My final research paper on NJ gun control

[Pew Pew Plates 358]

This is from awhile ago but just found it. Did this for my english class. Maybe some of you will enjoy it. Its fluffed up with a good amount of BS to meet the page requirement lol.

 

Glenn Papp

English 1

Prof. Tyson

April 11th, 2008

New Jersey Gun Law Reforms

New Jersey has a history of ineffective and highly restrictive gun control laws. Bias, media, and misinformation have created a negative typecast towards guns, their owners, and have led to strange and ridiculous laws trying to oppress law abiding gun-owners. In order to initiate a more effective state of gun control in New Jersey, several things must be altered. The assault weapon ban, carry laws, penalties, and the efficacy of the gun control laws themselves must be reviewed and subsequently altered. But whether you are an avid shooter or are completely against firearms, it can be agreed that it is necessary for reforms in the legislation, because despite where one stands on the issue of gun control, they are a necessary and guaranteed part of an American citizen’s constitutional rights.

 

A great example of one of New Jersey’s absolutely ridiculous laws is the Assault Weapon Ban of 1994, which started out as a federal law set forth by President Bill Clinton. It has since expired federally on September 13th, 2004. This ban made hundreds of firearms illegal for civilians to possess (Adams, P5). The ban had set forth laws that banned guns based on “evil features” such as bayonet lugs, pistol grips, folding stocks etc. The law also made guns illegal based upon how they look, or how “evil” their names sound. Of course New Jersey, in all its infinite wisdom, chose to retain this law after the rest of the country for the most part let it sunset. So now here in New Jersey, you cannot buy an “AK-47” but you can buy a “WASR-10”. What are the differences making one illegal and one legal? The difference is simply the name. You see, the AK-47 is an evil assault device because the name is mean, but a WASR-10 is an AK-47 with a different name made in Romania, so it’s totally acceptable and legal because of its name. Since New Jersey considers BB guns such as the infamous Daisy Red Ryder a fully fledged firearm, it is illegal because it holds more than fifteen BBs due to the Assault Weapon Ban’s magazine capacity restriction. I cannot give my nephew a BB gun as a gift because he will then be in possession of an illegal assault weapon! Violation of this law results in up to five full years in jail and/or up to a $5,000 fine (Markowitz, 1). There is no direct correlation between gun control laws restricting the use/purchase of guns, and violent crimes committed with guns (Murray, 91).

 

Another area of the New Jersey laws that needs reform is concealed carry laws. Currently in New Jersey, it is technically legal for a citizen with a clean record and over the age of twenty one to obtain a concealed carry permit for pistols. New Jersey however is by law a “may issue” state meaning that they do not by law need to issue the permits to even the most qualified of people if they don’t want to, which is usually the case. Obtaining a concealed carry permit in the state of New Jersey is near impossible. Why may you ask do us citizens need a permit to carry a pistol? It is proven that conceal carry helped prevent crime. Approximately 2.5 million crimes are thwarted per year by a defensive gun user (Jost, 28). That comes down to approximately one crime stopped in the country every thirteen seconds, by a law abiding citizen with a registered, legal firearm. New Jersey defiantly should join the forty other states that introduced right to carry laws, and adopt “right to carry” laws, as the statistics show a very good chance at decreasing crime. James Lott and David mustard found that “allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to produce no increase in accidental deaths. If those states which did not have Right to Carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults would have been avoided yearly....[W]hen state concealed handgun laws went into effect in a county, murders fell by 8.5 percent, and rapes and aggravated assaults fell by 5 and 7 percent.” (NRA-ILA, 1). If this research proves true, then why don’t we adopt that right? It is after all, our constitutional right. Some people even believe that the school shooting at Virginia Technical Institute could have been countered effectively if students had privately owned guns on campus, and carried them. In that particular scenario, there could have possibly been a dramatically lower number of killed and wounded students that day if one of the students had the means to effectively defend himself and his classmates against the shooter. I believe that New Jersey should then however, keep very strict laws and regulations upon conceal carry permit holders and require some amount of training if they do indeed adopt the right to carry and slacken the laws to allow that. This is because having a weapon of such magnitude in public is an enormous responsibility.

 

If New Jersey, or any state for that matter, is to slacken laws pertaining to gun ownership, there needs to be a stronger deterrence against committing crimes with guns. A person may justify using a gun to settle an argument or make a threat and justify that result for fines, community service, or a little while in jail. However, if the penalties for committing such an act were stiffer, such as 10 years in jail for an unjustified brandishing of a weapon, it would keep everything in check. However, this brings into question the effectiveness of gun laws overall as they stand now. The question of gun control is very often and very wrongly separated into two black and white distinct groups. The two groups are simply those in favor of gun control, and more laws pertaining to gun ownership, and those who are anti gun control, those who favor the slackening of the laws against guns and their lawful ownership. Basically what then must be decided is who can purchase what kind of firearms under what particular circumstances (LaFollette, 263). A perspective to also consider is that of the common police officer. Police officers of course want to take guns out of the hands of criminals that could potentially use those guns against them or other people. However, for the most part, they want to keep the second amendment right intact for those Americans who deserve it, the peaceful law abiding citizens. They want the laws to only to affect the illegal ownership, something that the Brady law and such does not do because it affects everybody as a whole, good or bad (Fotis, 1).

