124gr9mm

Respectfully, I think you just need to spend more time dry-firing and at the range. I wouldn't use one in a Bullseye match, but on a torso sized target there's no reason you can't get rounds on paper out to 25 yards. Go online and grab a case of ammo for the best price you can find and have at it. This guy hits them out to 80 yards (the gong).

Respectfully, you shouldn't be coming to an internet forum like this for the kind of "absolute" you're looking for. As the the question of municipalities selectively enforcing a TRO, it makes no sense. The law was passed by Murphy. The judge issued a TRO for parts of the law which essentially strikes them...temporarily. Municipalities don't get to selectively enforce something that isn't a law. Well, I guess they could try to, but as soon as you got in front of a judge the case would be tossed. If you currently have a carry permit and are exercising it in a way that's protected by the TRO but would otherwise be against the law if it wasn't in place, then you would be very wise to stay on top of the court proceedings so you'll know which way the decision lands. What's allowed one day could quickly be illegal the next.

Since neither of us are lawyers, I won't dig deeper, but the law you cited states it's an offense if you knowingly enter a place you're not supposed to or enter a place where you've already been trespassed. That means you have to either know you're in violation or have previously violated and have been trespassed. The scenario I was commenting on was neither of those.

I'd love for it to happen, but we're talking about legislation that has to be voted on, not a Supreme Court decision that nullifies existing law because it's unconstitutional.. Many Democrats base a significant part of their platforms on being "anti gun". You will not get enough Democrat votes to support any pro 2A gun legislation, and you will not get a Democratic President (particularly this one) to sign any pro 2A bill into law.

Unfortunately you need the House, Senate, and President to be Republican in order for it to have a chance. This one one won't go anywhere...

I'm not a lawyer, but you would be wise to abide by the rules of an order you were given by the court. If you don't agree with the stipulations in the order or if you feel that there is new legislation that renders the stipulation in the order moot, then you should contact the court and get THEM to provide you with an updated order (or a letter indicating the order is rescinded). You can't ignore a court order.

I think the Mosin train has rolled by. LOTS of people were into them when you could pick them up for $200 (or lower) and surplus ammo was plentiful. Unfortunately the rifles aren't cheap anymore and the ammo is getting expensive. I saw a listing for a crate on Gunbroker with a buy it now price of $9k and the bidding was already at $5.5k!! Add to that the fact that regardless of the modifications, a Mosin will always shoot like a Mosin...just "OK". I know there are people out there who SWEAR they added a stock, chassis, shim kit, screws, etc, and made their a "sub-MOA gun"...but that's bullshit. That said, my M44 is a family favorite when we have a range day. Something about the fireball, big recoil, big sounds, and stiff bolt that makes it fun to shoot...

Oh stop. There's a difference between having a conversation with a cop and offering "any information that was requested". I was pulled over on my way to Cherry Ridge last spring and when the cop asked where I was headed (as they always do), I told him I was out for an extended lunch break for the first time in a month because things had been so busy at work. I told him I work from home so I usually end up cutting lunch short, but that day was too nice out so I was going to get some time just for me. No wife, no kids, just me and some open air. Way too much information, but who fucking cares? I didn't say "I'm on my way to Cherry Ridge with rifles, pistols, a shotgun, and hundreds of rounds of ammo", and I didn't say "I don't answer questions to police officers during traffic stops". He laughed and went back to his car. He came back after running my information and just gave me a warning. Yes, the cop may have suspected where I was headed, but my story was plausible (and it was the truth) and he was satisfied that I wasn't on drugs or otherwise a danger to society. Had he asked to search my vehicle, I'd simply reply, "no I'd rather not. I don't want to waste any more of my lunch break than possible on the side of the road". Being able to interact with cops doesn't mean you're licking their boots.

Not a stupid question at all. I'm not a lawyer, but in that scenario you haven't really gone afoul of any gun laws, so you're not an instant felon. You ignored the sign, so the owners will likely be pissed and have you "trespassed" by the police. That means you're no longer allowed in the store and you'd be arrested if you went there again. So that means be aware of the signs on places you go and don't let your gun poke out from under your shirt.

It hasn't been 57 years for me (though it's close) but that's been my EXACT experience with being pulled over. I drove like an idiot when I was younger, so I got pulled over frequently, but even back then I was as courteous as possible. That resulted in many more warning than tickets. Never searched, arrested, tased, shot, etc. Did I answer more questions than "necessary"? Absolutely, but I kept everything conversational, so i asked the cops questions too. And they answered. I did encounter a fair number of douchebags, but even then, I was nice and polite. No need to put myself in a shitty mood just because some asshole on the night shift lives his life that way. If I'm carrying and get pulled over (before July) I'm not going to offer that I'm carrying, but if asked I'll be honest and say yes and share my permit (and copy of court order). I travel in compliance with the law, so things should end there, but if they go further, so be it. I'll complain along the way and cite reasons why we're going out of bounds, but I'll still play along. Starting in July I'll obviously notify right away.

That's crazy. I applied for 2 permits in late December and the turnaround was about 3 weeks. My son applied for his FID at the same time (same town) and the turnaround was about 4 weeks. A 3 - 4 MONTH turnaround for those is absurd...

Maybe it's a language difference, but I don't think we're in disagreement. Murphy is a political hack who only cares about his own power and career aspirations. I think we're ALL glad that some of the legislation is TEMPORARILY restrained (not stopped). Agree that people should be very happy with the progress made.

Again, the LAW as signed by Murphy is far more restrictive than what's in place in most states. Read it and you'll be shocked at how much it oversteps Bruen. There is currently a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in place preventing any of the limitations from being effective, but litigation is ongoing, so there are no guarantees that they will be permanently eliminated (in my opinion the legislation is unconstitutional and will be scrapped, but that's another discussion). I agree that RIGHT NOW (thanks to the efforts of the 2A lawyers, Anthony Calandro, etc) we can carry similarly to other states, but the fighting has just started.

Read the legislation. It's VERY restrictive. Yes, there is a TRO in place, but that's temporary. The challenge is now with the court and it looks promising, but regardless of the initial decision, it will be challenged for a while. There's no guarantee that the TRO will stay in place, so the restrictions (including NOT being able to carry IN YOUR VEHICLE) could remain in place.

I'd view it the same way. I'd print a copy of that email and attach it to the original court order and carry it with me until the permit expires.