Bill To Reduce Mag Restrictions From 15 To 10

[ZOMBIE 19]

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bills/A1500/1329_I1.HTM

 

 

I was looking over the bills for our assembly and noticed one I didnt see before. Not sure if everyone knows about this already or not but i figured it was worth a share and I will be writing my Reps about this.

[ZOMBIE 19]

It looks like this bill is only limiting the amount of ammo being held in fixed mag rifles. Not sure how i missed that the first time reading it. How I read the bill i only see a change concerning fixed magazine rifles. Am i reading this wrong?

[Qel Hoth 33]

You're right, the only changes I can see are 2C:39-1I being relettered to 2C:39-1i, to be in line with the rest of the statutes, and 2C:39-1w(4) being changed from 15 to 10 rounds. 2C:39-1y is not changed.

 

However, in the statement, they claim that this will amend the law to make "large capacity magazines" be defined as 10 rounds. My guess is whoever typed up the page missed the change and the actual bill will change 2C:39-1y as well.

[tom catman 0]

there they go again playing with laws with no input from who it affects.so now they have expanded manufacturer to include parts not just recievers.i hate n.j.

[heaterbob 53]

looks like there going after all mags to me

[Cemeterys Gun Blob 165]

This bill was originally introduced las year, along with a whole bunch of other states.

 

What's sneaky, is that some of them restrict mag tube capacity as well, on lever guns!!!

 

NJ2SA reached out to one of the sponsors I believe. Don't recall the result.

[PK90 3,573]

This Bill was originally introduced on February 17th, 2011.

This bill revises the definition of “large capacity ammunition magazine.”

Under current law, magazines capable of holding a maximum of 15 rounds of ammunition are legal in New Jersey. This bill would reduce the lawful maximum capacity of ammunitions magazines in New Jersey to 10 rounds.

This legislation is a response to the recent horrific tragedy in Arizona where the assailant utilized a large capacity ammunition magazine in a shooting that resulted in the deaths of six people and injuries to 13 others, including Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.

Strange that it does not change the statute that it addresses. But I am sure that someone will pick up on that if the Bill ever makes it. All it takes is another incident to occur involving a shooter using a magazine greater than 10 rounds in New Jersey.

[Vlad G 345]

Well, I hope that we would see a far larger outcry to the rulers of this state then we seen for the ammo issues not that long ago and hopefully stop this in its tracks.

[deadeye74 5]

A while back while visiting Cabelas, the salesman at the gun counter told me how "silly" NJ mag laws were. To quote his words "anyone who knows how to shoot could cycle 3 ten round mags and get off 30 shots just as fast as someone shooting a single 30 shot one". I'm sure if someone pointed that out to the law makers, they would go for an all out ban on anything that used a magazine period.

[Cemeterys Gun Blob 165]

A while back while visiting Cabelas, the salesman at the gun counter told me how "silly" NJ mag laws were. To quote his words "anyone who knows how to shoot could cycle 3 ten round mags and get off 30 shots just as fast as someone shooting a single 30 shot one". I'm sure if someone pointed that out to the law makers, they would go for an all out ban on anything that used a magazine period.

 

Exactly.

 

OR....we would get what CA has, the need for a narrow point, like a .223 tip, to actually activate the button that releases magazines........

[this_is_nascar 162]

A while back while visiting Cabelas, the salesman at the gun counter told me how "silly" NJ mag laws were. To quote his words "anyone who knows how to shoot could cycle 3 ten round mags and get off 30 shots just as fast as someone shooting a single 30 shot one". I'm sure if someone pointed that out to the law makers, they would go for an all out ban on anything that used a magazine period.

 

 

I know you're using that as an examle and he was using that for effect, but I'd take that bet that someone could get off 30-rounds from a single mag quicker than someone getting off 30-rounds using (3) 10-rounds mags.

[Sandy 44]

So , do restrictions apply to fixed mags , on a gun that is NOT semi automatic? Like a lever or pump action ?

[mipafox 438]

Maybe you can negotiate it up to 11 rounds. I've never heard of an 11 round mag, so if you point that out to them, they might be OK with it.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Exactly.

 

OR....we would get what CA has, the need for a narrow point, like a .223 tip, to actually activate the button that releases magazines........

 

i am honestly shocked it has not come to that..

[mipafox 438]

 

 

i am honestly shocked it has not come to that..

 

NJ moves slowly. Be patient.

[deadeye74 5]

I know you're using that as an examle and he was using that for effect, but I'd take that bet that someone could get off 30-rounds from a single mag quicker than someone getting off 30-rounds using (3) 10-rounds mags.

 

Too bad were not in a free state. That would be a good competition! Two identical guns, one with a 30 round mag and one with 3 ten round mags. One or two different shooters timed and then judged on accuracy.