It is common knowledge among people that most firearms that are used in crimes are not legally obtained by the person committing the crime. I believe that all New Jersey is accomplishing by tightening the gun control laws, is making it harder for the law abiding citizen to obtain guns for sporting or defensive purposes. While accomplishing this, it’s actually not making it any harder at all for the criminals to obtain the weaponry because they weren’t getting them through legal channels in the first place. There is no dramatic proportional drop of gun homicides vs. other homicides from city to city, where gun access or lack thereof widely varies. It is also believed that gun homicides simply won’t disappear with the restriction or abolishment of firearms. The belief is that the person committing that crime will simply just switch to a different weapon and use that alternate weapon to the same effect. Is it still a gun control advocate’s victory if a particular states shootings are down 50% but stabbing incidents are up 200% as a result? I sure don’t think so!

 

According to Decision Making Information, Inc (DMI) data, fifteen percent of registered United States voters have had to utilize a weapon in the self defense role. Another ten percent have needed to use a firearm in the self defense role, but had none available at the time needed (Wright, 29). This shows that in potentially in New Jersey there could be a ten percent increase in self defense instances, and perhaps then a drop in crime. If a burglar went after somebody in their house and knew that they had a gun, I seriously think it would make that robber think twice about his actions. This is especially true if everybody has been trained in self defense shooting tactics. If the laws were altered to make self defense more legal and easier to go about, people would be less hesitant to defend themselves effectively. This therefore, would pose a great threat upon criminals who wish to burglarize or threaten law abiding members of the community.

As with any argument, one must always look at the opposing side to gain a better understanding of the issue being argued out. As with most politically oriented arguments, there is strong opposition to my stance on gun control, and unfortunately many people would like to see guns abolished, or made very difficult to obtain. This is especially true in New Jersey. Pertaining to the assault weapon ban of 1994, crimes committed by illegal “assault” weapons dropped by half according to the Brady center to prevent gun violence (Adams, 3). This however can be countered with changing demographics and the crime rates lowering regardless of that particular ban on so called “assault weapons.” 1993 to 1997 was the pinnacle of gun control in the United States and New Jersey. In 1993, the Brady law was passed necessitating background checks and waiting periods, however it was superseded in 1998 by NICS, the National Instant Check Service. In 1994 the assault weapons ban abolished so called “assault weapons” that were banned by features or name. And finally, in 1997, President Bill Clinton made a deal with gun manufacturers to sell safety locks with about eighty percent of their sold handguns nationwide (Adams, 15)

 

New jersey, due to bias, misinformation, and media, has a history of arguably ineffective and highly restrictive gun ownership laws which only hinder the acquiring of firearms by law abiding citizens, rather than restricting the firearms access to the criminal elements that the laws are supposed to target. There are several things must be reformed in order to initiate a state of more effective and less restrictive gun ownership laws, such as conceal carry laws or the outdated assault weapon ban. If you are an avid shooter or a gun control advocate who wants to completely abolish guns among private citizens, it can be largely agreed upon that reforms in the New Jersey state laws are necessary, and no matter how you view the issue of gun control. The reforms are absolutely necessary because the laws that are currently in place are restricting gun access in all the wrong places and is not doing anything to keep crime down. It is a guaranteed right by the second amendment of the United States Constitution and that right shall not be infringed by our state government.

[GRIZ 3,369]

This is from awhile ago but just found it. Did this for my english class. Maybe some of you will enjoy it. Its fluffed up with a good amount of BS to meet the page requirement lol.

 

The NJ AW law was passed before the federal law. It went into effect May of 1991. The federal law went in in September 1994 and it was pushed through Congress as the Democrats wanted it through as they saw the handwriting on the wall and their impending loss of congress to the Republicans. They were able to do so by putting an expiration date on the law.

[The_Matrix 105]

Did you get an "A+" or F?

[fliks 20]

yah, Glenn, I too am curious about the grade you received on this...

[Pew Pew Plates 358]

I'm pretty sure I got a B+, suprisingly.

 

I was "that guy" who always went against the grain when it came to class discussions LOL. Ethics of torture... everyone would be like OMG NOOOO and I'de raise my hand and be like, hell yeah if it saves lives!

[raceruss2003 0]

LOL Glen I know how you feel. I race offroad motorcycles and majored in Biology in college. I was definitely the blacksheep in Ecology, forestry and wildlife management, etc... All the Profs viewed me as one of those guys who drinks beer and rips up the land and habitat. Glad to see you held your ground.