Paulie Buffo

Welcome to New Jersey . . . If you want to be a firearms owner in this state the take a job in law enforcement. What is considered retired "law enforcement"? FBI? CIA? CUSTOMS? Anyone that ever had arrest authority? I've seen a video of a guy shooting 30 round using 2 15's and again with 3 10's - time difference is less than a second or so. This is just the foot and leg getting further in the door for a total ban.

"who concluded that he failed to establish specific threats that put him in special and unavoidable danger" So how many politicians, judges, retired leo's and so on had to give "specific threats" to be allowed to defend themselves and their family? So if I have a "stranger" leave a threatening message on voice mail is that enough? Do I actually need to get attacked and beat up? Does the beating have to cause hospitalization? So in NJ "law abiding citizen" basically means "target on back".

I contacted my legislators (plus a few others) to see if they would push for at least allowing a limited grandfather clause : up to 15 rounds grandfathered in if it was what came with the firearm when it was legally purchased - keeping the original purchase together. I know its not that good but its better than permanent modification (no way) or having them live out of state separated form their loving firearm - and Murphy and his com-padres always rant about not wanting to split up families.

Rumor I heard was once these new laws are signed the anti-gunners are planning on causing altercations with anyone they perceive as pro-2A. It would be a misdemeanor in court but could cause a revocation of firearms right in NJ to ALL parties involved. This could put firearms owners in a touchy predicament. Just being overly cautions as I really don't trust the anti's or the NJ government.

I think we need some sanctuary counties here in NJ. It would be interesting. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-effingham-county-gun-sanctuary-20180417-story.html 2 more things, 1st: Sussex, Warren and Hunterdon counties should vote to secede from NJ and join PA. 2nd: (from my family in PA) People from NJ - when you move to PA please leave your NJ liberal attitude back in NJ. We don't want it here. Firearms bills being pushed now in PA seem a lot like the ones being passed in NJ. Your leaving NJ for a reason. The whole east coast of PA is becoming NJ west. Please stop it. You ruined your state, don't come here and ruin ours.

It doesn't. I was just looking for another angle to present to my senator in an outside chance to sway him. Its the "petty disorderly" that's scary - it's an extremely encompassing "law" that most states consider a misdemeanor.

Bill A1217 "Extreme Risk Protective Order Act of 2018" has one of the listed offenses - "petty disorderly persons offense" and your firearms privileges are forever banned in the USA. So don't get caught with a joint, publicly intoxicated, a small scuffle in a bar or be charged with the vague "obstruction" charge. The grandfathering of 10+ round magazines could be defined as - the standard magazines that came with the firearm when it was purchased. It stinks to not keep additional mags but at least we can keep what came with the original purchase. That may be an angle to push. The more I read these bills the more devious they seem.

It's easy for the anti-gunners to rally because they have emotion on their side - kids were savagely shot in a school. I think all of us can understand why emotions run high. Whether they are right in attacking "guns" and the NRA does not matter. They run on pure emotion and that emotional anger drives them to rally and protest. Now on this side - its hard to be emotional over someone preventing a robbery, rape or murder. I'm not saying it's not important - but good things just don't emote the same feeling as bad things. I understand that self defense and the right to bear arms is extremely important to myself and others here - yet the general public does not understand the way we feel, but they do understand murdered children - and the "negative emotion" is very hard to fight against. If we disagree with anti-gunners we are called "insensitive", when we rally for our rights we are called "insensitive", when we proudly wear 2A/NRA hats and shirts we are called "insensitive", if we complain about idiotic gun restrictions we are called "insensitive", seems like is we just breathe we are called "insensitive" (I'm not sure but from reading these blogs it seems Zeke is pretty sensitive) . Anyway, I believe we here care more than most people about wanting safe schools and a safer society. We despise gun violence more than anyone - because when gun violence happens WE lose our rights and we are called "insensitive".

The anti-gunners have been well funded and organized for many many years. They are left leaning political groups that wait for a tragedy like Parkland to pounce on the opposition. A handful of Soros/Bloomfield funded groups along with an empowering media have created an extremely powerful force. They don't in-fight, they cooperate and support each other. They create a single point of contact for the general public, a single web sight, a single twitter, a single email group where people can sign up for free and allow the propaganda machine to disseminate its agenda . Gun rights supporters have none of this. There is no national group or connection point. Every group we have are "paid membership" organizations - that limits the people that will sign up - we need a "sign up for free" place with "donations accepted". We need some wealthy supporters or groups (like Koch Bros) to fund it. But beware because anyone funding it will be brutally attacked as "not caring about the children" and be boycotted by the Soros/Bloomfield media. We need to keep "guns" and 2A out of the name - make it something like "Defend Our Rights" or "Defend Our Constitution". Make it more than just the 2nd - make it about ALL rights. The anti-gunners use emotional phrases like "save the children" and "never again" and then attack the 2A and guns in the details. It often seems like we have fallen into the "divide and conquer" stigma - and we have done it to ourselves. We need a national single point of contact (can't really be the NRA because the "left" has successfully tainted them). It needs to be supported by a person or group that isn't necessarily pro-gun - but pro-constitution. National spokespeople need to change the conversation from GUN rights to ALL rights. Defend ALL the amendments - the 2nd being just one of those rights. We need to redefine the term "common sense" gun laws to mean "better background checks and proper reporting to the authorities" from the current "more gun restrictions". We are letting the anti-gunners define the catch phrases. So are the various pro 2A groups willing to put aside their egos and "need to lead" mentality for the greater good? Are they willing to cede their power for the greater cause? Will the divisions continue as each of these groups fight for the limited number of paying members? Will there be a person or group of people to rise up and pull us together? Will we learn that dividing ourselves will just let the "death by a thousand" cuts continue? I guess that remains to be seen.

Link earlier not good. https://www.facebook.com/events/1206908886109104/

I'm trying to understand this issue. The 2A was put in place so the federal government could not impose tyranny on it's Citizens. Yet somehow the states were given power to restrict your 2A rights as they see fit. Then "local government" are allowed to impose even more restrictions if they so choose. So what would stop state and local governments from doing the federal governments bidding. I thought the 2A was put in place to defend against a potential tyrannical government - I don't remember it being only about a "federal" tyrannical government - tyrannical governments exist at all levels. It seems the same people that want to disarm us are the same people we were given firearms to defend against in the first place.

Looks like some kids are rallying - support them https://www.yahoo.com/news/march-guns-rally-planned-virginia-145745799.html

"A state or smaller government division can't make a law that supersedes a federal law. They can make a law that's more restrictive. They can't make a law that contradicts federal law." They can make it "more restrictive"? So can a town can require more restrictions on proving you are a town resident before you vote, not just a voter ID but also say a water or electric bill? It would be more restrictive than Murphy's "let anyone vote" policy. Some would say that those additional restrictions are a violation of rights - just like imposing more restrictive firearms restrictions. To me they are similar in how they are "more restrictive".

Coming from the person who "waived background checks" for people she hired for high security positions. http://dailycaller.com/2018/04/01/democrats-pakistani-background-checks/