[PDM 91]

1. 
   Exactly.
    
   OR....we would get what CA has, the need for a narrow point, like a .223 tip, to actually activate the button that releases magazines........
   

Of course the counter argument to that is, if 3 ten rounds are equally has effective as a 30, why do you care so much? What's the big deal? Of course, the counter, counter argument is that a mag ban has many other effects, including rendering lawfully owned property non-transferrable and, even with a "grandfather clause", leaving law abiding gun owners having to prove their innocence if found in possession of a formerly legal large cap magazine.

 

Still, I don't think the 3 tens is as good as a 30 is a good argument, because it does cut both ways and isn't completely truthful. The reality is that, yes, "large" (ie regular) capacity magazines are more useful for lawful purposes in some circumstances, such as certain self defense encounters. That is one reason law abding gun owners (and law enforcement) want them. And yes, in the hands of a criminal or nut job, a twenty round magazine may be marginally more dangerous/effective than a 10 rounder, even if the 10 rounder can be swapped out almost as quickly with some training. The real point is that there is literally zero evidence that a law mandating 10 round magazines will make anyone one iota safer, and there are a number of significant downsides and burden on law abiding people associated with it. We shouldn't pass feel-good laws that have no empirical basis.

[Cemeterys Gun Blob 165]

So , do restrictions apply to fixed mags , on a gun that is NOT semi automatic? Like a lever or pump action ?

 

The Federal Bill does restrict lever and pump actions, and some other states version of the bill do as well.

[mipafox 438]

The real point is that there is literally zero evidence that a law mandating 10 round magazines will make anyone one iota safer, and there are a number of significant downsides and burden on law abiding people associated with it. We shouldn't pass feel-good laws that have no empirical basis.

 

What if there was real, incontrovertible evidence that bans on magazines over 10 rounds DID make areas safer, and saved a significant amount of lives.

 

In that case, would you support the ban?

 

[deadeye74 5]

What if there was real, incontrovertible evidence that bans on magazines over 10 rounds DID make areas safer, and saved a significant amount of lives.

 

In that case, would you support the ban?

 

No. I can't get behind something that make legal gun owners jump through hoops. All these laws do is make it harder on the people that are NOT criminals.

 

Anyone from NJ can drive to PA any time, walk into a gun shop, whip out some cash and buy a 30 round mag. Same goes for ammo. So mr. gangster can take his illegal black market gun and outfit how he sees fit just by driving an hour or so.

 

Seems to me we all stress here about getting pulled over with a gun in the car or if we have the right safe, etc. We look at our $500+ firearm as an investment, a defensive tool, a collector piece. A criminal DOES NOT CARE! As we speak there are people in NJ with not good intentions riding around with who only knows what kind of gun either on them or in their car. If they commit a crime, the guns gonna end up thrown in a river, land fill, etc. They will just go spend another couple hundred bucks in a back ally someplace and buy another one.

 

Criminals do not care about the law!

[vladtepes 1,060]

Too bad were not in a free state. That would be a good competition! Two identical guns, one with a 30 round mag and one with 3 ten round mags. One or two different shooters timed and then judged on accuracy.

 

same shooter to eliminate skill variable..

 

shooting under the same conditions..

will obviously be faster with ONE 30 round mag.. the speed may be marginal.. but any time you insert additional movement it is obviously going to slow the process down..

slow ti down enough to matter? probably not.. but still slow it down none the less..

[mipafox 438]

No. I can't get behind something that make legal gun owners jump through hoops.

 

If it's matter of principle, then why are people here playing the Anti's game of using statistics to justify their rights to keep and bear arms and defend themselves?

 

...All these laws do is make it harder on the people that are NOT criminals.

 

Criminals do not care about the law!

 

Maybe they go after laws in PA to fix your "magazine loophole" and then it would work. Bloomdouche is working on it.

 

So, if the law DID deter criminals from gaining mags over 10 rounds, you'd be OK with it?

 

You answered my question with a twist on the same statement I questioned from the prior poster. I am hearing that the reason NJ shouldn't have a 10 round mag ban is either because larger mags do more good than harm or because the laws won't affect the criminals.

 

I'm glad you guys aren't fighting for MY rights. My rights have nothing to do with whether or not a law restricting my rights will or will not reduce crime. Keep fighting gun control on the field setup by your anitgun politicians. Fight on their terms, on their issues, against their statistics, the way they have defined them, according to their rules. Good luck with that. Their stats are common sense. Yours are made up by the gun lobby. You lose.

[PDM 91]

What if there was real, incontrovertible evidence that bans on magazines over 10 rounds DID make areas safer, and saved a significant amount of lives.

 

In that case, would you support the ban?

