raz-0

Some ranges ban steel cased ammo because they can't sell the brass. Others ban it because they don't clean the powder residue well and the sparks from the steel jackets can cause problems.

Fed laws grandfather because it is the whole nation. No grandfathering would require them to invoke the taking clause and start paying people. It'd also mandate that they either come searching house to house or let people ignore them. One isn't good for staying elected, the other isn't good after you just asserted you are the one in control. They also don't want to spend the money. States care less because as long as other states don't do it, they can easily argue they haven't denied you your property. You can move it out of state or sell it out of state. If you chose not to understand this I can't help you.

Do you really mean length of pull (I.e. length from trigger to end of stock), or do you mean the amount of trigger take up before it breaks. Geissele will improve the trigger, but the reach to it will be the same or worse if you get the flat trigger. Ar gold will move it back a teensy bit, but total trigger travel is really short relative to stock trigger geometry. They make an ar-10 specific version. If you are actually talking about length of pull, you deal with the stock to fix that.

What part of scotus decisions do you think states there is no right to concealed carry. Best I can recall is that they said their decision does not extend to that because that was not the case in front of them.

1/2011 purchase only.

Via WISQRAS ( http://wisqars.cdc.gov:8080/cdcMapFramework/mapModuleInterface.jsp ) most recent data mapping which was 2000-2006, the per capita incident of fatal accidental firearms injuries per capita in NJ was below the national average (0.15 per 100k vs 0.25 nationally) , and below the majority of states, all of which have lower population densities than NJ. Same for homicides (2.78 per 100k vs 4.07 nationally), legal intervention (0.04 perk 100k vs 0.11 nationally), and suicides (1.96 per 100k vs. 5.81 nationally). From the same data set, California is less than 1/4 as populous (91 people per sq. km), and has more gun control laws than we do. IF population density mattered, and gun control laws helped, they should have lower numbers. Their rate per 100k for fatal unintentional injury was 0.22, homicides was 4.98, legal intervention was 0.20, and suicides was 4.05. Florida is the most populous state without a lot of gun control laws (131.14 per sq km) their injury rate was 0.13, which is less than NJ, homicide was 3.70 which was more than nj, legal intervention was 0.07, and suicide was 7.06 (if you look at the age adjusted rates rather than the curde rate, you will see that lots of old people in florida off themselves, for old folks the rate goes over 18 per 100k there) DC, which is the only distinct reporting entity with a population density higher than NJ, at the time of the data set effectively banned firearm ownership, had a fatal accidental injury rate of 0.42 over 2xs higher than NJ. A homicide rate of 24.92 (murder capital yo!), a legal intervention rate of 0.15, and a suicide rate of 1.88. SO other than suicides, extremely strict gun control did nothing for the safety of DC. Given similar population densities (FL and CA), the place with more gun control is actually the place you are more likely to be killed by a gun. Given the argument increasing gun control, or decreasing population density should reduce the incidence of fatal shootings, california does both and increases your likelihood of being fatally shot. I know the data is old, but given the decreasing rate of violent crime, these stats should be worse than the current state of affairs. Lets see.. columbine and virginia tech were both perpetrated with 10 round magazines. In neither instance was the shooter stopped by intervention by outside parties. Both ended by suicide. VT after 49 people were shot (37 of whom died). Columbine had 33 shot (12 died). The aurora shooting killed 12 and injured 70. HE used a pump shotgun, an AR style rifle with a 30 round magazine which malfunctioned before emptying the 30 round magazine, and a glock 22. swapping long guns and dealing with a malfunction take less time than reloading, and reloaded with the handgun. Yet this helped nobody as he was apprehended without resistance in the parking lot. THe giffords shooting, the glock 22 malfunctioned after 30 of the 33 rounds were fired and people intervened. 