Jump to content
Malsua

New Jersey and Gun Control

Recommended Posts

This is a good article that pretty much sums it all up.   That said, my only hope is to exit NJ post haste however that may take me some years.  Once I become a stroke of the pen felon, my choice will simply be to move prohibited items beyond the control of the jackbooted Nazis in the NJ government.

 

--------------

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/06/new_jersey_and_gun_control.html

 

The gun control conundrum will continue ad infinitum.  But what is happening in New Jersey should frighten anyone -- gun owner or not.  NJS102 will most likely be affirmed by the Democrat senate majority in the NJ legislature.  The NJ Assembly has already passed the following:

  •  A1217, which would create restraining orders in the state allowing family members and others to ask a judge to have a person's guns seized and ban them from buying weapons for up to a year. 
  •  A2757, which would require all private gun sales in the state to go through a licensed dealer who can perform an additional background check at the point of sale.
  •  A2759, which would create an outright ban in the state on possessing armor-piercing bullets.
  •  A2761, which would ban magazines in the state that hold more than 10 rounds, with some exceptions.

How will this affect gun owners?  The proposed legislation states that

No person shall be convicted of an offense… for possessing any firearms, weapons, destructive devices, large capacity ammunition magazines, silencers or explosives, if after giving written notice of his intention to do so, including the proposed date and time of surrender, he voluntarily surrendered [emphasis mine] the weapon, device, instrument or substance in question to the superintendent or to the chief of police in the municipality in which he resides, provided that the required notice is received by the superintendent or chief of police before any charges have been made or complaints filed [.]

Furthermore, a firearm with a fixed magazine capacity holding up to 15 rounds which is incapable of being modified to accommodate 10 or less rounds is to be registered.  If not, the firearms owner "must complete a registration statement to be prescribed by the Superintendent of the State Police, and produce for inspection a valid firearms purchaser identification card, permit to carry a handgun, or permit to purchase a handgun."

Moreover, "the heir or estate of an owner of a firearm which has been registered pursuant to this section shall within 90 days after the owner's death dispose of that firearm in accordance to the sections of the proposed law.”  

New Jersey is now coercing a portion of the population to hand over their defensive weapons or else.  The consequences of not obeying these regulations are as follows:

In revising the definition of semi-automatic rifles considered to be an assault firearm as those with a fixed magazine capacity exceeding 10 rather than 15 rounds, the possession of such weapons, if unlicensed or unregistered, is a second degree crime. Since a crime of the second degree is punishable by five to 10 years imprisonment, a fine of up to $150,000, or both, the bill may cause indeterminate additional court and criminal prosecution costs to the State (Judicial and Executive branch) and localities, indeterminate increased costs of incarceration to the Department of Corrections, and indeterminate additional revenue from court-imposed fines.

In revising the definition of large capacity ammunition magazines as containers capable of holding more than 10 rather than 15 rounds, the bill makes possession of these magazines, if unregistered, a crime of the fourth degree. Fourth degree crimes are punishable by up to 18 months imprisonment, a fine of up to $10,000, or both.

Moreover,

[t]he bill may increase State revenues and expenditures by indeterminate amounts, and may also cause local revenues and expenditures to increase by indeterminate amounts.

This amounts to confiscation of property, punishment by grandfathering and establishing ex post facto law which is "law that makes illegal an act that was legal when committed, increases the penalties for an infraction after it has been committed, or changes the rules of evidence to make conviction easier. The Constitution prohibits the making of ex post facto law."

195378_5_.pngMoreover, New Jersey A1181 "mandates law enforcement in the state to seize a person's guns if a mental health professional determines they pose a threat to themselves or others."  But what if the gun belongs to a family member -- what of that person's constitutional rights?  Will that individual have to surrender his weapons?  Will that person be fined or incarcerated?

Will a spouse of a law enforcement officer be held liable if she resorts to using her husband's legal 15-round firearm when he is out of town and she has to face down an intruder? Do I detect a double standard here?

 In addition, New Jersey A2758 "mandates that state residents need to show a 'justifiable need' to obtain a permit to carry a handgun -- meaning they must show they face a specific threat to their own safety.  It gives the state far too much power and that is potentially dangerous. What if the threat is deemed inconsequential and someone is murdered by a jealous boyfriend?

