Mrs. Peel

I dunno... "helicopters everywhere" sounds like something more tangible...? I'm doubling down on crash (with industrial explosion as my backup). Edit: nothing on CNN. You'd think some of our "LEO" or "prepper types" would be on their radio gear... keeping us up on the latest. I'm a little disappointed at the lack of good "crowdsourcing" going on here!

Eek! That doesn't sound good! Maybe a military plane crash? You've got Ft Dix and Lakehurst in the general area. Whatever it is, I hope there's no casualties/fatalities.

That's the money quote, I think.

Pretty sure that's the Hamburg, PA store you're referring to...? Their website doesn't list a NJ store. Not sure why they would charge tax to the OP...? Perhaps a mistake. But, hmmm... didn't they merge with another chain? Maybe it has something to do with that - if they have "affiliated/sister" stores in NJ? Just a guess.

As I said earlier... they would not even NEED a law like this if it weren't for the shenanigans already pulled by states like NY and NJ. The legislators here are NUTS. All these other states where people have concealed carry... the statistics are clear. They aren't the wild west. People are not running around shooting their neighbors. Credible researchers have been entirely unable to show that concealed carry causes crime - because it doesn't. I'm a logical person - I go where the facts lead me. My conclusion is... our legislators are not really concerned about crime... they never were... for them, it's about control. Pure and simple. After digging into these issues for almost 2 years now, I'm totally convinced of this.

Of course they will do this! You nailed it. If this passes, "tooth and nail" they will fight - ironically, all while passing legislation that softens plea bargaining, reduces bail and otherwise puts the career criminals most likely to commit crime back on the streets. The sheer stupidly is mind-boggling. But that's why, Stage 2: The Lawsuits will be so important. It's also why the appointment of Gorsuch and ongoing appointments to the Federal appeals and other courts (and perhaps another SCOTUS app't or two) will become so very critical! For those of us (like me!) who pinched our noses and voted for Trump based primarily on his ability to shape the courts and cut down on judicial activism, this will feel like "winning". (I certainly haven't felt anything at all like "winning" seeing some of the legislative flops as of late - or - when reading his god-awful, unrestrained, cringe-worthy Tweets, that's for damn sure! Sheesh.).

Eh, I'm not about to join you on that particular venture. I still think Roubian is a loose cannon who takes one step forward then two giant steps backwards. But, I will GLADLY eat crow on this if I turn out to be horribly wrong.

I truly believe we're not giving anything away... we all know our anti-2A-obsessed legislators will fight tooth and nail and this will all ultimately be battled in the court system anyway. Honestly? I'd make a push to personally get some extra freelance gigs to devote some of my meagre earnings to the 2A org bringing the most viable lawsuits. It's time, people. It's overdue.

Ooohhh! That's interesting. That does shed some light. Maybe that wording is NOT as harsh as I thought after all. Of course, this has a long way to go. What I think is so interesting is that the legislators in states like ours and New York have only themselves to blame if this DOES pass. After all, if it weren't for insane, abusive cases like what our state did to Shaneen Allen, I think there wouldn't even have been such a push for this law in the first place.

Need a law suit in the queue.

Yeah, I'm still not reading it that way. As someone else mentioned, that may just refer to states that don't REQUIRE a CC permit in the first place. Maybe I'm being too anal? I think that's a loophole that NJ will exploit. But, maybe you folks are right... and I'm just being too negative?

Then why is that wording that I highlighted in red in there? I'm sorry, but that reads like a curveball to me.

Man, I'm still having a hard time (for whatever reason) wrapping my brain around this. I still think this wording leaves a carve-out for crazy states like Joisey. A New Hampshire permit still doesn't allow you to carry concealed in NJ. Therefore, this wouldn't allow CC in NJ. Am I totally confused?? Edit: USRifle30Cal and I were typing at the same time it seems... I think we're focused on the same phrase.

Perhaps I missed something in the translation...? I thought this was the bill that would recognize a concealed carry permit issued from the person's state of residence (only). I have to go look at this again. Maybe I'm thinking of an earlier version? Sooo confused right now... guess I haven't been tracking this legislation that closely! Are you saying it would recognize ANY concealed carry license? Like if you had one of those NH ones that lots here were applying for, for instance?

I guess if you haven't called your reps yet, this would be the time to do it? Yes, I know some people might argue, "how will this help us in NJ?" - but I think it would exert even more pressure, bolster any subsequent legal suits brought, etc. It's another incremental step forward. Besides, from a simple standpoint of JUSTICE, the way out-of-state concealed carry licensees have been abused by this state is just WRONG - and IMO it needs to stop.

If I had that service in my area, I'd do it in a heartbeat. How convenient! Even if I used it just for non-perishable items - detergents, paper goods, etc. It would cut down my time at the grocery store. Yes, that list I gave is some of the most popular companies that send the "kits" with all the fresh ingredients, the recipe, etc.

