JohnnyB

ANJRPC RELEASES GUIDE TO COMPLY WITH MAGAZINE BAN

261 posts in this topic

30 minutes ago, JHZR2 said:

The comment I saw above, unless I misread, was really more oriented towards LEO, and their potential willingness to strip and arrest in light of blatant disregard for constitutional rights as has been recently legislated  

The fact that vets and hunters were listed, wasn’t an attack on those groups, but rather because those groups tend to be more cherished than others, vets because of their sacrifices, and hunters, because they’re supposed to be benign and the embodiment of what the left things 2A is for (well, that plus muskets).  

I think the point was to arrest a tacticool desk jockey commando, or an actual criminal, would shake the public at large up less than if it were one of these more cherished groups. 

Just my interpretation.... not a dig against vets. 

Bad read.

Share this post


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

See EJ's post above. He got it 100% right!

I'll add, it is just the same person who brags about not donating to ANJRPC, and how bad our Lawyer's are, being himself. I'm sure he wouldn't be the type to serve in the military either and has 100 ways to justify it in his mind why he shouldn't :-).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Combat Auto said:

I'll add, it is just the same person who brags about not donating to ANJRPC, and how bad our Lawyer's are, being himself. I'm sure he wouldn't be the type to serve in the military either and has 100 ways to justify it in his mind why he shouldn't :-).

Bro. You totally screwed the quote thing

jus trying be... a helper 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JHZR2 said:

The comment I saw above, unless I misread, was really more oriented towards LEO, and their potential willingness to strip and arrest in light of blatant disregard for constitutional rights as has been recently legislated  

The fact that vets and hunters were listed, wasn’t an attack on those groups, but rather because those groups tend to be more cherished than others, vets because of their sacrifices, and hunters, because they’re supposed to be benign and the embodiment of what the left things 2A is for (well, that plus muskets).  

I think the point was to arrest a tacticool desk jockey commando, or an actual criminal, would shake the public at large up less than if it were one of these more cherished groups. 

Just my interpretation.... not a dig against vets. 

If you read the last paragraph, vets are lumped into the same group of people who want us dead. I interpreted as it was stated.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2018 at 11:26 PM, vladtepes said:

with all due respect.. I think that is a bad idea.. mistakes happen.. accidents happen.. police have to be in homes sometimes.. 

I understand the frustration.. and I think the law is ridiculous.. but failing to comply.. unless you have some high profile lawyer in your corner who is ready to fight the big fight on your behalf on his or her dime.. its a decision you could pay for the rest of your life.. 

not complying only works in mass when there are enough people not complying that the governing body can simply not deal with.. and I would not rest my freedom or the rest of my life on that.. 

you are all not alone... firearms in our entire country is an uncertain mess.. here we are.. nothing pro gun passed.. and the president poised to ban "bump stocks"... we are even losing ground under this administration.. so save your fight for the big nationwide fight that is inevitable.. 

 

What ever happened to that doctor who was caught with an assault weapon in this fine state about a year ago?

Share this post


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

If you read the last paragraph, vets are lumped into the same group of people who want us dead. I interpreted as it was stated.

Fair enough.  I looked at the last paragraph as a lapse of punctuation/continuous thought.  Obviously retired vets can’t arrest and do some of the other things noted. 

Benefit of the doubt. Not saying I was right...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, retired vets are not coming into your home to take your guns. As if I have to state such an obvious fact.

My point still stands, oh and ANJRPC can keep their bigwig and his 6 figure salary, getting paid to pat us all on the shoulder and tell us it'll all be all right. One day. Oh and for $1.25 per magazine you can keep them at gun sitters guys!

I've been hearing that crap for ten years, it's all gonna change! One day. One day, guys. They've been saying it for twenty. But hey, at least I can store my magazines at Gunsitters for only $1.25.

Hey did I mention, you can store magazines at Gunsitters for only $1.25!

"Never waste a tragedy" who said that one again? Diane Feinstein or Scott Bach? I can't remember.

Oh well. I do remember I can store my magazines for only $1.25 each over at Gunsitters.

And no, I didn't or wouldnt join the military. You're right, it's not my thing. I'm cool with that, since the 2A has nothing to do with veterans, military, or LEO. A well regulated MILITIA. I'm capable of defending myself, my home, my family, and if need be, my country. That's what the 2A is about.

Oh yeah, and storing magazines for $1.25 a month, that too.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, here is some perspective for you.

I know a number of retired and active leos....

Lets sample 5 or so.....

RLeo one, thinks that civilians shouldnt be able to carry guns and dont have the balls to use it or know how to use it, yet he admits he cant hit anything with a j frame 38...also God complex.

Not native nj, didnt work here, but carries here daily and states eff these laws ill do what i want.

 

Rleo2 is full tilt 2a gun rights guy for all ...thinks we should carry no limits ..collector, great guy and is very concerned about mag limits and how it affects HIM.  But is very sympathetic to us.

Rleo3, not really a gun guy, but carries, thinks we should all be able to carry, hates murphy and hates these laws.."these stupid effingnlaws do nothing", but very concerned how the mag laws affect HIM and his family.....do the math.

ALeo1, full tilt gun guy, great person, thinks the laws are stupid, thinks we ALL are getting shafted, would do anything to help you....and i would stand with him, or two of the above for that matter any day of the week.

Rleo4,5,6 - dont care about us, not gun guys per se, but all THEY care about is how it affects THEM....when you point out the disparities etc.  They commonality of the answer is, "well to bad you should have been a cop, we earned it...."  really?

 

This is a short non scientific opinion tracker...

For me if you do not support the right of the people to keep and bear arms, using the same tools that you would use to defend yourself, your family and to get you home after your shift - you can eff off - your part of the problem and the lacky of the liberal pinko commies.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay dumb question time, just confused myself reading between the bill and the guidelines. I have a bolt action .22 that has a fixed tube mag that holds 17 rounds. Should still be good since the bill indicates it's for semiautomatic, right?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, El_Mal90 said:

I have a bolt action .22 that has a fixed tube mag that holds 17 rounds. Should still be good since the bill indicates it's for semiautomatic, right?

Yes, plus it's not a detachable mag.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, El_Mal90 said:

Okay dumb question time, just confused myself reading between the bill and the guidelines. I have a bolt action .22 that has a fixed tube mag that holds 17 rounds. Should still be good since the bill indicates it's for semiautomatic, right?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

Correct 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Screwball said:

 


To add, law now (actually when it was originally signed) allows the Marlin Model 60s with the longer tube... allowing for 18 rounds.

Kind of ironic, as it was one of the guns that was used to be an example years back.

 

Because this isn’t about representation, this isn’t about the village. This is about testing the waters 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.