leahcim

The way I understand the law, you are OK--unless you are hunting with pistols.

I think the collective wisdom on this forum was that it is legal to keep an unloaded long gun in your vehicle: http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/35608-anything-wrong-with-driving-around-with-an-unloaded-long-gun-in-the-trunk/page__hl__trunk__fromsearch__1

I forget ecxactly, but don't you sign a release with the FID paperwork package that allows access to your records?

And if you disclose it in the paperwork once, you will have to disclose it forever and the PD will have to go through the same stupid check again--every time. Because of this, any such condition would have to become severe before I would EVER talk to a medical professional, therapist, counseler about it. So does that make me paranoid?

Don't mess with this lady! http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=29708

If people showed up on the public streets around these gun buyback venues with cameras and started documenting, most of the participants would bail out and the buyback would fail. Plus it would provide evidence for a criminal complaint against the DA and Prosecutor.

Emily Miller rocks! Her series on the difficulty of legally getting a gun in the district forced D.C. to ammend its draconian rules for purchase. I hope this helps LT Kim get his property back.

Of course you are justified. The possible problem is in a civil case. If the jury sees you defended yourself with a tire iron, well every one has a tire iron in their car and defense is not its primary purpose. With a weapon whose primary purpose is to kill, I think plaintiff's attorney is going to try to suggest that you thought this through and were out looking for a fight so you could defend yourself. You are still justified. Some states have laws where you cannot be sued in a civil case if you are acquitted--based on SD--in the criminal case. I do not think NJ is one of those states. Just sayin, it might not help you with the jury--unless one of you are on the jury.

Agree--I totally missed that--but he definitely should have used the honorific "President" in that line to show proper respect for the office.

Well, I think the "HD ammo shows that you were just waiting to kill an intruder" is just as idiotic.

I mentioned HPs in a conversation today and the person I was talking with gives me an "I wouldn't do that if I were you" look. So I ask why and he gives me the rationale that it could be prejudicial in an HD situation, and if you use HPs, the prosecutor is going to point to that and say there is no valid reason for HP but to inflict maximum damage. Once that is established, well then the only reason you would by HP is you are just waiting for an intruder so you can use them. There is no argument of "I just use the pistol for sport shooting"--or is there--with HP bullets. I do not buy this line of reasoning, but not sure how I would respond to the question of why I own HP? Do people on the forum own or not own HP and why? If so, do you use them for other than HD purposes? What do yoiu think of the argument? Also I found Hornady Zombie-Max HPs--I was thinking to buy those for HD. I can claim that I keep those around for the occasional zombie attack, and in the heat of the moment I loaded the wrong ammo during a home invasion. My friend did not think that was a good argument, but I think it is as rational as the specious supposition that I only have HP because I am itchin to shoot someone. http://www.hornady.c...ie-Max-Handgun/

This is how the Martin case should have been handled -- "Race, gender, socio-economic status -- these are not factors in this case nor should they be. What mattered was gaining a clear understanding of the facts in this case and applying the law." http://patriotpost.u...emper-justitia/

Thast is unbelievable. Too bad the officer's return fire didn't kill the perp. Impressive response from the officer--shot 5 times, hits the guy in the face and returns fire! The perp's mother says "He's innocent, but he pleaded guilty because he knew nobody would take his word over a police officer," I would NEVER cop a plea if I were innocent--I would go to jail before I would perjure myself by pleading to something I did not do.

Does anyone have experience with this ammo? Pricing is pretty good, and I figure less vaporized lead is better, but I don't know about aluminum cased ammo--any issues or problems with Al case? Thanks!

I went to the R-14 pistol range for the first time last Friday. And shot my new Rock ISland 1911 Match for the first time. I had no problem with any of their rules or enforcement--so far. I heard the RO call people out several times for not having the right flag out, going to shooting station during cease-fire, and having targets too close; but those are the range's rules and they are in writing. Sounds like there may be capricious enforecement of unwritten rules, but I did not have any such issue on my one trip. I liked the range, the price is great, and it is very close to my home. I think I can put up with some flack if I have to.

Apparently not in the MSM

Same thing in the Center City attack in January--except it did not go as far and the perps were apprehended. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/dncrime/138331584.html This happened before Trayvon but got little coverage. No hate crime charges were filed by the DA even though the teens used racial epithets.