6 people were killed int he attack and 14 were injured. Magazine capacity makes no difference, the primary difference are the presence of individuals willing to intervene as soon as possible. Historically, in the early days of the nation, the govenrment leased warships, cannon, mortars, and other crew served weapons from private individuals to wage war. These were the tools used to lay waste to cities and war on nations. Given the medical care of the day, and the proximity of those founding the government to the horrors of war on a first hand basis in their back yards, I would argue that the average person of today might be a wee bit scared of just how radical our founding fathers were and where they might draw the line. From a personal standpoint, I would say that the non crew served weapon loadout of your average infantry man might be a rational demarcation if one were probing for limits despite these being greatly exceeded in the past. Everything out of a shotgun at in home ranges is basically a shotgun slug and will over penetrate in a similar manner. Pistol rounds being relatively slow and heavy will penetrate and retain momentum thus remaining fairly lethal on the other side of a wall or similar lightweight barrier if you miss. PIstols are harder to shoot accurately with minimal training than is a rifle or shotgun. A short barreled semi automatic rifle in .223/5.56 with appropriately chosen ammunition has all the benefits of a semi-auto pistol with easier to attain accuracy, and is more likely to fragment and slow when encountering a lightwieght barrier like the internal wall of a home. IT is also more likely to stop an assailant with one shot than a pistol meaning less rounds fired, which means less bullets flying overall. This assumes that getting stabbed or otherwise killed is somehow superior to getting shot. The violent crime rate per capita and homicide rate per capita does not correlate with strict or loose gun control laws or ownership. What you have seen is that where countries that are culturally similar, with similar rates of violent crime, when firearms bans have been enacted, gun crime rates increase as do violent crime rates. The more permiable your borders, the worse this is (i.e. australia was an island far from places with lots of illegal gun trafficking, and had less issue than the UK, which basically was a drive and a channel crossing from lots of centers of illegal gun trafficking, and saw this effect in greater proportion). The US has increadibly porous borders, and there is LOTS of illegal arm trade to the south of us. Much like the fall of the USSR wound up with the average price paid for an illegal firearm dropping from over $500 previous to the ban down to $50-60 after the ban, the dollar's strength is likely to attract arms form south and central america, and in all likelihood these arms will be fully automatic military arms such as Mexico is having problems with. Leaving aside the issue of placing a test in front of an incorporated enumerated right, which is generally considered unconstitutional, arbitrary training requirements and arbitrary mental health screening that can prevent you form exercising a right are just that, arbitrary. As the law is written, the results of that evaluation have no recourse to contest the results of the screening, nor a definition of where one draws the line of competency. As written, it permits an arbitrary mark to be set which may well be unattainable, and would equate to an outright ban. Additionally, training is no guarantee of less accidents. Police receive training, and many of them still have accidents. This is due in large part to the outcome of training being HIGHLY dependent on how invested the individual is in benefiting form that training. Lots of police regard the firearms training and qualification as a chore, and many departments do not allocate sufficient budget. The bar of police qualification is, despite media myths, pretty damn low. So you either set the bar that low or lower, or you start having to up the requirements of police to be armed in public. Or you require less trianing of an armed officer than a private gun owner who can't use their firearm outside the home or at a range. In an average year about 50 cops die in the line of duty. A good chunk of that involves traffic fatalities. Naitonally, police kick down the incorrect door with a fully loaded out swat team WAY, WAY more often than a cop is killed by a firearm, much less a legally acquired firearm in the hands of it's owner. IF they can't get the address right, and the person right, what good will the data for a different address and a different person do them? This is nothing other than either a backdoor ban by demanding non-existent technology, a useless waste of tax dollars, or a means of pricing ammo out of the reach of consumers price wise. Every ballistics database to date that does toolmark matching has been a boondoggle. Modern manufacturing methods means that you will either get too many matches because each model of gun is too similar, or you will get no matches because grit and grime creates too much difference between each shot fired form the same gun over time to be of use for a computer searching the database. There has been no sweet spot to date, and increasingly with the advent of DNA evidence, it is being demonstrated that toolmark evidence is less trustworthy than previously believed (i.e. hard math is saying the guy didn't do it, and the "it's more art than science" field of toolmark matching isn't calling the results right at the same frequency they claimed they would). NEither Canada's, nor NY states ballistic firngerprint DB has lead to a prosecution. They are a waste of money. Microstamping, under the best circumstances has an incredibly low success rate in producing legible markings as applied by the inventor of the technology. The machinery is prohibitively expensive and proprietary. The net result is easily renderd 100% useless with the gentle application of a little abrasive. to the stamping surface.

