Will anything good ever come out of Heller/mc Donald

[Jim Hartman 31]

I was optomistic that NJ assault weapons ban would be ruled unconstitutional along with id cards and pistol permits but Im starting to feel like "the most important 2 ammendment ruling ever" is for nothing and only simbolic. This was to have real meaning for states like NJ and Cal.This better mean something.

[djg0770 481]

This better mean something.

 

Sorry to do this Jim... Or What? What are you or anyone else going to do about it?

 

Despite the quantity of organizations fighting for our rights (ANJRPC, 2AF, NJ2AS, NJCSD, etc) it seems as though the vast majority of the regular community and the firearms community are apathetic towards any real change regarding firearms in NJ.

 

I have already resigned myself to the fact that if I want to exercise my 2A rights, I will need to relocate, outside of NJ, permanently. Oh, by the way, that move provides solutions to a host of other problems I have with NJ like excessive taxation, overcrowding, ridiculous traffic, etc.

[Jim Hartman 31]

Sorry to do this Jim... Or What? What are you or anyone else going to do about it?

 

Despite the quantity of organizations fighting for our rights (ANJRPC, 2AF, NJ2AS, NJCSD, etc) it seems as though the vast majority of the regular community and the firearms community are apathetic towards any real change regarding firearms in NJ.

 

I have already resigned myself to the fact that if I want to exercise my 2A rights, I will need to relocate, outside of NJ, permanently. Oh, by the way, that move provides solutions to a host of other problems I have with NJ like excessive taxation, overcrowding, ridiculous traffic, etc.

I agree with everything you said. It just sucks that you have to move in order to exersize your GOD given rights. The 14th ammendment was applied to the 2nd my understanding and Allen Gura's also was that states cannot exclude any constitutional right. I was hoping Heller Mc Donald was going to be like Roe v Wade or Brown V Board of education I guess we will see.

[heaterbob 53]

as long as the silent majority sit by and watch nothing gets changed for the better. make the phone calls, write the letters yourself and make sure you vote. in nj the squeeky wheel gets greased, if the governor didnt get tired of the phone calls brian aiken would still be an example. governors office 609-292-6000

[djg0770 481]

I agree with everything you said. It just sucks that you have to move in order to exersize your GOD given rights. The 14th ammendment was applied to the 2nd my understanding and Allen Gura's also was that states cannot exclude any constitutional right. I was hoping Heller Mc Donald was going to be like Roe v Wade or Brown V Board of education I guess we will see.

 

I don't disagree with you, at all. NJ will go kicking and screaming just like the South did with Brown vs BOE

[Jim Hartman 31]

I don't disagree with you, at all. NJ will go kicking and screaming just like the South did with Brown vs BOE

Im trying to keep up some positive fellings in a hopeless environment, and not let this **** ruin my life. I saw an interview with Allen Gura right after the Mc Donald decision was handed down and when asked by Glenn Beck "in direct reference to states rights" and using NYC gun laws as an example he said "there all going to be found unconstitutional" I think there is a you tube video on the 2nd ammendment foundations web site of that interview. Also in Sam Allito's opinion he wrote. Not verbatim. State's and local governments poses no constitutional authority to regulate firearms.

How can any clear thinking individual think the NJ and California assault weapons ban is not worthy of a US supreme court case. I think the only orginization with the balls to do this is the 2ammendment foundation. Rant over.

[LorenzoS 100]

Heller and McDonald did two absolutely critical things for gun rights. Heller established that the 2A protects the right of a person to keep and bear arms for self defense - not for hunting, sport or the national guard as anti's (and the state of NJ) liked to claim. McDonald established that the 2A does indeed apply to states - contrary to how anti's (and the state of NJ) liked to claim.

 

So yes these are going to become the basis, in time, of protection of our rights for things like concealed carry or cases where individuals might be denied ownership entirely for insufficient reason. In NJ it is IMPOSSIBLE for an average person to CCW, so this is a prohibition despite being labeled by the state as a regulation. And in many cases people are denied entirely from owning a firearm without due process - this is the type of infringement and denial of rights the 2A will protect us from.

