SpecialK

He was an armed robber, not just a robber IMHO. So, he was a threat still. If you commit a crime with a weapon then I have no sympathy for you and no one else should either. Since I still haven't found any more details about this, I am going to fantasize that every shot hit the armed robber. If we are going to speculate and make up details as we often do online (we being the entire internet population not just us) I rather make up happy details

I need more to the story, was he missing him? or did all his shots land and just not happen to take him down? What was behind the bad guy if the bullets were missing? an empty field? a school? a brick wall? a house? Sure you can see a car drive by in the back ground but that doesn't mean that road doesn't curve, so it would be an assumption to say he was shooting over a road for sure. Even if he was missing, but the shots were going into no where then how is this fighting bad? Sure it would be better if he had hit the guy, but until you are actually shooting at a live moving target instead of paper targets you won't know how well you will perform. I'd have to double check Missouri's CCW laws, but there are plenty of states that would side with the CCW holder in shooting an armed robber.

1) If they are handguns the only way you can buy ammo is either online or go out of state. It is legal to buy long gun ammo without a FPID, if the store won't sell it to you that is their own policy, so screw them go shop some where that follows the actual law. 2)The FPID is a firearms PURCHASER ID only. You do not have to have it to own firearms. If a cop asks for it you tell them that you do not need it, if they push the issue then make them look bad for not know the law in front of their superiors. Of course this is NJ, so there is a chance of you having a huge hassle and a huge attorneys fee to do this. He should just grab his ankles like everyone else in this state and get his FPID when he gets here.

While on active duty you are considered a resident of the state you are stationed in. He can buy a gun (long or hand) directly from a FFL in another state with his military ID and a copy of his orders as that will fulfill the requirements for proof of residency of that state. Any firearm legally bought outside of NJ that is also NJ compliant can be moved into the state. For example I just moved from Colorado, I legally brought my guns that I purchased legally there with me when I moved here. It would be the same thing for your son as he can legally buy the guns in the state he is stationed in. You do have to keep in mind not all gun stores know all the laws, so some might not want to sell him a firearm, just go to a more informed store if that happens. Hope this clarifies what the others have already said.

I was merely pointing out that many of those issues are not an American issue as they only pertain to a small regions of country. If he had said that there are a large number of mormons in America that are persecuted by not being able to marry multiple wives legally would that be considered something that is happening to this country as a whole? That is a Utah issue, not an American issue. Many of the points he brings up are very localized and if you went to another state and said "look what America is coming to..." and said some of those things they would look at you with a blank stare, because they are non-issues there. I agreed with a bunch of his points, I just feel that there are many there as well that are not issues for all Americans and therefore not something that is happening to this country as a whole. The states are independent of each other and have always had their differences, so if he is pointing out all the differences then the answer to his question is that nothing has happened to the land of the free and the home of the brave as states have always had their differences and opinions on different issues. I get your point of view, I just have a different one on the issue I guess.

-it is a double standard when it comes to congress lying to us and us lying to them for sure. -I cannot think of one case where a white disliking a black (I am assuming this means Obama mainly anyways) for any reason has been censored. Just because when you say you don't like someone and the reception to that opinion is not well received doesn't mean your 1st Amendment rights were withheld. -"The government" this is a terrible blanked noun that is used way to often in this country. There are many Government in the USA and while they work together they are not one. The Federal government rarely is involved of convicting criminal compared to state and local courts. If one is unhappy with the way victims are treated then it is up to their local or possibly state governments to rectify this situation, this is not a problem with the Country as a whole. - Only Congress is restricted by the Constitution from establishing a religion. This is another local issue, not a national issue. If you travel around there are plenty of schools that teach religion. May I suggest you start in the bible belt. -The right to or not to abort or use the death penalty is an issue that is up to each individual states at no point in the Constitution are the powers to make a law either way given to the Federal government. -if you do not agree with the rewrite then keep a copy of the original for yourself. At no point has a book ever been legally mandated to have a rewrite, so this is a non-issue. If a bunch of people want to rewrite a book that is fair use they have every right to. Only if it infringes on copyright law is there a problem. -The idea that Communism is evil is false. It is only a political theory. To fear communism itself is idiotic. To fear those willing to violently impose it is rational. -Mexico is our neighbor, the 38th parallel is a war zone. -Once again I cannot cite a single issue of someone being arrested for bashing Obama or someone for burning a W effigy. The 1st Amendment has been applied evenly to both instances. Just because the reaction is different doesn't mean it was a violation to an amendment -A nativity scene in a public park is a local issue, not a Federal issue. If the community decides they do not want to put it up then there will not be one. -When I lived in Arizona I never once read a news article about sick people. I did how ever rad over and over about how the criminals were treated with a special brand of justice from Sheriff Joe. Once again the author of this is confusing where ever he lives with all of the USA. -While stem cell research is not something I personally care about either way. I do feel this should be settled at the Federal, but only with an Amendment to the Constitution. While it could be argued that a law could be passed as the Federal government is to "...promote the general Welfare..." like I said it can be argued. It should be in black and white what the majority of US citizen think. Does life begin at conception, at birth or some place in between. Lets put it to a vote. -Can't argue with this point on welfare at all. This happens mainly at the Federal level, s is in fact something that all of America has become. -Can't argue with this point either seeing all the anti gun people out there, that cry when their other rights are infringed upon. -Freedom of speech never came without consequences. you can still say as much non-PC things as you want, but if they are directly offensive to others then they can disagree with you. -Ritalin and Video games, well as far as I know this is correct. -with all the bail out money from the Federal government yes this country has made plenty of hand outs lately. -The issue with this is that the author is arguing that neither President did anything to help. What were they supposed to do? It is sad that people need the Federal government to save them, because they are to useless to do it themselves. Both executive branches did in fact send aid to both of those anyways, so this is a moot point. Very little of this has to do with America as a whole. I am getting a little sick of people not being able to tell the difference between their local, state and the Federal government. It is not one entity. That is what is happening to the land of the free and the home of the brave, stupidity.