Well in NJ, lacking a castle, they have nothing but an obligation to retreat. Lacking a fixed address, who would they go to for a firearms permit? So regardless of the state constitution, the bill of rights, and SCOTUS, I would argue that effectively they do not have the right to self-defense under most circumstances, nor the right to keep and bear arms. At least in a practical sense.

Not only could they prosecute, they could argue premeditation because you went out to confront the dude with a firearm. There are some pretty screwed up precedents in NJ law for REALLY reaching with the premeditation thing regarding firearms.

I've already seen 410 steel barrels showing up. That's liek winding the stainless barrel market back to like 1999ish right there. it's been 416r or some nicer alloy everywhere for a while that I have seen.

BEcause it doesn't criminalize the possession of them on day -1, and it doesn't criminalize the purchase of them in the past. With the 90 day notice, it would criminalize the purchase of them 90 days from passage AND the possession of them 90 days after passage. Since possession would be the crime, and they would bust you for the possession in the future, rather than in the past, I don't see how ex post facto comes into it even if you would like it to. You can argue that it technically denies you of property by creating a specialized market shared with no other place, then criminalizing them without compensation for their seizure or destruction if you can't find a buyer.

Really? I see nothing but derision for huffpo and MSNBC, I don't think I've seen any links to mother jones except for the occasional oddball article that actually agrees with facts on RKBA rather than being the frothing emotional screed we would expect. CNN is a toss up, but I can't say I have seen any linkage with zero detractors. Info wars is something I would classify as about as rational and unbiased as alternet, with less selectivity about the quality of the content. That being said, this article isn't all that bad. I've said repeatedly that we are outbuying the government when it comes ot ammo. By A LOT. I do disagree with a lot of what the article says. HUmanity isn't a cesspit of awful people as proven by cops being cops. Cops don't get called to respond to decent folk who aren't problems. We are however plagued by enough A-holes to make polite society a dodgy bet on any given day. Unless your ration of a-holes happens to be those committing moving violations, those having a domestic incident, drunk and disorderly folks, or dealing with construction in the roadway (or likely to escalate to something worse form those incidents), the average cop isn't doing much to PREVENT anything. They show up after the fact and maybe do something to clean up the situation after the fact. (and frankly, I don't want them policing before the fact, so don't take that as a cop bash). As for them not having enough ammo in the case of some kind of disaster or civil unrest, in the case of something like sandy, what was heading down the road of dodgy wasn't going to be fixed by a cop who wasn't there, ammo or no ammo. They were busy with other problems, and that is going ot be the case every time. The giant sinkhole, total lack of traffic control, or exploding poop processing plant is a problem NOW, and that's where they'll be. The anonymous theft and vandalism isn't going to be their priority, and neither is the emboldened a-hole who thinks the state of emergency provides them some decreased chance of repercussions. AS for something like katrina, I know a guy who was a cop there during the event. Most cops either went awol or bugged in to their stations and or improvised base of operations while looting/commandeering supplies necessary to eat, get around, and provide communications. Very little policing was done, and their supply of ammo didn't do anyone but the police much good or harm.

