Jump to content
xXxplosive

Bill S.746 Animal Cruelty and suspension of 2A in NJ

Recommended Posts

In NJ, Is it legal to feel live animals to other live animals? 
Seems terrible, but many people who own snakes feed them live Mice/Rats/Rabbits- or have to buy live animals and euthanize them to feed fresh. 
There was a man in NC that was arrested for not feeding his fish ( it was later dropped).
Would hate to be the guy that loses my 2a rights over something like pet-food
 

Share this post


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

So this is OK with U as they take away your Constitutional 2A Rights...………..

Not with me.  Animal cruelty can mean a lot of things.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr.Forks said:

In NJ, Is it legal to feel live animals to other live animals? 
Seems terrible, but many people who own snakes feed them live Mice/Rats/Rabbits- or have to buy live animals and euthanize them to feed fresh. 
There was a man in NC that was arrested for not feeding his fish ( it was later dropped).
Would hate to be the guy that loses my 2a rights over something like pet-food
 

Yes it's legal to feed Iive food to reptiles and other animals like fish and birds of prey. Thawed frozen food has become popular in recent years but some species will only eat live food.  Nothing wrong with that it's just the food chain. 

Share this post


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

... Nothing wrong with that it's just the food chain. 

Sounds just like the PRNJ's Gun Control "scheme" (as the courts refer to it, very correctly) whereas the sworn cops can have and carry them, the politicians (if they wish) can carry them, the protectors of the rich can carry them, the rich can carry if they want,  and then at the bottom of the pile, are we the subjects who cannot carry unless we can can show "justifiable need"

The PRNJ Firearm Foodchain. :blackeye:

  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

Sounds just like the PRNJ's Gun Control "scheme" (as the courts refer to it, very correctly) whereas the sworn cops can have and carry them, the politicians (if they wish) can carry them, the protectors of the rich can carry them, the rich can carry if they want,  and then at the bottom of the pile, are we the subjects who cannot carry unless we can can show "justifiable need"

The PRNJ Firearm Foodchain. :blackeye:

More like a caste system 

Share this post


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

I understand your point but I dont think you have read NJ 4:22 therefore you are speaking about something that you are uninformed about. 

Definitely no PETA member here I have been a licensed hunter for 24 years and fishing for longer than that. 

NO, in fact it's quite the opposite here and I'd argue you really don't understand what your reading or thinking this through.

 

to another comment later on, they are creating separate groups of people which is clearly not permitted by a multitude of rulings at state and federal levels.  This is what Nappen needs to go after

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, fishnut said:

I dont commit animal cruelty or any other crimes for that matter so how would anyone take away my 2A rights? 

Yes I'm ok with people who are convicted of animal cruelty losing their 2A rights. As I stated in my first post people who commit animal cruelty do not possess good decision making skills therefore they should not have access to firearms. 

Are you ok with someone owning firearms when they intentionally dont provide shelter, food or water to an animal for so long that the animal dies of exposure, starvation or dehydration? 

I'm in favor of a penalty.....fine, jail, other...…...but never taking away a "Right" of mine.....can't believe your thinkin'.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abusing animals is horrible and those that do it should face criminal charges.   And, those that have animal abuse in their background should be assessed for their mental status, however, linking anything other than a felony conviction of aggravated animal cruelty concerning animals (on its own merit) should not be grounds for barring firearms ownership.

By the way, why stop there, Leftists.  Anyone charged and convicted with animal cruelty should be barred from voting and running for politics. 

As with anything "Progressive" and "leftists", look at all possible options/actions and/or non-options and the wrong thing and the wrong focus and the wrong logic will always be applied.  

Lets, instead, focus on the actual animals that use firearms, and in particular "abusive" way.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, xXxplosive said:

I'm in favor of a penalty.....fine, jail, other...…...but never taking away a "Right" of mine.....can't believe your thinkin'.

Is being jailed not a loss of rights?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RUTGERS95 said:

and there lies the rub as interpretation is key and remember, this is for a misdemeanor!  NUTS

Not really, the definitions and qualifications are all spelled out so there is not much left for a judge to interpret and the majority of all animal cruelty is not a disorderly persons offence(misdemeanor) they are inditable criminal charges(felony) so currently most people found guilty of animal cruelty are prohibited from owning firearms. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m all for vigorous prosecution and stiff penalties for cruelty to animals, but not for linking that to suspension of 2A rights.  There is no logical connection. 

Is loss of the right to free speech, a free press, the right to assemble, or practice religion ever considered as an add-on punishment?   No

How about we make violators quarter soldiers in their homes without their consent?

Or subject them to unreasonable search and seizure,  or maybe take away their right to not self-incriminate?

Maybe we deprive violators of the right to a speedy trial, or a trial by jury?

Or maybe declare that rights not delegated by the constitution to the federal or state government will NOT be reserved to people who violate certain statutes.

Why is it always second amendment rights that are targeted?

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, 10X said:

I’m all for vigorous prosecution and stiff penalties for cruelty to animals, but not for linking that to suspension of 2A rights.  There is no logical connection. 

Is loss of the right to free speech, a free press, the right to assemble, or practice religion ever considered as an add-on punishment?   No

How about we make violators quarter soldiers in their homes without their consent?

