Jump to content
M1152

NJ LAWMAKERS ANNOUNCE PLANS TO DESTROY RIGHT TO CARRY

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, JohnnyB said:

The woman said Glock is the most popular carry gun and you can switch it to full auto and fire 20 shots a second!

Yes.  Someone showed her a YT video of a highly restricted unobtanium full auto glock, now, in her mind, all glocks are full auto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glock auto switches (black market produced) are very much out there in "the wild" - As usual, (D) legislators only understand the half truth of it, but this is what's driving their rhetoric:

https://www.wbrc.com/2022/05/19/its-just-spraying-rounds-everywhere-tiny-illegal-machine-gun-device-surfaces-ala/
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bennj said:

I have a sneaking suspicion that the people who are using switches on Glocks probably aren't legal carry permit holders, and her ignorance should have been pointed out post haste.

not a single part of this unconstitutional law will affect any one of them either

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How they voted: NJ Assembly approves new limits on carrying guns (nj1015.com)

“Because of Bruen, more New Jerseyans will die as a result of gun violence,” said Assemblyman Joe Danielsen, D-Somerset. “The question before us now is: How many will die?”

------

Give me a friggin' break!  The pearl clutching, Chicken Little routine is old.  Legal, lawful firearm owner aren't the problem!  Are "these people" really that stupid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, CMJeepster said:

“Because of Bruen, more New Jerseyans will die as a result of gun violence,” said Assemblyman Joe Danielsen, D-Somerset. “The question before us now is: How many will die?”

More now because of your bullshit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Krdshrk said:

More now because of your bullshit

"They" always act like the sky is falling and it's the end of days.  Remember when the Federal "assault weapon" ban lapsed and "they" said that open warfare was going to break out in the streets?  That didn't happen that I can recall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CMJeepster said:

"they" said that open warfare was going to break out in the streets?  That didn't happen that I can recall.

Go to Camden, S. Plainfield or Newark and tell me there is not open warfare.  I guess Chinese and Mexican drug fueled gang wars don't count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Scorpio64 said:

Go to Camden, S. Plainfield or Newark and tell me there is not open warfare.  I guess Chinese and Mexican drug fueled gang wars don't count.

Stolen / illegally obtained pistols in most cases, not legally acquired "assault weapons."

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CMJeepster said:

Stolen / illegally obtained pistols in most cases, not legally acquired "assault weapons."

They "feel" a gun is a gun, and if they can keep legal guns off street, its still less guns. Thats all they care about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Scorpio64 said:

Go to Camden, S. Plainfield or Newark and tell me there is not open warfare.  I guess Chinese and Mexican drug fueled gang wars don't count.

i went to visit mom on sunday at cooper in camden. she was still in er. they have metal detectors to get into there. and security. i never thought i'd go to a hospital with metal detectors.

2 hours ago, CMJeepster said:

Stolen / illegally obtained pistols in most cases, not legally acquired "assault weapons."

they'll come back to that one with "well they had to get those guns from somewhere".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We know that the cancel Carry bill will be passed by the Senate and go to the Furher for signature. It will immediately go to the courts and should be found to be unconstitutional. The sad part was that there was no push back by any Democrat. Not a single one. These zombies all walk in lockstep to tyranny.  This was never about guns it was about CONTROL.

 

 

hitquote.jpeg

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DAHL said:

We know that the cancel Carry bill will be passed by the Senate and go to  Czar Murphys desk for signature. It will immediately go to the courts and should be found to be unconstitutional. The sad part was that there was no push back by any Democrat. Not a single one. These zombies all walk in lockstep to Czar Murphy's tyranny.  This was never about guns it was about CONTROL.

 

control.jpeg

It’s typical. If they want any influence, they can’t buck the leadership. And pro-gun democrats in politics are as rare as hen’s teeth now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, CMJeepster said:

“Because of Bruen, more New Jerseyans will die as a result of gun violence,” said Assemblyman Joe Danielsen, D-Somerset. “The question before us now is: How many will die?”

More Jersey criminals for sure, which is a net positive for society.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CMJeepster said:

"They" can't be that stupid.

they are. i've had them try it on me.

12 hours ago, CMJeepster said:

How they voted: NJ Assembly approves new limits on carrying guns (nj1015.com)

“Because of Bruen, more New Jerseyans will die as a result of gun violence,” said Assemblyman Joe Danielsen, D-Somerset. “The question before us now is: How many will die?”

------

Give me a friggin' break!  The pearl clutching, Chicken Little routine is old.  Legal, lawful firearm owner aren't the problem!  Are "these people" really that stupid?

yea. they're essentially calling all legal gun owners criminals.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Walkinguf61 said:

New York’s law that is similar to this bill just got smacked down with a ruling by a federal judge in the western district .

Is the 2nd circuit going to overrule this, probably but that’s three judges calling this law unconstitutional. 
That puts pressure on the 2nd. 
 

Folks to be clear there is no official opinion from the district court in NY yet.  The plaintiff’s first sought a TRO, which is temporary until they could get injunctive relief.  The judge needed to review the merits to determine if there was  greater than 50% chance the Plaintiff’s would prevail.  Suddaby did an analysis and determined that the answer was yes and granted the TRO.  The 2nd circuit then stayed the TRO, and was supposed to have a three judge panel review to see if they agreed on the Suddaby’s conclusion.  In the mean time Plaintiff’s went back to the district court for the injunction which was also granted and then stayed by the 2nd circuit.  We are now waiting for a three judge panel to decide on the injunction.  If they come back with a stay Plaintiff’s will likely appeal that to SCOTUS, if the injunction is granted Defendants will appeal to SCOTUS.  All of this this is just for the injunction.  The case hasn’t even been argued before the district court.  Once all that is worked out, to determine if the law can be enforced by NY why the case moves through the system, the case will go back to the District court for oral arguments and an actual opinion will be issued.  This has a long road ahead.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Spartiati said:

 

This TRO was issued by another judge in a different federal district . New York is covered by more than one federal district . This TRO is still in effect as of last night ( I didn’t check this morning yet). This is the third district judge to rule parts of the New York law as unconstitutional. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a citizen goes against the rule of law in the Constitution/Bill of Rights he/she can be arrested and prosecuted but if our legislators do it then its perfectly OK by them.  They are mistaken. When you go against our constitutional republic that is called treason. It makes for the argument that our Democratic lawmakers are law breakers not law makers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, father-of-three said:

His first question was his best question.

true. i was more paying mind to the level of childishness going on in our statehouse. these people were acting like teenagers that were just trying to make excuses to their parents. just based on the attitudes i heard in this video, i feel none of them should be allowed in any position of governance over anyone.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a political insider that I know. Both houses of the legislature and the governor all know the cancel carry bill is unconstitutional. They also know that it will eventually be overturned.  The real reason for the bill is to drag things out another three years so when Murphy leaves the governors office and campaigns for a NJ State senate seat, he can brag in his campaign to the idiots : "Governor Murphy of NJ - enacted strict gun laws that kept guns off the street and made our citizens safe"

I'll hope hope and pray for a quicker resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...