 

No, for the following reason: Justice Scalia in Heller made it clear that the 2A applies to arms that are commonly owned for self-defense. Firearms with 10, 15 and 20 rd magazines easily fit that definition. So, even if there were "incontrovertible evidence" that a "large cap" magazine ban would save lives, such a ban could not be reconciled with Constitutional requirements. A ban on 30 rd mags is probably a different story. Some people argue that the 2A requires no lines to be drawn -- ie no regulation on machine gunes, bazookas, or howitzers if you choose. I am not one of those people and think the "what part of 'infringe' don't you understand" is a very simplistic argument. The Supreme Court has drawn a line -- a reasonable and historically supportable one in my opinion -- and we need to live with it.

 

But, I think you missed my point. My point was that we don't even need to get to the 2A constitutional argument when no one proposing a "large cap" ban has ever offerred a shred of support for the proposition that 10 rds is safer than 15 or 20. For that reason alone the idea need not be considered.

[mipafox 438]

 

No, for the following reason: Justice Scalia in Heller made it clear that the 2A applies to arms that are commonly owned for self-defense.

 

Then why was that not the reason you proffered?

 

You gave a reason that the law should not pass. When I provided a scenario to ameliorate your concern, all of the sudden you tell me it doesn't matter. Sounds like you didn't have a very good argument to begin with.

 

I'm not trying to single you out, I am again pointing out that you should reconsider fighting by their rules.

 

The Supreme Court is the most horrible criminal enterprise in the history of this Nation.

 

95% of what Congress does is not authorized by our Constitution.

90% of what Congress does is patently illegal.

100% of what Congress does is because 95% of Supreme Court rulings since the start of the 20th Century were completely illegal and dismantled the Constitution. Not just the Bill of Rights, the whole thing.

 

Lawyers can look to these criminals for guidance to cover their asses. Citizens should not.

 

[PDM 91]

Mipafox -- You may want to consider spending more time in your bunker.

[mipafox 438]

Mipafox -- You may want to consider spending more time in your bunker.

 

LOL

[PDM 91]

I'm glad you took my comment in the spirit it was intended (humor). I do actually share your frustration. The S Ct is certainly imperfect and often gets things very, very wrong. But no institution is perfect and overall, I think our system is the best ever created by man (and one influenced by our Creator, in my opinion). We need to live within it and try to make it better, not ignore it or tear it down. Any alternative to what we have -- either tyrrany or anarchy -- would be far worse.

[Cemeterys Gun Blob 165]

Mipafox: You need to release this is NJ, with NJ gun owners who need to always ask 'Mother may I?', and most importantly, NJ Courts dismiss both Heller and McDonald, so ultimately, there isn't now, and there will never be, any 2A right in this State. The Sun will burn itself out first.

[mipafox 438]

I'm glad you took my comment in the spirit it was intended (humor). I do actually share your frustration. The S Ct is certainly imperfect and often gets things very, very wrong. But no institution is perfect and overall, I think our system is the best ever created by man (and one influenced by our Creator, in my opinion). We need to live within it and try to make it better, not ignore it or tear it down. Any alternative to what we have -- either tyrrany or anarchy -- would be far worse.

 

I'm not an "either" "or" kind of guy, but if there's only two choices, the baby can go with the bathwater.

 

Government in the US permits a lot of activities, at their discretion, that people in many other countries don't often get to participate in. But the people in most of those other countries have rights. We have no rights in this country. Including right to due process, or even your life. They don't seize property without due process in Europe, they don't imprison people indefinitely without letting them speak to a lawyer, they don't write national security letters (no judge or warrant) requiring you to spy on your kids/patients/clients indefinitely with threat of imprisonment if you speak to your wife or lawyer about it. They don't execute you without a trial.

 

There isn't a single right in the First Ten Amendments that hasn't been deemed to be at the pleasure and approval of the government.

 

Things may be more comfortable here for some. But you are wrong. They have it more right elsewhere. The rules may be slightly different, but they honor them. Our rules may be better, but they are meaningless.

 

[pepsi71ocean 2]

same shooter to eliminate skill variable..

 

shooting under the same conditions..

will obviously be faster with ONE 30 round mag.. the speed may be marginal.. but any time you insert additional movement it is obviously going to slow the process down..

slow ti down enough to matter? probably not.. but still slow it down none the less..

 

not to rain on your parade but my brother and i had an argument over the M14 vs M1 Garand issue, and at the range we solved it.

 

We ran several sets of shootings, one for accuracy and one to see who could unload more on target fast enought, in the end it was marginal.

 

My brother running two 15 round magazines, and me running 4 en blocks through my rifle (one was missing two rounds), we figured out that we both finished at about the same time, problem is we finished so close that even after 3 sets we couldn't define a winner.