Or subject them to unreasonable search and seizure,  or maybe take away their right to not self-incriminate?

Maybe we deprive violators of the right to a speedy trial, or a trial by jury?

Or maybe declare that rights not delegated by the constitution to the federal or state government will NOT be reserved to people who violate certain statutes.

Why is it always second amendment rights that are targeted?

Should ex felons have the right to vote and own firearms?

It takes a special kinda sick pervert to abuse animals, and apparently it’s a gateway to much worse people crimes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, xXxplosive said:

Give up 2A for animal rights...…..the "Crazies" are out today....omo.

So where's your line in the sand? When do you think someone should loose their 2A rights? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 anjrpc_header-2-revised-b.jpg
 

GUN BILLS STALL IN SENATE COMMITTEE

At today's meeting of the NJ Senate Law and Public Safety Committee, S120 (increases penalties for leaving firearms within access of a minor) was not heard and the bill was "held." Our sources indicate it was held because anti-gun lawmakers intend to pursue more aggressive legislation on the subject instead in the future. 
 
Also, a hearing began on S746 (prohibits firearms ownership for mere "disorderly persons" offenses toward animals), but after fundamental questions were raised about the scope of the bill, the legislation was also "held" and the bill sponsor agreed to go back to the drawing board on it. 
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

It takes a special kinda sick pervert to abuse animals, and apparently it’s a gateway to much worse people crimes

I’m not arguing with that, but why does it always seem to be the second amendment the dems want to curtail?  Let’s mix it up a little!   Curtail the third amendment--if found guilty of animal cruelty, a couple of Marines are going to come live with you 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, 10X said:

I’m not arguing with that, but why does it always seem to be the second amendment the dems want to curtail?  Let’s mix it up a little!   Curtail the third amendment--if found guilty of animal cruelty, a couple of Marines are going to come live with you 

What’s wrong with marines dude?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Ray Ray said:

No

Can you elaborate? As far as I know people in jail or prison are not allowed to have guns and they are subject to warrantless serches so I dont think inmates have 2A or 4A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, fishnut said:

Can you elaborate? As far as I know people in jail or prison are not allowed to have guns and they are subject to warrantless serches so I dont think inmates have 2A or 4A

Your attempt at playing devil’s advocate just veered into reductio ad absurdum territory. 

There are some legitimate concerns brought up that you’re just dancing around. Because...animals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

Your attempt at playing devil’s advocate just veered into reductio ad absurdum territory. 

There are some legitimate concerns brought up that you’re just dancing around. Because...animals. 

No it's because I've had actual experience with people who commit cruelty to animals. 

The only legitimate concern brought up here is the lawmaker introduced a law that would prohibit a person convicted of certain disorderly person offence from owning a firearm instead of making all NJ4:22 violations inditable offences. 

Every other concern members here have brought up is already covered in NJ4:22 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, fishnut said:

No it's because I've had actual experience with people who commit cruelty to animals. 

The only legitimate concern brought up here is the lawmaker introduced a law that would prohibit a person convicted of certain disorderly person offence from owning a firearm instead of making all NJ4:22 violations inditable offences. 

Every other concern members here have brought up is already covered in NJ4:22 

Another is “why the 2A?”  What does animal cruelty DP have to do with firearms that warrants a lifetime prohibition? What about voting?  Or writing?  Or even owning other animals? (Can those convicted as DP under 4:22 continue to own pets?)

I get it though. Those that typically commit animal cruelty offenses are scum of the earth. I don’t see anyone justifying their actions and most would agree with any punishment as long as it was justified. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

Another is “why the 2A?”  What does animal cruelty DP have to do with firearms that warrants a lifetime prohibition? What about voting?  Or writing?  Or even owning other animals? (Can those convicted as DP under 4:22 continue to own pets?)

I get it though. Those that typically commit animal cruelty offenses are scum of the earth. I don’t see anyone justifying their actions and most would agree with any punishment as long as it was justified. 

No, currently a person who is convicted in NJ of animal cruelty can not legally own another animal in NJ. Unfortunately in my experiance though it is plead down and sometimes is even allowed to get back their pet. Thanks to the NJSPCA thankfully they are gone now, hopefully it's not as common anymore. 

Why the 2A? because historically convicted criminals lose their 2A rights. As I've said several times most of the violations in 4:22 will already result in a.loss of 2A rights because they are already crimes. 

Voting, yes they can still vote. 

Writing, now your just being silly 

Share this post


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

Can you elaborate? As far as I know people in jail or prison are not allowed to have guns and they are subject to warrantless serches so I dont think inmates have 2A or 4A

Many people have gone to jail and have either expungements, dismissals, charges dropped or petitioned for their rights to be reinstated.  Happens all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Ray Ray said:

Many people have gone to jail and have either expungements, dismissals, charges dropped or petitioned for their rights to be reinstated.  Happens all the time.

But they still lost rights temporarily 

Share this post


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

Sounds to me your in favor of these  Bills that take away one's Rights...….very strange to me.....why are U here.

You said your in favor of taking ones rights away by putting them in jail so I guess the same reason as you. 

I'll ask again what type of crime do you think someone should lose their 2A rights for committing? Do you think convicted murders and rapists should retain their 2A rights? 

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...