Sniper

Bad idea. There are tons of kitchen renovations that don't get/need permits. If you call the town and open that can of worms, expect an invasion. It's a lot less time consuming and costly to ask for "Forgiveness versus Permission" on those types of projects.

Exactly, if the plumbing or electric is being moved or relocated, then a permit could be needed. But, many even do major renos and relocations of utilities and never get a permit or inspections.

I've done a lot of work in the state, I never heard that you need permits or inspections to replace cabinets. They're considered fixtures just like the oven, refrige, washer, dryer, etc.

That's what I was thinking. The smallest unit is $40/month or $480 a year to store just magazines. At that rate, is it worth it to store them indefinitely?

In approximately 160 days, you become a felon if they're in your house too, so what's your plans for that? If the cops come to your house for any numerous reasons (fire, robbery, domestic disturbance, noise complaint, etc.) there's the potential for your mags to be found.

OK, so you think every one that has gone to the range since the new bill was passed has only taken 10 round mags? Not a single person has taken a 10+ round mag to the range in the last two weeks? How many of them have been arrested? Wouldn't that be real easy picking for Murphy?

Nothing for nothing, but I've asked multiple times, and there hasn't been but one or two people arrested for having +15 round mags in the state, and that law goes back to the 1990s. I'm sure there are a heck of a lot of +15 rounders currently in the state.

I agree. Someone doesn't get involved in shooting sports because they're looking for a low cost hobby.

You should have nailed him with that legal Taser that you're carrying around all the time.

I read an article not too long ago that said illegal guns get "passed around" on average 6 times before being recovered by police. Seems once a criminal uses it for an adventure, they play pass the hot potato to someone else.

Where would this be published when they finally get around to it?

It's been confusing, for sure. If I'm reading the final amended bill correctly, we should be able to use a block in the mags, since I don't see that last piece in the bill (block or pin). After all, magblocks were considered "NJ compliant" in the 15/xx mags sold by many of the manufacturers, so why wouldn't magblocks be OK in the 10/xx versions?

Why does that matter? Do they have access to the handguns too? Why can't they go in a plastic case like mentioned above on the top shelf of a closet?

I see the "permanently modified" part in the amended bill, but I don't see that particular text of "pins and blocks". It might have been removed on the final version of the bill.

It's there in the bill, here's the line: b. Render the semi-automatic rifle or magazine inoperable 1or permanently modify a large capacity ammunition magazine to accept 10 rounds or less1 https://legiscan.com/NJ/text/A2761/2018

How about a Make/Model of the unit, so someone can look it up to see what it takes?

Wow, they be soundin' like fightin' words...

What existing law was changed? Was this the 15 round law from decades ago that they just changed to 10? Or something else?

Are you waving the White flag?

(Sorry, I couldn't resist..)

Come on, don't you know anything about fishing??? The fish are wwwaaaayyyyyyy out in the middle, over 100 yards away. That's why you need this thing!! It's all about casting distance when catching fish (specially the guy firing it off the back of his boat)!! He who casts the farthest, wins!!!

I'm not trying to argue, I'm trying to understand this process. The magazine bill was introduced Feb. 1, 2018. I don't know if it was a "cut and paste" from parts of a past bill, or something new. Isn't the "introduced date" a Start point for a bill? https://legiscan.com/NJ/text/A2761/2018 Also, even if it was a cut and paste, it was voted on and signed by Murphy two weeks ago, so what is the legality of it? I understand that there are old laws on the books (as stated above), and new ones get written. Why would the Dems let an unconstitutional law (knocked down last November) still be inserted into a new bill?? Doesn't anyone in Trenton proofread?

The ruling on stun guns was back in November. The new magazine bill was introduced in February, with the stun gun clause in it? If it was still on the books, why duplicate it?

So, you're willing to go strap one on and go through your normal routine each week out in the public?

So, the question is, did this new bill make them illegal, or did the previous ruling make this current bill null and void?