PDM 91 Posted February 20, 2013 So here is the language added to A1239, the 10 round mag capacity bill that will be up for vote tomorrow. They exempt retired LEOs that have a carry permit. Of course, begs the question, what about a grandfather clause for everyone else? What possible rationale could there be for this. And you can see they generously gave us 90 days after the law takes effect to comply. So outrageous, it defies words. 112 2. (New section) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection 13 j. of N.J.S.2C:39-3, a retired law enforcement officer who is 14 authorized to possess and carry a handgun pursuant to subsection l. 15 of N.J.S.2C:39-6 may possess and carry a large capacity 16 ammunition magazine which is capable of holding up to 15 rounds 17 of ammunition that can be fed continuously and directly into a semi-automatic handgun.1 18 19 1[2.] 3.1 20 This act shall take effect on the first day of the third 21 month following enactment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alec.mc 180 Posted February 20, 2013 Do what I say not what I do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryan_j 0 Posted February 20, 2013 Only the police should have guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpecialK 193 Posted February 20, 2013 Don't ask for or suggest a grandfather clause. Write Christie to veto it because it doesn't have one. If it passes let it pass without one so there is an easy reason to veto it. There should be no discussion to amend these bills at all, let them pass (in their shitty form from) the legislature as is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RubberBullets 65 Posted February 20, 2013 So here is the language added to A1239, the 10 round mag capacity bill that will be up for vote tomorrow. They exempt retired LEOs that have a carry permit. Of course, begs the question, what about a grandfather clause for everyone else? What possible rationale could there be for this. And you can see they generously gave us 90 days after the law takes effect to comply. So outrageous, it defies words. 112 2. (New section) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection 13 j. of N.J.S.2C:39-3, a retired law enforcement officer who is 14 authorized to possess and carry a handgun pursuant to subsection l. 15 of N.J.S.2C:39-6 may possess and carry a large capacity 16 ammunition magazine which is capable of holding up to 15 rounds 17 of ammunition that can be fed continuously and directly into a semi-automatic handgun.1 18 19 1[2.] 3.1 20 This act shall take effect on the first day of the third 21 month following enactment. Don't ask for or suggest a grandfather clause. Write Christie to veto it because it doesn't have one. If it passes let it pass without one so there is an easy reason to veto it. There should be no discussion to amend these bills at all, let them pass (in their shitty form from) the legislature as is. They didnt grandfather anything in th original NJ-AWB (Even NY allowed this) What makes you think they would do it this time? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mattio41 0 Posted February 20, 2013 I will not comply...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remixer 1,645 Posted February 20, 2013 Matt, Ill miss you LOL Sorry for the joke... Its really a sad situation Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sigman 41 Posted February 20, 2013 15 rounds is not a large capacity magazine, it's standard capacity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpecialK 193 Posted February 20, 2013 15 rounds is not a large capacity magazine, it's standard capacity. 30 is standard actually. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JustJoe 0 Posted February 20, 2013 Retired LEO=civilian. No? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpecialK 193 Posted February 20, 2013 They didnt grandfather anything in th original NJ-AWB (Even NY allowed this) What makes you think they would do it this time? The point is they won't even think about it unless "our side" brings it up. Are you applying logic to how the NJ legislator thinks and does things? Assuming anything with these people is dangerous. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nikos 31 Posted February 20, 2013 Retired LEO=civilian. No? LEOs are also civilians who are employed as public servants. They are just a different class of citizen as are the politicians. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wooly bugger 1 Posted February 20, 2013 They didnt grandfather anything in th original NJ-AWB (Even NY allowed this) What makes you think they would do it this time? I wasn't around during the initial ban. So what happened to the non-grandfathered guns? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RubberBullets 65 Posted February 20, 2013 I dont think theyd entertain it. They are making the argument that these 15 round mags are evil.. why would they let anyone keep them? These asshats are on a serious Anit Constitutional roll.. As another thread has mentioned, the death of 20 children is a political gold mine for them which makes me sick to my stomach. I would love to tape these shitbags behind the scene because you know damn well the powers that be are high fiving each other over these tragic events that have given them the stones to vote on bills like this. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RubberBullets 65 Posted February 20, 2013 I wasn't around during the initial ban. So what happened to the non-grandfathered guns? They were given time to sell them out of state...to turn them in... or to hide them properly Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PDM 91 Posted February 20, 2013 I am most definitely going to mention the grandfather clause issue -- in fact I already did in a letter to Governor Christie. While I oppose the bill even with a grandfather clause, the lack of one highlights not just our politicians' disregard for the Second Amendment and common sense, it also shows that they have no concerns ahout fundamental fairness and property rights. I think that should make it an easier veto target for the governor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Qel Hoth 33 Posted February 20, 2013 15 rounds is not a large capacity magazine, it's standard capacity. It's reduced capacity for a full size 9mm handgun... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scatterbrains 0 Posted February 20, 2013 I will not comply...fugg them Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