Here's a list of some top-rated ones: https://www.top10bestmealdelivery.com/?bkw=meal kits delivered&bcampid=267397000&bcamp=MD 1 Bing&bagid=1177577362511573&bag=delivery meal general Nag&btarid=kwd-73598623664868:loc-190&bidm=be&bnet=o&bd=c&bmobval=0&bt=search&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=meal kits delivered&utm_campaign=Bing+CPC+Campaign&c=73598651219932&m=e&k=73598623664868&binterest=&bphysical=96775&bfeedid=&a=B9502&ts=delivery&topic=

That's interesting. I had looked into a few of them (Blue Apron, Hello Fresh, etc.) because I thought the idea was intriguing. But I opted out because I found the price point was higher than compared to just buying enough groceries for the week and doing a certain amount of "meal prepping" one night. But, then again, I'm just cooking for one, which makes a big difference. For a busy family, it does sound like a nice balance between healthy eating and convenience. If it turns cooking the meal into shared "family time", so much the better.

Let me be clear, I'm really not trying to be rude! He's clearly done a lot of research and is passionate about his cause. I can respect that aspect of his posts. It's the fatally bad attitude that's starting to tick me off.

Were my above comments snarky? Yep, you betcha! I'm trying to hit you on the back of the head with a 2x4 --- hopefully, to get you to see how impossibly rude and arrogant you sound. But, if you've been booted off of of multiple forums before, I should probably throw in the towel right now. Clearly, you'll never see that you create your own problems.

- oh, for god's sakes! Don't be so petulant. You've been here for less than a week... and now you feel you need to pack up and go because you decided that readers didn't: drop everything... do immediate research... and then fawn over your brilliant idea (as quickly as you think they should have)? Cut the melodrama, pls. As others have pointed out, yours is a provocative idea that would undoubtedly generate a not inconsiderable backlash. You thought you were going to pitch that idea and win converts in 6 days on here, huh? Are you for real?

Concur. And that's why I hope every single person who reads this thread has their own 2018 New Shooter Recruitment Plan all mapped out. How many people do you intend to bring to the range monthly? Have you identified who they are? Have you talked it up already (planting the seed)? etc. I believe that may be the single most impactful thing every individual gun owner can do (and should also be a big focus of our 2A groups). If they caught ME on a hot mic instead of Loretta - I'd be saying "recruit - recruit - recruit!!!"

In general, I'll concede the point that "snark" happens on all forums. It's rude and unfortunate, I agree. And yet... you also "threw someone under the bus" in your own post. My point: manners are a 2-way street. I also agree that it's difficult to spur people to do ANYTHING... much less something that will inconvenience them or put them at any kind of perceived risk. And yet, your claim of being booted off of forums for no good reason, or that you made people "apoplectic" while you were being so "nice" --- sorry, still sounds like a stretch. My observation is that people getting booted off of sites generally contributed mightily to their own online demise. (In my mind, you're off to a poor start here... but I'll be delighted if you prove me wrong and turn out to be a gentleman poster of the highest order, lol). And finally, though I appreciate your laser-like focus on the laws as written and as intended, you asked an open-ended question in your prior post - why the focus on individual rights? My off-the-cuff suggestions were posed more on an understanding of how people think, how they act... you know, real life. The laws can say whatever they want, but if citizens (flawed people) or government officials (also flawed people) think those words inconvenience or threaten them in some way, they'll tend to turn a blind eye to them. It's a perfectly valid observation on human nature. So, why are we arguing about it?... Maybe you just like to argue? I actually don't. Let's stop. Besides, I'm really not trying to hijack or drift your thread. You have a point of view and should be able to express it. If you can manage to do it without trashing someone else, your arguments will have more weight (with me anyway).

I don't know you from Adam. All I know is 1) what I see (you joined here less than a week ago, correct? And you've directed us several times towards your publications) and 2) what you have told us (see paragraph above as one example). You "may" well know far more than me about our legal framework and about the 2A specifically. I think your argument is an interesting one and I will take more time this week to peruse your site more carefully. I strive to be open-minded to all arguments. Yet, common sense (which I do have, in abundance) tells me that tackling the establishment on such a controversial issue as gun rights and successfully waging a legal battle all the way to SCOTUS probably takes many skills. One of the most basic would be an ability to make your case to potential 2A supporters (without telegraphing impatience) in order to engage/win them over to your point of view. You've already shown a wee bit of impatience in this thread. You've also apparently ruffled so many feathers elsewhere that you're getting banned from other 2A websites. To boot, you're on here casting shade on another individual (but in an indirect manner so he doesn't even know he's being trashed online). All of that gives me great pause. I'm not saying I'm disregarding your legal argument, not at all. I am saying that after only a handful of posts, I'm already starting to question your approach. You may be one of those perpetually rebellious souls that views being banned from sites as an accomplishment of some sort - a twisted point of pride? Whereas I just see it as a failure to communicate effectively. Food for thought.