Magazine Ban Upheld

[Sniper 6,372]

27 minutes ago, Zeke said:

You do realize we have discussion sections here correct? 

 

[1LtCAP 4,263]

2 hours ago, RichP said:

 

Most hunters that I know share an enjoyment of shooting and guns in general. Thinking that because they don't shoot "black" rifles and hi-cap handguns, they are dense and deserve to be punished is both inaccurate and really does nothing but empower the opposition.

I don't really understand the animus towards hunters by some on this forum.

FYI - the hunting community is also under constant attack by both the state and very well funded anti-hunting groups like PETA and HSUS. Bear hunt bans, new hunting and trapping restrictions, dealing with activists in the woods, etc., is nothing new to most "Fudds".

 

i never said they should be punished. i do think they should wake the hell up though.

[BobA 1,235]

55 minutes ago, Sniper22 said:

Exactly... besides, there's more important things to discuss here on the forum than unconstitutional laws.... like meatloaf!

 

Meatloaf?  Is he still around?

[Zeke 5,504]

20 minutes ago, Sniper22 said:

Ok.. so why are you bringing up my awesome meatloaf in this current trend of blaming hunters for all nj gun owners woes?

[CAL. .30 M1 2,101]

2 hours ago, W2MC said:

...and congratulations.  You just fell into the libtard "divide and conquer" trap.  Your response is exactly what they want; all part of the Democrat "class warfare" stock in trade. 

 Ben Franklin was right.  "We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we will all hang separately."

The problem is - I am kinda a 'fudd' i enjoy hunting etc.  But my ownership of firearms is not hunting centric.

I will give you too examples -

 

1)  Mention to an avid deer hunter that they are coming after guns en masse - " not my muzzleloader " - i said ya never know anything is possible - they are doing x - y - z - " well if they ban em I still have my bow - they can't ban that who cares.."

 

2)  An Ex friend - Avid deer hunter takes 5 deer a season or more - has one AR all others are shotguns or thutty thutties.......  DIPSHIT VOTED FOR MURPHY...  WHY?  Weed.........  could care less about giving up his AR as long as he has his weed and shotties......

 

Yes they are the problem at times.........

 

 

[raz-0 1,259]

2 hours ago, RichP said:

Having been a member of many hunting forums almost since their inception, I have yet to see posts that cheer for anti-gun legislation. As a matter of fact, just quickly perusing several NJ hunting forums, there is a clear opposition to anything anti-gun; from state laws to boycotting anti-gun companies.

What I'm saying, there should not be a "us vs them"  mentality, since you'll find that many folks are both.

I know a fair number of hunters. About half of them are gun guys who hunt. Those who aren't gun guys mostly don't hunt with guns, just bows. 

Probably about half of the bowhunters could give a crap about anti legislation and most of the hunting stuff outside of deer. For them hunting = deer and they could give a crap about anything else. Not animosity for the most part, more laziness. Of the non gun guys who hunt with shotguns.. well.. most of them are of the "if it weren't for you gun nuts, I could live in peace and hunt". 

They are not getting it, but I try not to be a dick to them about it. About 3/4ths of the non gun guy hunter population are probably tractable to tit for tat support for what they do care about. 

[JackDaWack 2,895]

2 hours ago, W2MC said:

...and congratulations.  You just fell into the libtard "divide and conquer" trap.  Your response is exactly what they want; all part of the Democrat "class warfare" stock in trade. 

 Ben Franklin was right.  "We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we will all hang separately."

I fail to see how calling out Fudds for their lack of interest in gun laws has anything to do with falling into a trap. 

I would love their support, but as I basically pointed out, they dont seem to care..

If it wasnt apparent, they seem to be the ones who dont want to hang together.... 

[silverado427 10,725]

2 hours ago, Sniper22 said:

Exactly... besides, there's more important things to discuss here on the forum than unconstitutional laws.... like meatloaf!

 

LMFAO.

[myhatinthering 462]

3 hours ago, W2MC said:

...and congratulations.  You just fell into the libtard "divide and conquer" trap.  Your response is exactly what they want; all part of the Democrat "class warfare" stock in trade. 

 Ben Franklin was right.  "We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we will all hang separately."

I don't think he's wrong, just look at the UK and Australia for further proof.  The black rifle is now the second most common hunting rifle in America second only to the shotgun as a group.  We are all in this together

[voyager9 3,434]

1 hour ago, Zeke said:

Ok.. so why are you bringing up my awesome meatloaf in this current trend of blaming hunters for all nj gun owners woes?

Your meatloaf would be that much more awesome if it contained dear or bear meat, obviously. 

[Zeke 5,504]

4 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

Your meatloaf would be that much more awesome if it contained dear or bear meat, obviously. 

Ahh I see.. bear apparently is a tough one to prepare.

 

 

 

i call bull shit!

[JackDaWack 2,895]

If were on the topic. I know of at least 4 hunters, and probably more, who don't even vote. When we were talking about the recent bear hunt shut down on state land and all of their response was, we hunt private land, i guess were gonna get bears this year.....

