S2720 -- Has the NJ press picked up the ball, yet?

[Bob2222 317]

 

As I think we all know, the ratio of FPID cards issued divided by the number of households in a municipality should be inversely proportional to the violent crime rate of that municipality. (Even in New Jersey.)

 

That isn't what Loretta Weinberg believes, of course -- or she wouldn't have introduced the bill.

 

 

SENATE LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE

 

STATEMENT TO

 

SENATE, No. 2720

 

STATE OF NEW JERSEY

 

DATED:  MAY 2, 2013

 

      The Senate Law and Public Safety Committee reports favorably Senate Bill No. 2720.

      This bill clarifies that certain firearms records are available under the State’s open public records law.

      Specifically, the bill clarifies that the public has access to aggregate information concerning the total number of firearms purchaser identification cards or handgun purchase permits, without any personal identifying information, that have been issued by the Superintendent of State Police or the Chief of Police of a municipality.

      At present, personal firearms records are confidential pursuant to administrative regulations of the Department of Law and Public Safety.

 

P.L.2013, CHAPTER 112, approved August 8, 2013

Senate, No. 2720

 

 

An Act concerning firearms records and supplementing P.L.1963, c.73 (C.47:1A-1 et seq.).

 

     Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:

 

     1.    Notwithstanding the provisions of any other statute or regulation to the contrary, government record as defined in section 1 of P.L.1995, c.23 (C.47:1A-1.1) shall include aggregate information regarding the total number of permits to purchase a handgun and firearms purchaser identification cards, without any personal identifying information, that have been issued by the Superintendent of State Police or the Chief of Police of a municipal police department.

 

     2.    This act shall take effect immediately.

 

 

STATEMENT

 

     This bill clarifies that certain firearms records are available under the State’s open public records law.

     The bill clarifies that the public has access to aggregate information concerning the total number of firearms purchaser identification cards or handgun purchase permits, without any personal identifying information, that have been issued by the Superintendent of State Police or the Chief of Police of a municipality.

     At present, personal firearms records are confidential pursuant to administrative regulations of the Department of Law and Public Safety.

 

 

                                

 

     Clarifies that information concerning the total number of firearms purchaser identification cards and permits to purchase a handgun issued in a municipality are public records.

 

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bills/BillView.asp?BillNumber=S2720

[Arbelest 29]

What's the point to this? If someone really wants to know they will probably have to pay 15 bucks in administrative costs plus 10 cents a page to get a copy of something that says x amount of FPID cards were issued in this municipality followed by x amount of active P2Ps.  Maybe it will be a good thing as she'll learn how many people actually support the 2A in her district and she'll end up changing her stances (<- one hell of a longshot)

[T Bill 649]

Fuel for the Antis. Oh look, you chief issues way to many gun permits in your town, or See, if there we less gun permits issued in your town, crime would go down.

 

Nothing good about this. Gives them more fuel for more bans.

[Bob2222 317]

The more FPIDs there are in a municipality per household, the lower the violent crime rate.

 

The higher the town's violent crime rate, the fewer FPIDs per household.

 

Not that it's easy anywhere in NJ -- but is it more difficult to obtain a NJ FPID and P2P in a densely populated urban area like Camden, Trenton, New Brunswick, Newark or Jersey City, or in a suburban / rural community (one that has its own police force)?

 

Many of the "better" suburban/rural NJ communities have violent crime rates that are close to 0.

 

 

 

http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=52219

 

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

[OchoBlue 3]

Any idea what the ownership rates are in NJ?

[Bob2222 317]

If this old survey is accurate  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/health/interactives/guns/ownership.html

 

---12.3%---

 

Among US states, only Hawaii is lower. If this is accurate. I have my doubts as to how accurate a telephone survey about gun ownership could be. But I don't doubt that firearm ownership is relatively low in NJ compared to most states.

 

For several reasons, firearm ownership in households by suburban and rural municipalities is higher than it is in urban areas. It's the inverse of the violent crime rate. Some NJ municipalities have voting patterns that are more conservative than Texas. While their firearm ownership rates probably aren't quite as high, it would be difficult to to believe that it's as low as it is in the more densely populated areas of the state.

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/160223/men-married-southerners-likely-gun-owners.aspx

 

Suburban/rural demographic groups are more likely to be gun owners than urban demographic groups.

 

We have parts of the state with a relatively high number of legal guns, and parts of the state where there are relatively few guns, and many of those guns are illegal. It's the "outlaws" in places like Camden, Trenton and Newark who have many of the guns. They probably don't have FPIDs.

 

 

 

[voyager9 3,439]

 

As I think we all know, the ratio of FPID cards issued divided by the number of households in a municipality should be inversely proportional to the violent crime rate of that municipality. (Even in New Jersey.)

 

]

Of course correlation != causation. There are a lot of factors involved.

[Bob2222 317]

Of course correlation != causation. There are a lot of factors involved.

 

True that.