Other relevant considerations include:

Banning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds will not reduce the lethality of a criminal who can obtain high-capacity magazines from other states.  In addition, it will cause owners of these guns to incur a financial loss of millions of dollars because (a) of the destruction of the magazines, and (b) eventual replacement with these new magazines.  Thus, there is a loss of value, not only once but twice. 

Consequently, "[t]hose who pass such laws will instantly be creating not just criminals, but armed criminals by the thousands, or more! At the stroke of a pen!!"

Furthermore, removing a part of a collectible firearm will reduce the value of that item.

Some firearms are specifically designed for 15 round magazines and may not function properly with lower capacity after-market magazines.  The possibility of malfunction may cause injury or loss of life. In addition, gun stores will lose a great deal of inventory and subsequent profit as a result of this law. 

Finally, an individual with ill intent can do just as much harm as quickly with six 10-round magazines.  Thus, gun control advocates will continually insist upon incremental reductions to the number of magazine rounds until total gun control is in place. 

Will politicians who are protected by armed security ask their security agents to reduce the rounds from 15 to 10 rounds -- just to make it fair? 

On the other hand, Chris Ladd  writes that

No one is permitted to drive on our roads without obtaining a license. Every automobile is registered. Every transaction is taxed. All vehicle owners are required to maintain insurance to cover potential harm. Despite tight regulation, car ownership is ubiquitous. Cars remain a major cause of injury and death, but insurance has played a critical role over the years in driving safety improvements...

Our habit of imposing complicated and confusing restrictions on weapons by type and shape is largely theater, designed to create a sensation of progress while avoiding the fundamental problem [emphasis mine].

Instead, Ladd asserts that "we should adopt a simpler, more powerful solution. Register every gun and every gun sale. Require gun owners to obtain a license. Make liability insurance a requirement for every gun owner, tracked to every gun. Require proof of insurance for every sale. Track sales of ammunition, just like we track the sale of Sudafed. Make these gun and ammunition registries available to law enforcement. It is a simple, constitutional approach that preserves the right of responsible adults to own as many weapons as they want, so long as they can demonstrate responsible, safe ownership."

In New Jersey there is already a permit registration for handguns at the state and local police level.  In addition, when an individual buys handgun ammunition he/she has to obtain a firearms identification card and the sale is noted by the vendor. This is available for review by law enforcement.  Liability insurance is a good idea but individual ammunition sales should not be tracked because it would become excessively complicated.

David Kopel in "The Truth About Gun Control" asserts that "gun prohibition has many bases, among them the pacifist-aggressives -- people who want to use the force and violence of criminal law to make everyone else live by their personal philosophy of not using defensive force against violent attackers."

At one level, these new gun restrictions are extortion plots for more money.  But more frightening, New Jersey is acting in a totalitarian manner as it works to control and punish its citizenry. 

Ostensibly all this legislation is a result of school shootings. But it still will not protect students from random school shootings.  Students would be far better served with metal detectors at all entryways and professionally trained and authorized armed security officers.  The chart below is a potent argument and it is hard to ignore the commonsense information.

These encroachments are not about gun control; they are about people control.

Eileen can be reached at [email protected]                    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Malsua said:

This is a good article that pretty much sums it all up.   That said, my only hope is to exit NJ post haste however that may take me some years.  Once I become a stroke of the pen felon, my choice will simply be to move prohibited items beyond the control of the jackbooted Nazis in the NJ government.

New Jersey is generally well ahead of the curve with its gun control laws. It passed it's own laws years before the 1968 Federal GCA and the Clinton AWB,

Only reason much of this wasn't signed into law years ago is that Chris Christie thought that he could become President.

The state (and the majority of it's voters) are hopeless. The only salvation possible is if Trump replaces a few more SC justices and the state gov't goes into bankruptcy and receivership. (Murphy is going an excellent job in that respect!)

Trump has a home in New Jersey and he isn't a New Jersey resident. Just like Florida, the weather in the state isn't bad 9 months of the year. Great beaches, pizza and tomatoes. Nice place to visit -- but not to be a taxpaying resident of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" Since a crime of the second degree is punishable by five to 10 years imprisonment, a fine of up to $150,000, or both, the bill may cause indeterminate additional court and criminal prosecution costs to the State (Judicial and Executive branch) and localities, indeterminate increased costs of incarceration to the Department of Corrections, and indeterminate additional revenue from court-imposed fines.