As far as i can see, the devide already existed.

 

[Zeke 5,504]

1 minute ago, JackDaWack said:

If were on the topic. I know of at least 4 hunters, and probably more, who don't even vote. When we were talking about the recent bear hunt shut down on state land and all of their response was, we hunt private land, i guess were gonna get bears this year.....

As far as i can see, the devide already existed.

 

Someone has to bridge that gap...

cnjfo does it.. but you guys might wanna walk the bridge also?

everthing is perspective 

Jus sayen 

know your enemy, they are the people that teach me to fight me

[Smokin .50 1,907]

19 hours ago, Sniper22 said:

To me it looks like the 2A groups in the state play "can you top this" instead of pooling all their resources and working together for a common cause. This dilutes all efforts...

This is news to me & I'm the most active 2A leader in NJ.  

Please illuminate us on what you consider to be a group.  I need to know who I'm supposed to be playing "can you top this" with.

To me a "group" is a non-profit corporation with a checkbook, board of trustees, mission statement, bylaws, dissolution amendment, Executive Committee (elected officers), website, Facebook page, and twitter account PLUS a dues-paying membership.

We've never played any games, and are on record as calling for a meeting of all 2A "groups" upon our INCEPTION!  I really wish the opinionated BS of the "Passionately UNINFORMED" would cease & desist!  

Does a $5,500 check to fight the mag ban legislation count as "pooling resources" or is it a "can you top this" & nobody told me, eh?

[Zeke 5,504]

@carl_g you see the parallels here?

db vs quad vs Jeep, vs whatever? 

[Smokin .50 1,907]

3 hours ago, RichP said:

Having been a member of many hunting forums almost since their inception, I have yet to see posts that cheer for anti-gun legislation. As a matter of fact, just quickly perusing several NJ hunting forums, there is a clear opposition to anything anti-gun; from state laws to boycotting anti-gun companies.

What I'm saying, there should not be a "us vs them"  mentality, since you'll find that many folks are both.

EXACTLY!  And well said!

To everyone, not just Rich P:

You're all lookin' at living proof of this^^^ right HERE!  I'm a Hunter.  I'm a 2A leader.  I'm a Shootist.  I'm a pistol league discipline Co-Chair & match director at my local club!  In point of fact I run Hunts as fundraisers to get everyone from all backgrounds (Black Rifle owners, Fudds, regular Red Necks, kids, women, pistol shooters that I LOAN a long gun to, etc.) talking to each other in a format that produces friendships instead of enemies!  There is every type of gun owner in NJ in this photo.  My job is to get them talking to each other so they support each other instead of using stereotypes against each other    

The problem in some cases is passion itself.  Good leaders look for passionate volunteers that care about the mission.  Showing passion is a good thing because leaders want committee people that infect others thru their passion.  Too much of a good thing however leads to making suppositions & pointing the fickle finger of fantastic fate.  Worse yet, this forum is infected with people that don't belong to an active 2A group but somehow they feel as if THEY have all of the answers.  Cue the "pooling resources" line from above...

The real answer is a forum is a place for opinions to flourish.  My job is to herd the cats after all of the pissing & moaning is over.

[45Doll 5,877]

On 11/28/2018 at 5:19 PM, Sniper22 said:

What recourse do the citizen at large have for getting a unconstitutional law signed in June and shoved up our asses?

Want recourse? Are the 1 million gun owners in the state willing to march and protest on Trenton waving 15 rounds mags in the air, demanding repeal and recourse??

Didn't think so.

You wouldn't need 1.5 million.

The current NJ prison population is around 15,000. If 15,000 gun owners were willing to do this, the law would become immediately un-actionable and unenforceable. Not to mention budget problems. This is basic Cloward-Piven strategy. 

Of course you won't find 15,000 either.

[voyager9 3,434]

I change my vote in the other thread. I want to meet @Smokin .50

[Zeke 5,504]

3 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

I change my vote in the other thread. I want to meet @Smokin .50

You’ll regret that..

luv ya Rosie 

[Smokin .50 1,907]

14 minutes ago, Zeke said:

You’ll regret that..

luv ya Rosie 

HA!  Good advice!  

I'm feelin' the luv @Zeke  

[Smokin .50 1,907]

27 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

I change my vote in the other thread. I want to meet @Smokin .50

What thread?  What VOTE?  LOL!  I must have missed something?

I'll meet anytime.  Just PM me to make it happen!  

[Zeke 5,504]

2 minutes ago, Smokin .50 said:

What thread?  What VOTE?  LOL!  I must have missed something?

I'll meet anytime.  Just PM me to make it happen!  

Ya @voyager9! Do it!

[capt14k 2,052]

What thread?  What VOTE?  LOL!  I must have missed something?
I'll meet anytime.  Just PM me to make it happen! [emoji4] 

No idea what they are talking about, but whileI have your ear how do I get more shirts. I wear my shirt at least twice a week and it is starting to show wear.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JHZR2 56]

On 11/28/2018 at 1:24 PM, diamondd817 said:

You were given 180 days as per the legislation. Court challenges do not effect the  legislation timeline, unless of course you win. Which isn't going to happen, hence the reason for the last minute decision release - no time to appeal or apply for an emergency injunction. 