1 and 2: I insure with Amica also. Service is decent, but dealing with the PIP doctors (IME) can be difficult--especially if you believe the treatment is helping and they claim you have reached "maximum medical improvement" and wish to cut you off. I had to go to arbitration with them on this once--they lost and had to cover the treatment plus my attorney fees. But the adjusters and claims people are always nice and always professional. 3) Have you comparison shopped their pricing against other insurers? I usually run a comparison every year and they are close enough. I also have an umbrella ($1E6 excess liability) and HO policies with them. I do not have the price breakdown, but my auto policy is about $1100--zero-threshold, Comp/Collision ($500 or $1000 deductible), $500,000 liability, Uninsured/Underinsured motorist, $2500 PIP deductible. The umbrella policy is about $150. I will probably drop my comp/collision soon as my car is almost four years old now. 4) Have you made any claims in the last few years and how were you treated? Any other relevant info you wish to share would be greatly appreciated. I had two claims against the PIP (both were for accidents in which the other party was at-fault.) PIP claims were fine until we got through the first couple of treatment plans. At that point they try to cut you off--send you to their doctors and slow-roll everything. You have to continue treatment and (in one case) maybe go through PIP arbitration. In my case we had an orthapaedic doctor who would evaluate every month and document objective improvement with the PT--range of motion, pain, etc. I got an attorney who speciailizes in PIP arb cases (pro-bono, so if he accepts the case it has pretty good odds of prevailing) and the insurance had to pay for all of the treatments plus the attorney fees (law in NJ for PIP cases). I was rear-ended once and the at-fault party was insured by Allstate. I know they are representing thier client, not trying to help me--but after dealing with those idiots, I would never buy anything from Allstate. They were very unprofessional and nasty in my dealings with them. Second incident, I was on my bike and was hit by a truck--I was on a street with no stop, he was turning onto same street from a side street with a stop-sign. Apparently did not see me. Very minor injuries, but it destroyed my carbon fiber bike. He was insured by Liberty Mutual, and they were a pleasure to deal with--especially compared with Allstate. Did not try to fight me on replacing the bike (the only visible damage was to the fork, but with Carbon Fiber you can have small fractures that will fail catastrophically later PLUS it voids the warranty). They covered the bike, some after-market products, my clothing and paid me for my time off of work. Also, I had the verbal threshold back then and I switched to zero threshold after that--it added about $400-$500 to my bill (per year) but it is worth it. With verbal, you could have ongoing chronic pain or other issues that have real economic impact, yet be unable to sue if it does not pierce the threshold. I also carry very high deductibles and drop comp/collision after 3-5 years--I rarely get into at-fault accidents (actually never had one involving another person), and I can handle a few thousand dollars if I do. But having to pony up for a five or six figure loss would be unsat. This is one of my problems with the state minimum policy--I think it is called the "basic" policy. The liability limits are just pathetically low--$0.00 bodily injury liability, and $5000.00 property damage? and the "standard" policy is not much better. If you have any assets to protect, go with at least $500,000.00 combined liability limit.

I saw this piece on Rock Center; the guy who had leaned the gun on his truck admitted that was his mistake--but he still had expected the safety would have kept the gun safe. The other guy--shot most of his hand off--said that he did not blame Remington at all; and admitted that his hand should never have been in position to be shot--safety or not. He stated that he sent the gun to an "independent lab" which verified repeatability, then he sent it to Remington and they could not repeat the incident. He claimed he was not seeking damages from Remington, just wanted to inform them of a potential issue. I think the Glock is setup so that the firearm cannot normally discharge if it is dropped--something about the trigger bar blocking the firing pin until the trigger is actually pulled. The third guy "accidentally" shot his wife--I did not find his story persuasive. "Honey can you help me clean my gun? Yeah, stand right in front of the muzzle while I clean the trigger." He was cleaning the firearm in his garage and asked his wife to help. Gun just went off by itself. The guy is either brain dead for not unloading and double checking prior to any cleaning activity, or it was an intentional act. The NBC reporter said they (NBC) were not anti-gun, and they would do the same story if it were a defective baby stroller. However, the main expert they relied upon seemed to have an axe to grind with Remington. I can't remember, but I think NBC did mention contributory factors such as lack of maintenance and unsafe handling.

You rarely see a gas station that is not also combined with a convenience store; thus allowing the store to sell gas at low, low profit margins. I don't know the percentage, but almost everyone who buys gas is also buying something else inside the store. And most of that stuff has very high margins (think coffee and soda, cost is almost nothing so it is pure profit). The gas is a "loss leader" to get people in to buy the stuff that pays for the business. Think about it. If you are selling gas and you lower the price to one cent less than the guy on the other corner. Even selling at break-even or a loss, you will more than make it up because you now have more people coming to your station rather than the other guy's; and the increased revenue on those high-margin incidentals will more than make up for the revenue decrease on fuel sales.

I am still ambivalent because I am not fully informed on SYG. I understand and agree in principle with law that would extend a castle doctrine to allow protection of self and property outside of the confines of your property. But I am not sure how far that should go--should there ever be a duty to retreat? Does it allow broad, blanket defense against any shooting (just say "I feared for my life" and the only wittness is dead) and the court has the burden to prove that you did not fear for your life or feel threatened? Is there a responsibility to try to de-escalate or retreat--e.g. if someone is running away from you with your property, can you chase them down and then defend yourself in the ensuing confrontation? So I think it depends on how the law is written, but I think anyone who CCW has the responsibility to understand the law, when they can/should employ the weapon, when they should step back and let the situation play out, when they should try to descalate and--when a confrontation does occur--how far do you take it. e.g. many self defense laws do not allow you to continue "defending" if the perp has backed off or becomes compliant. I think it is pretty useless to discuss the current Zimmerman case wrt SYG because it is completely dependent on whose story you believe, who was the aggressor, did Trayvon attack Z or vice versa, etc. The Jury is going to have to decide that based on fact presented in court, not based on media hyperbole from both sides--I do not envy that job because they will probably be in danger if they do not give the right decision (and by right I mean Left).

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; Singing a traditional and/or patriotic song in a public school is not Congress making a law respecting an establishment of religion.

Sorry--should have said they can be not re-appointed. No wonder I never see judges on the ballot since I moved here. As for the original question--I have considered applying. But knowing it would be an almost pointless exercise, could cause problems when I move out of state, and could get expensive and use up a lot of time better spent at the range; I decided against that fight.

Yes, but they can be not re-elected. And I can imagine the campaign ads now--against a judge who approved a CCW permit that was later used in commission of a crime.

The way I understand the law, one is presumed innocent until guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt (in criminal matters). While one may be actually guilty, guilt must be proven IAW proper legal process to establish a legal judgement of guilt.