 

Outdoorsmen and hunters tend to live in suburban and rural areas, not in urban municipalities. Convicted felons -- who are ineligible to obtain a NJ FPID -- are more likely to reside in urban municipalities, and not suburban and rural areas. Suburban and rural residents have more disposable income. Minorities are more likely to live in urban areas than in suburban and rural communities. According to Pew, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank   the median net worth for black households in 2011 was $6,446, which does not leave a lot of room for investing in assets like nice guns.

 

There are other factors.

 

However, Loretta Weinberg must think "more guns = more crimes", and that Camden, Trenton and Newark are armed to the teeth with legally purchased guns, and that's why they're more dangerous than Baghdad. Why else would she have introduced the bill?

 

The information available as a result of passing S2720 should show the opposite, even in New Jersey. I suspect that Chris Christie (or one of his aides) also believes this, and that's why Christie was happy to sign the bill. There are plenty of other factors -- but the information should show the opposite of the gun-grabber's conventional wisdom (?), and be an embarrassment. I'm fine with just that.

[Pythagoras 2]

There are plenty of other factors -- but the information should show the opposite of the gun-grabber's conventional wisdom (?), and be an embarrassment. I'm fine with just that.

Amen, brother!

[Vini 0]

I think this law will do next: 

1. Show that more legal guns = less violent crime and gun crime - have no doubts about it. 

2. Allow people to choose where they want to reside: pro gun communities or anti gun communities. 

3. Allow criminals to make wise choice of their target areas. 

[T Bill 649]

They want this information to show that guns are the problem in NJ. Just like the federal BATFE crime report information they were denied. This is going to be used to skew and justify their agenda in proving more guns equal more crime. I am sure there is a devious reason why she wanted this bill. Time will tell. I just hope it is not to our detriment.

[halbautomatisch 60]

They want this information to show that guns are the problem in NJ. Just like the federal BATFE crime report information they were denied. This is going to be used to skew and justify their agenda in proving more guns equal more crime. I am sure there is a devious reason why she wanted this bill. Time will tell. I just hope it is not to our detriment.

I don't doubt this was their motivation for passing this bill, but it might have the opposite effect than what they were intending. It will probably show there are a lot more gun owners in NJ than most people realize.

 

I come across people I've known for a good while that I only find out are gun owners a lot later on. As a general rule, people in NJ don't like to admit they are gun owners to others unless they know the other person is also a gun owner or at least sympathetic toward gun ownership. We've been indoctrinated to believe gun ownership is bad and shameful, keeping it hidden is very common here in NJ.

[mipafox 438]

 

If this old survey is accurate  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/health/interactives/guns/ownership.html

 

---12.3%---

 

Among US states, only Hawaii is lower. If this is accurate. I have my doubts as to how accurate a telephone survey about gun ownership could be. But I don't doubt that firearm ownership is relatively low in NJ compared to most states.

 

 

 

I don't doubt firearm ownership is low in Jersey. But I also expect it to be more undereported in a Jersey survey than in most other states.

 

I'm going back a few years, and organizations like njgunforums and NJ2AS may be helping, but in the recent decades I lived in Jersey nobody would tell a survey they owned guns. Even though all of my friends and family did indeed own guns. It's been part of the problem in NJ, we've been taught that guns are something you keep quiet about for a couple generations. And the louder the antis have become over the last dozen years, despite how successful gun owners have been over the same period, the more silent Jersey gun owners have become for fear of seeming "offensive" or some nonsense. Again, this may have started to change in the last few years since I lived there. But I'm sure it hasn't changed for everybody.

[AlDente67 563]

I don't doubt this was their motivation for passing this bill, but it might have the opposite effect than what they were intending. It will probably show there are a lot more gun owners in NJ than most people realize.

 

I come across people I've known for a good while that I only find out are gun owners a lot later on. As a general rule, people in NJ don't like to admit they are gun owners to others unless they know the other person is also a gun owner or at least sympathetic toward gun ownership. We've been indoctrinated to believe gun ownership is bad and shameful, keeping it hidden is very common here in NJ.

 

Funny, I had my sister and her husband over for a BBQ on Sunday.  Sitting out on the deck, my father asked if I had gotten any new guns lately.  I said no, but interested in trading up the Mossberg.  My brother-in-law pipes in and says "Did you say Mossberg?"

 

Turns out he has his FID and P2P in process.  When I showed him my collection, he said "I had no idea you had guns".

 

It seems every week I run across someone else I know comes "out of the gun closet".  My neighbor has about 15 rifles, which I never knew in the 12 years I've known him, until about 2 weeks ago.

[millsan1 3]

My biggest problem with this bill is that it came into being SOLELY because Loretta Weinberg was upset she could not get the info on gun ownership from her town. She said these exact words at an event I attended during the spring.

 

She even added something along these lines "even I, a Senator, could not get this info"

 

So the reality is one woman who was pissy because she couldn't get what she wanted passed a new law. Amazing.

 

 

 

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk 2