 

However I doubt this will affect the administrative and bureaucratic issues like the FPID, P2P or AWB. These are inconvenient, ineffective useless wastes of time but it's hard to argue that they prevent you from being sufficiently armed to defend yourself. Thus they will probably fall under the 'reasonable regulation' category left open by the SCOTUS. They might be inefficient but they aren't a prohibition so it will become the discretion of the state. The SCOTUS says you have the right to firearms, but not necessarily the right to an efficient state bureaucracy.

[71ragtopgoat 23]

2A is not a much loved right.Most people fail to realize that even the best places in America can be dangerous at times given the right conditions.They feel bad things will only happen to other people.

As far as NJ goes I think we will fair better then some other very anti states.

Mainly because we have such harsh gun laws that they are ripe for the picking by groups like the Second Amendment Foundation to take the court.But it will take time and a bunch of money.The other thing we have at the moment is a Gov who is a media and Republican darling

so when we do get a win in court he will be less likely to get with the legislator to write or adjust the laws to violate 2A in another manner and be sued again like Chicago did.

The one thing that shocked me was how close the SCOTUS vote was. The next justice appointed will really be important for 2A rights as we are just one justice away from losing our 2A rights!!

My advise is join SAF and become active on 2A where it counts.That would be the state legislature that is where change will come from and the new laws will be written if and when they lose in court.I'm not a big fan of the NRA as they have left us to fend for ourselves but they do have clout and will add cash and lobbyists when the court battle looks won so they can grab the headlines.They are fair weather friends but thats better then nothing.

In short the next 2 to 5 years should see changes provided we have the cash to fight.

[raz-0 1,259]

Heller and Mc Donald will yeild results in time. It doesn't mean those results will cater to what you want.

 

In general, how NJ goes about the process of regulating guns is contrary to how a protected right is usually permitted to be handled by law as it outlaws it and then carves out specific situations that are exempt form the ban. Generally, the accepted method is that unless stated otherwise, it's legal. To state otherwise with regards to a protected right usually requires the state establish a case for having a compelling interest in the limitation. NJ law is not constructed this way, and I can imagine a circuit court getting tired of watching it be disassembled bit by bit after a few cases where the ruling comes down and the state acts in bad fiat to "fix" the problem. At that point I can see blanket order to fix it all, fix it right, and either get to the USSC or stop messing with their court. That would still take years.

 

One thing I doubt it will get rid of is the permit to purchase or background checks. If they are performed consistently, honestly, in a timely manner, and are only denied to a segment of the population that they can make a good case for having a compelling interest in denying them (i.e. convicted felons, etc.), it'll likely pass muster even if they have to effectively reinvent the underlying law to produce a similar result.

 

Carry permits also likely won't go away, but I don't see why there won't be a case for making them rules based, and possibly another for making sure those rules are fair and apply reasonably to the general populace. The USSC pretty much invited something like that as the next case.

 

As for the assault weapon ban, well thats a much muddier piece of law. A rational person would expect that the state would have to make a case for their compelling interest. Reality states that you would have to find a court willing to demand that as long as they don't reach too far or too broadly. A named list could probably stand without explanation provided the list is basically ineffective (i.e. there's plenty of equivalent arms out there that fill the same role that you can buy), although a rational person would demand that they explain why anything is on it. As a theoretical example, I could see something like a state banning any AR pattern gun with a low shelf receiver if for example a home made DIAS were installed in one and used in a crime. The compelling argument could be we don't want non machine guns that can be converted that easily into a fully automatic weapon given that they HAVE been. That could likely stand in the face of a court demanding a state make a case for a compelling interest. On the flip side, things that are banned in NJ are becoming increasingly in common use, which was referenced in heller. So who knows long term. We may have to wait for the long tail on that one.

 

Magazine capacity limitations are probably anyone's bet as there are so many ways to make the case for and against based on extending the logic of previous case law. It'll be a mess, that's for sure, and I don't suspect NJ, CA, NY, or HI will be interested in walking away form the issue to avoid a messy case or a public argument over the subject.

[The Dark Knight 11]

Fact of the matter is, people don't care about things that they don't even know exist.

 

The reason you see pro-gun bills at least coming up for a vote in anti-gun places like IL and WI is because the gun owners there use their first amendment to do something other than cry about their second amendment on the internet. They make signs, write letters, and they get out there. They make it known what is going on, whether people are pro or anti gun, they are made aware that there is a debate about guns going on in their state.