H.M. Murdock 0 Posted February 20, 2013 They were given time to sell them out of state...to turn them in... or to hide them properly The latter is the most depressing -- never being able to enjoy the firearms except for the occasional barn pop. If one goes down that road, considering the trend of this new set of laws, I think it is prudent to possess NJ-legal firearms chambered in every caliber of ammunition one stores in bulk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RubberBullets 65 Posted February 20, 2013 The latter is the most depressing -- never being able to enjoy the firearms except for the occasional barn pop. If one goes down that road, considering the trend of this new set of laws, I think it is prudent to possess NJ-legal firearms chambered in every caliber of ammunition one stores in bulk. Nonsense.. If the deal is good enough I buy ammo for guns i dont own. If it ever comes a time to explain myself.. im investing since these assholes are driving up the price of ammo with their stunts. On second thought.. ill stick with "none of your god damned business" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albanian 121 Posted February 20, 2013 Next week I will finally be getting my glock 22 (waiting on NICS). They will have to come to my house with a warrent and take the 15 round mags from me if they want them. I will not go and hand the magazines to them. I won't resist, but I also will not just go out of my way to give my property to theives. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ruger9 0 Posted February 20, 2013 Molon labe.... ...if you can find them Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amy 0 Posted February 20, 2013 They didnt grandfather anything in th original NJ-AWB (Even NY allowed this) What makes you think they would do it this time? NY allowed everything because they pushed those laws through as a knee-jerk reaction to Sandy Hook. I guarantee you will start to see lawsuits popping up everywhere because little thought was given to Constitutionality, just a "hurry up and do it" attitude. Look at Colorado & Missouri, they're passing laws saying the State can confiscate your weapons. Think about this....they wrote that the state can come to your door and take your guns, except they forgot that we have Eminent Domain laws in this country & you can't take someone's property without paying them for it. Ergo, another opportunity to turn over an unconstitutional law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mcm308 0 Posted February 20, 2013 See signature... Molon Labe Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RubberBullets 65 Posted February 20, 2013 NY allowed everything because they pushed those laws through as a knee-jerk reaction to Sandy Hook. I guarantee you will start to see lawsuits popping up everywhere because little thought was given to Constitutionality, just a "hurry up and do it" attitude. Look at Colorado & Missouri, they're passing laws saying the State can confiscate your weapons. Think about this....they wrote that the state can come to your door and take your guns, except they forgot that we have Eminent Domain laws in this country & you can't take someone's property without paying them for it. Ergo, another opportunity to turn over an unconstitutional law. I am referring to the original Federal AWB of 94. Up until NY's push for harsher laws, they allowed for pre-ban magazines. NJ did not incorporate grandfathering in their AWB post 94 fed ban. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JustJoe 0 Posted February 20, 2013 Think about this....they wrote that the state can come to your door and take your guns, except they forgot that we have Eminent Domain laws in this country & you can't take someone's property without paying them for it. ... Except that my stuff in not for sale and than what's next? Acquaint yourself with Kelo v New London. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ruger9 0 Posted February 20, 2013 yeah, eminent domain hasn't meant much for awhile now, unfortunately... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Howard 538 Posted February 20, 2013 I thought the constitution (does that even apply anymore?) prohibits illegal takings by the government. Even when they use eminent domain to take property they have to compensate you based on fair market value. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ruger9 0 Posted February 20, 2013 I thought the constitution (does that even apply anymore?) There's your problem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
n4p226r 105 Posted February 20, 2013 I wonder if slmeone was to hypothetically not get rid of their 15rd mags, thus committing a crime, would they then be more likely to buy 30rd pmags to keep in addition to their other non-compliant mags? I bet most here have only currently compliant mags and won't get rid of them after the ban so why not get everything at that point? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites