. 

  8. Posted

    1 minute ago, almach5 said:

    OK, here’s a follow up question for the group. I was told by somebody whom I trust, that the TRO is selectively enforced, or not enforced, depending on the municipality. Is it really the discretion of the municipal police department whether or not they are going to follow the law as written by Mr. Murphy vs. the instructions in the TRO? For example, the ability to carry in one’s own vehicle, versus removing any ammunition and magazines, and locking a firearm in the trunk and storing the ammunition in a separate locked container. Seeking an absolute here, not conjecture, as it might mean the difference between legal CCW versus a potential arrest for brandishing.

    It SHOULD be an absolute, but NJ being NJ, you never know.

     

    • Agree 1

  10. Posted

    Just now, Moutinas said:

    President Obama had a similar Constitutional disconnect. Not sure if it's ignorance or worse. They may know then subtly lie to the low information public. The President famously said the Constitution gives citizens rights. We all know that is not true. Our God given rights predate the USA, the founding documents and all the Amendments protect these rights. It's a fine point but makes a huge difference. When the powers gives you something, they can take it away which would be any tyrant's preference.

    Yep.  That's why I have that link in my signature.  It's a great article that explains rights quite clearly.

    https://www.backwoodshome.com/we-dont-need-no-steenking-2nd-amendment/

    • Like 1

  11. Posted

    Just now, Displaced Texan said:

    I thought I remembered Judge Bumb saying something to Cai about that in the hearing…

    Yeah, it was something like the state should say "may post a sign" as opposed to "should post a sign".  No surprise the state's way of thinking is to just tell people what to do, as opposed to making a suggestion.  This *is* NJ, ya know.  :rolleyes:

    3 minutes ago, YankeeSC said:

    There should be harsh criminal and civil liability on property owners for any firearm related death or injury that occurs in a "gun free" zone.  If a property owner is going to enforce that, the owner then has a duty to protect.

    We "should" also have constitutional carry, but oh well.

    • Like 1

  18. Posted

    1 hour ago, Walkinguf61 said:

    That plan is now moot. They can’t expand the court without control of the House and the senate . 
    The great news is that they went full retard on their new laws and flat out said it was In reaction to Bruen. There now will be case law against any future attempts to do  when attempt to pass a scaled down version. 

    Fair enough, regarding expansion of the court.  But they control the Senate, and assuming Biden is re-elected, there will likely be opportunities for Supreme Court nominations.  That's 100% a Senate thing.  As for "case law against any future attempts......", the Supreme Court has reversed itself many, many times, and this is an extremely contentious issue.  Hopefully I'm wrong.  Time will tell.

    https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/decisions-overruled/

     

  19. Posted

    58 minutes ago, ESB said:

    Good point.  And may be on purpose in order to lay the grounds for Biden to expand the SCOTUS (as he implied he might during his election campaign) so he can appoint a liberal majority.  

    Yes, I assume that is the Dem's long game.  Expand the court during Biden's 2nd term (or earlier, if possible), and ensure the court takes a case that reverses Bruen, as quickly as possible.

  21. Posted

    1 minute ago, Displaced Texan said:

    I’m confident it will be shot down in a court challenge. That being said, you have to do YOUR part and contribute to the cause. 
     

    Don’t be the guy who rides on someone else’s coattails, be part of the solution. 

    Of course.  Been doing my part for years.  Will continue to do so even after my wife and I move out of this god-forsaken hellhole (as it pertains to 2A).  :good:

  24. Posted

    4 hours ago, Displaced Texan said:

    Because Thomas already gave you ALL the tools you need with the Bruen decision. 
     

    He sure did, and the 2nd circuit ignored those tools and swatted down the TRO that would have stopped NY's flaming pile of poo law from going into effect until it was settled in the courts.  So again, I fail to see how this is good for anyone.  Seems like a disaster to me, but maybe I'm misreading the whole thing.  :icon_e_confused:

    • Like 1

  25. Posted

    3 hours ago, Walkinguf61 said:

    The 2nd circuit just took off the TRO on the NY law depending the case and appeal. This is actually good for NJ. 
     

    The NY will be going to the 2nd circuit and then SCOTUS. It’s just a matter of time . And they all know they will be slapped down. 

    How do you figure it's good for NJ?  The NJ bill will be passed, and if there's a TRO that gets removed by the 3rd circuit, I think that's terrible for us.  Yes, it's "just a matter of time", but it took 15 years to get from Heller to Bruen.

×
×
  • Create New...