The 4 rules apply even when cleaning. The gun is a gun until dissembled to the point where it can no longer be fired in any way is how I do it.

Here's an idea go 1 month without drinking, you'll have better grades and be able to afford gun at the end of the month.

the one in the sweater would be the fiancees actually

My girls. Care to guess which on is my fiancees and which one is mine

Yeah it's a dogs life for me next time around if I get any say in it.

Yes, but if you read the red part of that it says "...unreasonable search..." The government is not barred from all searches, just unreasonable ones. So, this is a question of the reasonableness of this method of searching. Now unfortunately those creating the laws are the ones that decide what is reasonable or not. Only if these people would listen to us when we tell them that this is going to far! I am against these screenings and pretty much the entire TSA as it is a bunch of minimum waged workers that don't give a $#!? about actual security. This entire system is ran poorly.

I am not exactly sure what you are talking about here. Could you please quote the law that makes searches illegal for me as I am unfamiliar and interested in learning more?

I am okay with profiling, but we would have to repeal the law first to make it okay to do so. I am not okay with the Government breaking the law to defend this Country. We would have to pass a law that trumps the Civil Rights Act of 1964 first.

+1

I have a problem with it as well, but that doesn't change the fact that no rights are violated.

Are you suggesting that this is a 4th Amendment issue? Seeing as the vast majority of people do not have a problem with this procedure it would be a pretty hard argument that this is an unreasonable search.

what rights? Can you please quote the Constitution on this one as I am unclear as to which right you are referring to.

Just to be clear I do not feel the procedures used are effective at all and the TSA is a joke, but the Federal Government has the right to defend this country and while it can be argued that these tactics do not actually defend the country well their purpose is to do just that.

While I have zero tears for him not being able to fly as the government has every right to impose restrictions when it comes to the defense of the country. I do not agree with the civil suit and $10,000 he followed all the directions given to him.

With this growth do you have any job openings? Hell at this point I'd be willing to take an unpaid internship with the possibility of getting hired down the road Congrats on all the success.

the fine sounds about right to me. Figures it would be a slap on the wrist in the first place as if you are connected enough/rich enough to be able to carry in NJ you'd be able to have any serious penalties swept aside anyways.

Thanks for how to contact him. I will print up a copy of my letter to the Governor and send it to him inn hopes of raising his spirits a bit.

I'd be proud of my girl if she handled it in the exact same way. I am not worried about a 200lbs guy rushing her. I'm 200lbs and if I piss her off enough she can take me I rather risk it and step outside and be friendly than talk to people through a door. If it ever got that bad around here where I wasn't comfortable stepping outside my own home I would move immediately. This of course is just my personal thoughts on the matter, to each their own. Anyways kudos to your wife for having the right mindset. That is the most important part. The details of how one chooses to handle a situation is always up for Monday night quarterbacking. Be proud she had her head in the game, only you and her can nit pick the details as you know yourselves and situation better than anyone.