 

Here? The community has been pushed into the shadows, intimidated, and left to die quietly. And for the most part, they have. You won't see people organizing a rally and making signs here. Hell, they won't even tell people they own guns sometimes.

 

And the end result is many people don't even know citizens can legally own guns, here or anywhere else.

 

The other thing we have at the moment is a Gov who is a media and Republican darling

so when we do get a win in court he will be less likely to get with the legislator to write or adjust the laws to violate 2A in another manner and be sued again like Chicago did.

 

I wouldn't count on that. Christie may be a Republican but he doesn't need to really be pro gun at all. Considering the Republican party has been pushed so far to the right, and many of them think the current president is a soshlist muslim Kenyan, they'll vote for just about anyone other than him or any other Democrat. Elections now are nothing more than the lesser of two evils. And to the typical Fox viewer no one's more evil than a Democrat. So by being anti-gun, but slightly vague about it, he can woo more liberal voters with little regard for angering Republicans.

[KpdPipes 388]

 

 

I wouldn't count on that. Christie may be a Republican but he doesn't need to really be pro gun at all. Considering the Republican party has been pushed so far to the right, and many of them think the current president is a soshlist muslim Kenyan, they'll vote for just about anyone other than him or any other Democrat. Elections now are nothing more than the lesser of two evils. And to the typical Fox viewer no one's more evil than a Democrat. So by being anti-gun, but slightly vague about it, he can woo more liberal voters with little regard for angering Republicans.

Christie has ALREADY SHOWN HE IS NOT A FRIEND.....

 

In less than a YEAR from his Inauguration, his (Democrat) Rabidly and Vocally Anti-Gun Attorney General has STOPPED Shipment of CMP guns direct to customers, a right which we have enjoyed here for decades, STOPPED the Relaxation of the Total Ban on M-1 Carbines by revoking the Authorization letter for the Auto-Ordnance "ML" Carbines (Even though much like EVERY ONE OF OUR AR_Type Rifles) it is Differently marked therefore "Not Substansively Identical" to the Original "US Carbine .30 Cal M1", AND blokced the sale of IO Ak-style rifles, even though they had also been approved for sale by NJSP I beleive.

 

Christie campaigned in the 90's using his support of the Assault Weapon Ban as a canpaign platform, the flyers have been posted here ad nauseum, so i wont put it up again. At best we had hoped he would stay neutral on the subject, considering all of the other crap that they had to deal with in Trenton. sadly this is not the case.

 

 

As far as Heller and McDonald themselves. NJ's Gun Laws did not materialize overnight, they have been the result of a coordinated and Long-term effort by the Anti's since the 1960's. THEY WILL NOT BE OVERTURNED In a Day, The will not be overtruned in a Year, or, IMO even TEN years, and Sadly they WILL NOT BE OVERTURNED through Legislative Action. We...Dont...Have...The...VOTES. Nor, are we as a "Community" tight enough to BE a voting Bloc. The Skeet/Sporting Clays are quich to say "Why does anyone Need one of those things (AR-15), the Hunters say "I just take my Rifle to Pa, or my Shotgun to Harriman once a year, who does anyone NEED a Handgun anyway??" and so on, and so forth. The so-called "Fudd" mentality where ONE type of Sportsman is willing to toss everyone else under the bus...so long as "HIS" Sport is "SAFE" is the norm rather than the exception here.

 

I have said this before..and i've been accused of everything ranging from a "Defeatist" to an "Anti-gun Plant" for saying this...but the ONLY way NJ is ever going to change is through Lawsuits..which means either Gun Owners as a GROUP are going to have to dig deep, or, someone who HAS the means is going to have to step in and fund the MILLIONS of dollars these lawsuits....and the subsequnt YEARS of appeals will cost. Even when the suits are won, NJ will fight tooth and NAIL to keep from changing things. The ONLY way that this will not happen, is for Anti-gun Politicians Like Daley in Chicago, or Bloomberg in NY to be charged Criminally for their Violations of Federal Laws, or Vilating the Civil Rights of their residents. Since that wont ever happen, we are in for the long haul...

 

If you WANT change, then Donate to SAF and the ANJRPC..that is the only way we'll see change here.

[mcbethr 42]

If you WANT change, then Donate to SAF and the ANJRPC..that is the only way we'll see change here.