 

Yeah, sure, we were given 180 days. On a contentious topic that had a suit filed how many days after?  

The law causes permanent, irreversible damage.  The law can not assume that law abiding gun owners have a place in PA or some other state to stash their property. So the only options are to dispose (making a sa firearm either a single shot firearm or useless without new acquisition of an item to make it functional), or, irreversible, permanent change to their existing mags.  

So now the bill sponsors, one’s representation if they voted for the bill in “representing” you, the governor who signed it into law, and the court who owes a timely response ALL have a fiduciary responsibility to the population whose private property they affect.  

So if the law is upheld, there is financial damage that should be recovered against legislators and the governor. 

If the law is struck down, anyone who already bought, disposed or damaged their property should be able to recover damages for faulty law writing. 

Because it is reasonable and prudent for a reasonable, rational human to wait for an outcome on a contested topic, the court inherits a fiduciary responsibility, and an owed responsibility to the population to make a decision at law with sufficient time for a person to take action BEFORE the enaction date. If the court is unable to maintain this responsibility, they should too be liable and responsible for damages which could come from people waiting upon their action and responsibility and then left with insufficient time to act. 

The discriminator here is an effect, an irreversible effect, on private property, with zero grandfathering or other methodlogy to prevent private property from being rendered useless or else incurring substantial cost. 

I find it hard to believe that there is such immunity for these people that there is no recourse whatsoever, even on a person by person basis in something as simple as small claims court.  

 

[Zeke 5,504]

13 minutes ago, JHZR2 said:

Yeah, sure, we were given 180 days. On a contentious topic that had a suit filed how many days after?  

The law causes permanent, irreversible damage.  The law can not assume that law abiding gun owners have a place in PA or some other state to stash their property. So the only options are to dispose (making a sa firearm either a single shot firearm or useless without new acquisition of an item to make it functional), or, irreversible, permanent change to their existing mags.  

So now the bill sponsors, one’s representation if they voted for the bill in “representing” you, the governor who signed it into law, and the court who owes a timely response ALL have a fiduciary responsibility to the population whose private property they affect.  

So if the law is upheld, there is financial damage that should be recovered against legislators and the governor. 

If the law is struck down, anyone who already bought, disposed or damaged their property should be able to recover damages for faulty law writing. 

Because it is reasonable and prudent for a reasonable, rational human to wait for an outcome on a contested topic, the court inherits a fiduciary responsibility, and an owed responsibility to the population to make a decision at law with sufficient time for a person to take action BEFORE the enaction date. If the court is unable to maintain this responsibility, they should too be liable and responsible for damages which could come from people waiting upon their action and responsibility and then left with insufficient time to act. 

The discriminator here is an effect, an irreversible effect, on private property, with zero grandfathering or other methodlogy to prevent private property from being rendered useless or else incurring substantial cost. 

I find it hard to believe that there is such immunity for these people that there is no recourse whatsoever, even on a person by person basis in something as simple as small claims court.  

 

The suit was filed in less than 24 hours 

[carl_g 568]

4 hours ago, Zeke said:

@carl_g you see the parallels here?

db vs quad vs Jeep, vs whatever? 

@Zeke I have a db and a rubicon so.....

[Zeke 5,504]

4 minutes ago, carl_g said:

@Zeke I have a db and a rubicon so.....

Sooo you are jus the problem totally encompassing 

[carl_g 568]

2 minutes ago, Zeke said:

Sooo you are jus the problem totally encompassing 

LOL!

[Smokin .50 1,907]

1 hour ago, capt14k said:

 

No idea what they are talking about, but whileI have your ear how do I get more shirts. I wear my shirt at least twice a week and it is starting to show wear.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Hi & thanks for asking!  Here's the link to the online store:  http://www.cnjfo.com/Store 

I carry (in my car--what I refer to as "The War Wagon") maroon member tees, some orange 2A tees (design same as Rally), as well as some "Charlie-the-Perp" tees.  In outerwear I have both black & maroon hoodies, full-zip hoodies, sweatshirts.

I can meet you at Union Hill Gun Club during the day to drop anything off, so check online & let me know  

Rosey

[Fred2 367]

5 hours ago, USRifle30Cal said:

The problem is - I am kinda a 'fudd' i enjoy hunting etc.  But my ownership of firearms is not hunting centric.

I will give you too examples -

 

1)  Mention to an avid deer hunter that they are coming after guns en masse - " not my muzzleloader " - i said ya never know anything is possible - they are doing x - y - z - " well if they ban em I still have my bow - they can't ban that who cares.."

 

2)  An Ex friend - Avid deer hunter takes 5 deer a season or more - has one AR all others are shotguns or thutty thutties.......  DIPSHIT VOTED FOR MURPHY...  WHY?  Weed.........  could care less about giving up his AR as long as he has his weed and shotties......

 

Yes they are the problem at times.........

 

 

The weed thing is why the R team lost the election.