In revising the definition of large capacity ammunition magazines as containers capable of holding more than 10 rather than 15 rounds, the bill makes possession of these magazines, if unregistered, a crime of the fourth degree. Fourth degree crimes are punishable by up to 18 months imprisonment, a fine of up to $10,000, or both."

As I've said before, if the majority of gun owners of this state wanted to stop this nonsense for real, after this law passed there would be at least 10,000 in Trenton waving 15-round magazines in the air. And force the state to arrest, prosecute and jail them. Ideally this plan would have been in place and publicized before they passed the law. It might have changed their mind. Their assumption is that they will pick off violators two or three at a time and discourage the others from non-compliance.

In other words, make them pay for their plans, and overwhelm the system. Alinsky tactics work for us too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 45Doll said:

In other words, make them pay for their plans, and overwhelm the system. Alinsky tactics work for us too.

But at what cost?  The Alinsky people were willing to go to jail for what they believed in, particularly because the sentences were probably not as severe.  I don't know how many of us would be willing to have a felony rap "for the cause.."  especially when I seriously doubt "the cause" would take care of us after our time is served (i.e. provide income - since we might not be employable, protect us - since we won't be able to own firearms, support our political candidates - since we won't be able to vote etc. etc. etc.).  :dontknow:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. Freedom has a cost. And not enough are willing to pay it. That's what the government is counting on.

The 2nd Amendment is not that important to enough people. So the repression will advance from state to state until someone stands up. If ever.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that the proposed new legislation in NJ is so onerous that it has attracted the attention of American Thinker!

What I find particularly troubling about this magazine ban is that we already have an ammo limit.  If we can't be trusted with 15 rounds, why should we believe they will be satisfied limiting us to 10?  Seems like this is just a step on their ultimate path to zero. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Old Glock guy said:

I find it interesting that the proposed new legislation in NJ is so onerous that it has attracted the attention of American Thinker!

What I find particularly troubling about this magazine ban is that we already have an ammo limit.  If we can't be trusted with 15 rounds, why should we believe they will be satisfied limiting us to 10?  Seems like this is just a step on their ultimate path to zero. 

Next year it will be 5 round  mag bans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Old Glock guy said:

I find it interesting that the proposed new legislation in NJ is so onerous that it has attracted the attention of American Thinker!

What I find particularly troubling about this magazine ban is that we already have an ammo limit.  If we can't be trusted with 15 rounds, why should we believe they will be satisfied limiting us to 10?  Seems like this is just a step on their ultimate path to zero. 

That's right. Is there anywhere between here and there where we will be prepared to pay the cost of freedom, whatever that is?

BTW I'm not holding myself in some special regard. I'm just as reticent about this as anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At worst, we'd just have a bunch of rednecks getting filled with bullets by the military. There's just not enough idiots out there for a legit uprising to work.

So only idiots rise up? Not sure what else to take from your statement.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Greenday said:

At worst, we'd just have a bunch of rednecks getting filled with bullets by the military. There's just not enough idiots out there for a legit uprising to work.

Wow, you're on a roll today...

Ever hear of the term "3 Percent"?

Any idea how many hunting licenses are issued every year?

Try doing some research, it will help your ignorance.

While you're at it, go do some reading about Chris Dorner in LA, and how one guy tied up a complete county of LEOs.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Greenday said:

At worst, we'd just have a bunch of rednecks getting filled with bullets by the military. There's just not enough idiots out there for a legit uprising to work.

Remember, they hate you and want you dead! Great job by forum patriots for unmasking another totaitarian wanna be!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Greenday said:

At worst, we'd just have a bunch of rednecks getting filled with bullets by the military. There's just not enough idiots out there for a legit uprising to work.

My father gave me two very important pieces of advice:

1. Don't debate politics or religion

2. Never argue with children or idiots

I choose to no longer respond to any of your comments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Greenday said:

At worst, we'd just have a bunch of rednecks getting filled with bullets by the military. There's just not enough idiots out there for a legit uprising to work.

What makes you think the Military would comply with any such orders?  First, the Military isn't supposed to engage with US Citizens on US soil (Posse Comitatus Act). It would have to be under the auspices of a federal/State LEA first before they can call for the assistance of the Natl. Guard, or any Military org (as when the Coast Guard (LEA) gets help from the US Navy (MIL)). And, even if Posse Comitatus is suspended, again, what makes you think the Military would comply.  Their oath is to "support defend the US Constitution, not necessarily a tyrannical Federal Govt.).