 

Well, it's *one* way to see change here. Consider lawsuits to be a "top down" strategy. Consider FIDs to be a "bottom up" strategy.

 

I posted a message a few days ago about a woman from Voorhees who was going to pick up her FID application on Monday. She did it, now its off to MorphoTrack.

 

I have another friend of mine, a guy who wants to take up skeet, who is going to file his Cherry Hill paperwork on Friday.

 

I have a third person I'm taking to a handgun range in Philadelphia this Thursday.

 

Every trip to the range that does not involve taking a first time shooter, or a person who may be interesting in getting an FID, is a wasted trip. The real trick will be to use the system against the system. With FIDs come firearm ownership. With firearm ownership comes a vested interest in maintaining ownership. People will vote, get angry, and make signs if they think they are about to lose something valuable. We need to grow the pool of ownership from 12% to 20%, and then legislators will start to listen. And this will happen one card at a time.

[The Dark Knight 11]

Christie has ALREADY SHOWN HE IS NOT A FRIEND.....

 

In less than a YEAR from his Inauguration, his (Democrat) Rabidly and Vocally Anti-Gun Attorney General has STOPPED Shipment of CMP guns direct to customers, a right which we have enjoyed here for decades, STOPPED the Relaxation of the Total Ban on M-1 Carbines by revoking the Authorization letter for the Auto-Ordnance "ML" Carbines (Even though much like EVERY ONE OF OUR AR_Type Rifles) it is Differently marked therefore "Not Substansively Identical" to the Original "US Carbine .30 Cal M1", AND blokced the sale of IO Ak-style rifles, even though they had also been approved for sale by NJSP I beleive.

 

Christie campaigned in the 90's using his support of the Assault Weapon Ban as a canpaign platform, the flyers have been posted here ad nauseum, so i wont put it up again. At best we had hoped he would stay neutral on the subject, considering all of the other crap that they had to deal with in Trenton. sadly this is not the case.

 

 

Why the big rant over such commonly known facts?

 

Plain and simple, anyone who thinks Christie is pro-gun, is a moron.

 

There, I said it in a whole lot less words. Perhaps a bit harsh, but I tend to be concise.

[JimmyAGR 54]

Well, it's *one* way to see change here. Consider lawsuits to be a "top down" strategy. Consider FIDs to be a "bottom up" strategy.

 

I posted a message a few days ago about a woman from Voorhees who was going to pick up her FID application on Monday. She did it, now its off to MorphoTrack.

 

I have another friend of mine, a guy who wants to take up skeet, who is going to file his Cherry Hill paperwork on Friday.

 

I have a third person I'm taking to a handgun range in Philadelphia this Thursday.

 

Every trip to the range that does not involve taking a first time shooter, or a person who may be interesting in getting an FID, is a wasted trip. The real trick will be to use the system against the system. With FIDs come firearm ownership. With firearm ownership comes a vested interest in maintaining ownership. People will vote, get angry, and make signs if they think they are about to lose something valuable. We need to grow the pool of ownership from 12% to 20%, and then legislators will start to listen. And this will happen one card at a time.

 

I agree with taking new shooters every chance you get. I take my son's friends often, most of them are college students. Two have gone and got their FPID cards. Figure it will start to counter balance all the liberal **** they are learning in college. All of them have thoroughly enjoyed it so far, and the one's who were nervous actually learned that firearms aren't dangerous, it's people that are.

[PDM 91]

For anyone who believes that the NJ AWB will be going away, I have bad news for you. It ain't. We have a much, much better chance of getting at least limited relief for concealed carry and an improvement in the FID card system than we do of obtaining any change in the AWB ban. I've said before as have others, the AWB, while annoying, still permits one to own a whole host of rifles adequate for self-defense, from mini-14s, to Colt Match Targets, to Saigas, to lever actions. The fact that we can't have a flash hider and a pistol grip on the same gun simply isn't enough to prevail in a lawsuit, and there is even less of a chance for this ever to be changed legislatively. You want an AR with a flash hider and a collapsible stock? Move to PA.

 

As for the question -- "when will things change?" Here's the barometer. When we can muster 10,000 people for a 2A rights rally in Trenton I'll believe some change is possible outside a courtroom.