Leaderboard

Here's a thought - the State undermines itself in its arguments. Chapter 131 creates a vastly expanded enumerated list of so-called sensitive locations. The State attempts to justify many of these as locations where particularly vulnerable people assemble. The State fails to explain in what way these people are especially vulnerable. It may be presumed that they are vulnerable because they are less able to defend themselves from violent attack because they are children, mentally infirm, or substance abuse addicts. The State appears to presume that because these categories of people assemble in the defined locations for a specific reason (education, sports events, treatment, etc.) that they are the only people in those locations. This is clearly untrue as children do not educate themselves, referee their own sports matches, nor do the infirm treat their own ailments. There are always responsible, law-abiding adults also present to oversee and run the events at these locations as well as spectate at spots events. Indeed, officials at these events are required to submit to a State background check before engaging in running such events. Even children at playgrounds are required to be supervised by a responsible adult. The State’s blanket ban on firearms prevents these responsible adults from acting in defense of the vulnerable people present. It should also be noted that children, the mentally infirm and substance addicts are categorically prohibited from obtaining permits to carry handguns. Chapter 131 also extends the categories of people associated with law enforcement who are exempt from the prohibition of carrying a firearm for the purpose of self-defense in the multitude of sensitive locations. The State argues that these categories of people are at a heightened risk of attack from vengeful criminals. This is unproven, but may be so, but the State saying that they to need to be equipped to defend themselves in the enumerated sensitive locations, is also the State is admitting that regardless of the law prohibiting ordinary people possessing firearms in these locations, there is still a risk that self-defense from a violent attack will be necessary. This is a clear admission that prohibiting firearms from sensitive locations does not eliminate bad actors from committing violent attacks in those places. In contrast, the sensitive locations acknowledged in the Bruen opinion have active measures to ensure the prohibition is observed – metal detectors, armed law enforcement personnel, etc. The vast majority of the new sensitive locations do not have such measures and are a prohibition on paper only. It is very easy to understand how a bad actor ignores the prohibition. Even if an attacker has a particular person as a target, such as one of the newly enumerated exempt people in Chapter 131, it is usual for there to be indiscriminate gunfire from the bad actor. One only needs to look at the number of innocent bystanders injured or killed in the violence perpetrated in our cities to see this is true. Ordinary, law-abiding adults in these sensitive locations have a tangible need for self-defense, no less than the people associated with law enforcement. If the State wishes to persevere with the notion that prohibiting vetted, law-abiding adults from possessing firearms in sensitive locations is effective, they must also admit that it is unnecessary for the newly enumerated associates of law enforcement to be exempt from that prohibition.

Transportation hub is not codified in NJ law. Stretching the State's definition a small train station could be termed a "Transportation Hub" if a bus stops there. Your post shows how the current administration just wants to make the law up as they go along.

I wonder how long illegal aliens have to wait for their free benefits?

Or WFIL 560am it was the WABC of Philly along with Wibbage

This is a very evil man, nothing short of him vanishing the earth would be good enough. He destroyed many lives from Nursing home deaths to killing small businesses that invested their life savings into their businesses.

Pike County Sheriff's office - super easy. Was in and out in 5 minutes.

I’m afraid there is no Lawrence Welk channel..

If anyone wants to watch 2000 Mules, I think you will find it interesting. I know I did. PM me for instructions on how to view it for free.

It is kinda weird that the early drop box ballots are the very last to be counted. It is very convenient for fraud.

More like deja vu 2020.

Sounds remarkably like the middle of the night vote drops in Atlanta and Milwaukee in '20.

didn't we all go to bed with citeralli having a rather comfortable lead, then suddenly when we woke up it had pretty much reversed? kinda fishy like?

yea. she's not anti-gun....but i'm pretty sure she'll give me the old "why do you feel the need to carry a gun here?"

I'm going to make a distinction that's not related to this thread topic in particular, but laws in general. Laws prohibit behavior, but don't prevent anything. They don't and can't stop anyone from doing anything. Laws prescribe punishment for the prohibited behavior, if someone is caught. So all laws do is raise the stakes for those who wish to engage in a specific prohibited activity. And if someone is basically oblivious to punishment, laws stop nothing. In the end, what does and doesn't happen is totally dependent on the mindset of individuals.