It wasn't the Military that got involved at Ruby Ridge,,, or Waco, or the Bundy Ranch.  It was LEAs (FBI /  ATF / US Marshalls, etc.).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To paraphrase Martin Niemöller:

First they came for the 30 round mags, and I did not speak out—
Because I didn't use 30 round mags.

Then they came for the 15 round mags, and I did not speak out—
Because I did not use 15 round mags.

Then they came for the 10 round mags, and I did not speak out—
Because I didn't use 10 rounders.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Greenday said:

At worst, we'd just have a bunch of rednecks getting filled with bullets by the military. There's just not enough idiots out there for a legit uprising to work.

This is IMO an uninformed statement.

 

There are large swaths of this nation and citizens in it that are much more than internet commandos.  I truly believe they are just itching to get it on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Greenday said:

At worst, we'd just have a bunch of rednecks getting filled with bullets by the military. There's just not enough idiots out there for a legit uprising to work.

I guess that's why the US did so well in Vietnam, huh?

I get it.  Firearms are just a hobby to you.  If the government comes to take them away, you'll just move on to kite flying or whatever strikes your fancy.  But plenty of us are those "idiots" you speak of.  Firearms ownership and the Second Amendment aren't just a fun past time for us.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Greenday said:

At worst, we'd just have a bunch of rednecks getting filled with bullets by the military. There's just not enough idiots out there for a legit uprising to work.

Hmm you are stupid. 

So first up, military operating on US soil against US citizens. That's a no-no. Insist, and now you have a bunch of no 2A organizations opposed to you. This will be unlikely out the gate, and even if done, lets see what the compliance rate is. You can go shoot your fellow Americans, or sit out the shooting war with a fairly arguable case based on your oath. 

So it's law enforcement vs. the populace. How much non-compliance do you need? Well if you line up all the sworn officers, you have somewhere around a million and change for a populace of ~250 million adults. Now the cops, while they have their regular job. This involves showing up someplace when called. That's a real bad habit to have in a shooting war. Maybe they decide to dictate terms and kick in the doors. How many? How fast? How many people stay on their side when they are kiciking in the doors of their neighbors? Does it stop at just kicking in the right doors? Probably not. 

Why is it the leftist mind set thinks when we go into the middle east and enact violence on the population we will breed resistance, but if we do the same here everyone will just fold? That same bullshit cognitive dissonance just permeates their tenets. Cops are racist murderers and jack booted thugs/Cops are the only people who should be armed. We must conserve, recycle, and live like hermits because we don't have the resources on the planet/we can provide plenty for everyone because there's no limit on a government's resources that aren't made up. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what would happen if, assuming the 10 round mag limit passes, some particularly rebellious individuals started planting empty 11+ rd mags (say tiny ones, like for ruger 10-22’s) on legislators, their family and/or friends, and anonymously alerting the police to their possession.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DirtyDigz said:

I wonder what would happen if, assuming the 10 round mag limit passes, some particularly rebellious individuals started planting empty 11+ rd mags (say tiny ones, like for ruger 10-22’s) on legislators, their family and/or friends, and anonymously alerting the police to their possession.

filled with HPs

I like the way you think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From The Patriot Post on 6/6/18:

OPINION IN BRIEF

Walter Williams: "Having enjoyed my 82nd birthday, I am part of a group of about 50 million Americans who are 65 years of age or older. Those who are 90 or older were in school during the 1930s. My age cohort was in school during the 1940s. Baby boomers approaching their 70s were in school during the 1950s and early '60s. Try this question to any one of those 50 million Americans who are 65 or older: Do you recall any discussions about the need to hire armed guards to protect students and teachers against school shootings? Do you remember school policemen patrolling the hallways? How many students were shot to death during the time you were in school? For me and those other Americans 65 or older, when we were in school, a conversation about hiring armed guards and having police patrol hallways would have been seen as lunacy. There was no reason. What's the difference between yesteryear and today? The logic of the argument for those calling for stricter gun control laws, in the wake of recent school shootings, is that something has happened to guns. Guns have behaved more poorly and become evil. Guns themselves are the problem. The job for those of us who are 65 or older is to relay the fact that guns were more available and less controlled in years past, when there was far less mayhem. Something else is the problem. Guns haven't changed. People have changed. Behavior that is accepted from today's young people was not accepted yesteryear."

 

How very true!

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2018 at 6:55 PM, Greenday said:

At worst, we'd just have a bunch of rednecks getting filled with bullets by the military. There's just not enough idiots out there for a legit uprising to work.

There's so much fail in the above statement.

However, when all we can muster for a protest in Trenton, announced well in advance, is approximately 2,000 people out of an estimated 1,000,000  gun owners, that's a 0.2% representation. And that was only for a "rally", where we were guaranteed not to get arrested.

So how many will rise up? The American Revolution saw a participation level of about 3% of the population. Today, that number would more likely be 0.00003% of the American Gun Owner, in NJ that would mean 30 gun owners.  Yes, 30 people would easily be incarcerated by the State, 300 would be more difficult, 3,000 you're now achieving 'civil disobedience' levels and 30,000, you've reached the "Government GFY" level. But this is NJ. We can't even get 10% of the people to vote, and that's WITH dead people voting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2018 at 5:06 PM, 45Doll said:

That's right. Is there anywhere between here and there where we will be prepared to pay the cost of freedom, whatever that is?

BTW I'm not holding myself in some special regard. I'm just as reticent about this as anyone else.

Damn good question!  A felony conviction in NJ for a BS gun law would result in loss of the right to own firearms in all 50 states.  That's a high price to pay.  Sometimes a strategic retreat is the best course of action. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Old Glock guy said:

Damn good question!  A felony conviction in NJ for a BS gun law would result in loss of the right to own firearms in all 50 states.  That's a high price to pay.  Sometimes a strategic retreat is the best course of action. 

Yes, it would be. And if it's paid by (1, 2, 5 ...?) some low number of people it's a pointless exercise. Because arresting, prosecuting and incarcerating under nn (pick a number) people is a low price for the state legislators to pay to enforce their will on you.

Last year New Jersey housed 19,453 inmates state wide. If 50,000+ NJ gun owners chose to break the law by deliberately committing a process crime (waving that 15-round mag) and subject themselves to the legal and penal system, what do you think they would do? Triple the budget? Build three times as many cells? Jam 50 to a room?

Or would they reconsider the results of their laws? 

Their whole gun control scheme is premised on 1. You'll capitulate and/or 2. You'll go underground, and they'll pick off individuals one at a time to scare the hell out of the rest.

They are not prepared to handle mass disobedience.

If only six people had showed up in the 60's to sit at that white lunch counter or in the front seats of the bus, there might not be any civil rights law.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So just to take this thought experiment a step further (and I'm certainly open to your premise), suppose they convict 10's of thousands of NJ gun owners for a procedural crime.  The penalty for breaking any firearms law in NJ is a felony.  Let's say they "benevolently" decide to waive prison time for all the offenders.  As far as I understand it, they will still have stripped all those people of the right to ever own firearms anywhere in the US (plus, of course, the right to vote). 

I guess at some point those people could go to the courts for relief, but that would be a crap shoot at best. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, njJoniGuy said:

From The Patriot Post on 6/6/18:

OPINION IN BRIEF

Walter Williams: "Having enjoyed my 82nd birthday, I am part of a group of about 50 million Americans who are 65 years of age or older. Those who are 90 or older were in school during the 1930s. My age cohort was in school during the 1940s. Baby boomers approaching their 70s were in school during the 1950s and early '60s. Try this question to any one of those 50 million Americans who are 65 or older: Do you recall any discussions about the need to hire armed guards to protect students and teachers against school shootings? Do you remember school policemen patrolling the hallways? How many students were shot to death during the time you were in school? For me and those other Americans 65 or older, when we were in school, a conversation about hiring armed guards and having police patrol hallways would have been seen as lunacy. There was no reason. What's the difference between yesteryear and today? The logic of the argument for those calling for stricter gun control laws, in the wake of recent school shootings, is that something has happened to guns. Guns have behaved more poorly and become evil. Guns themselves are the problem. The job for those of us who are 65 or older is to relay the fact that guns were more available and less controlled in years past, when there was far less mayhem. Something else is the problem. Guns haven't changed. People have changed. Behavior that is accepted from today's young people was not accepted yesteryear."

 

How very true!

Well since 1940 there's about twice the population in the country. Still one national news cycle, and still 365 days in a year. So you would expect incidents to roughly double with literally nothing changing about people as a whole. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...