I think they were well intentioned but misinformed. Here's my assesment form a purely pragmatic position, and you may want to consider your position on these particular bills when contacting your senator for round 2. Remember, if the senate amends them, they have to go back to the assembly. PErsonally, I can see why a politician who wants to say they can compromise would pick these bills. They do little actual harm to NJ gun owners. A588 looks like it is either something for the good guys, or something that is simply restating an existing law if you are unaware of the technical details or perils of misapplication. The blessing of the AG has been removed, and what's left is restricted to handgun ammo with steel penetrators. Looking at the most current ammended version I can find, it does not leave in the NIJ body armor test like the committee stated, but chucks that with the AG text. What's left is a ban on handgun ammo with a steel penetrator followed by an aluminum core regardless of the hardness of either. PReviosuly this would not have been covered unless the steel part was >25% of the jacket weight, or greater than 72RC. The only cartridge I know of that fits that bill is SS190 5.7 ammo which you can't buy as a civilian. SS109 and 855 are steel followed by a lead core, even if you want to say that since there was a handgun made for it, it is now handgun ammo. IMO now that I can acutally see the amended version I really don give a turd about this bill. A1683 basically extends the prohibitions on purchase by a felon to ammo. GIven the low use of long arms in crime in NJ, this is moslty pointless as handgun ammo purchases require an FID to be presented, so it really doesn't do anything new to criminals, and FID holders by definition of passing the check for FID likely are not at peril for this law either. SO it is useless, but your rep may see rubber stamping a useless law as a reasonable compromise. A3687 - I think all the politicians are pretty scared of voting to protect anyone on the terrorist watch list. I can understand why, as the explanation might be good, but won't fit in a 15 second sound bite. Alternatively I can see this as a very easy bill for Christie to veto and appeal to both sides of the aisle by taking on the quality of the terrorist watch list, which could VERY easily be improved to not be the steaming pile of trouble it is. Even if not, he may see it is very challengable in court with low risk, and thus not worth risking his own neck for. There also may be a long game going on as given that you don't wnat ot be on the side of the terrorists come campaign season, they could play amendment ping pong trying to kill this turd. A3717 - This is simply finally providing mental health records to NICS. We already put up with mental health background checks that will flag stuff this wouldn't, so form the perspective of NJ gun owners, this bill does nothing new to affect you. It does however remove a barrier to arguing that NICS is sufficient to NJ background checks. If I'm misinterpreting the text of the bill, I'm sure someone will correct me. A3788 - I think we want this. Although I have come to question that. gun owner data is already protected as a blanket request. THis would prevent it at the individual level. I don't think the news outlets would bother with submitting 7 million poeple as individual requests to find all the gun owners, but now there would be zero chance of RKBA groups finding out who the hypocrites trying to make new laws are. AR143 - this is really just a bill expressing support. IT does nothing. You may object to your tax money being spent on buybacks, but as a whole they don't really affect you as a gun owner other than being insulted.

You mean your non functioning ar receiver replica paper weight? Why wouldn't a paperweight be legal? More technically, the BATFE couldn't care less about your hunk of metal, and I ahve seen nothing in the NJ statute definitions that would say your hunk of metal is anything other than a hunk of metal.

OK, I'll amend the post for some info. Lets say you want to pick up a particular hard to find model of air gun. You can find it online. How the heck do you get it to yourself? Can an FFL buy it for you? is there any place in PA that will take delivery for you? I only cross paths with the airgunners at the range once every blue moon, and last time I saw something that tickled the gotta have it center of the brain, I had no luck finding the answer before it was gone.

It's not a particular company. BATFE has a stick up their but about detailed all metal airsoft replicas wiht bits that look like they could be genuine receivers for a given firearm. I suspect the logic goes something like this. If I milled a receiver out of crap metal, and sold it to someone as a gun, I'd be breaking the law regardless of the fact it couldn't fire more than once without serious negative consequences. If I sold something as a firearm without the proper manufacturing and sales licenses that DID work like gun X despite not actually having the exact dimensions of gun X, I'd be breaking the law, reagardless of the fact that it differed in dimensions and materials to gun X. I think they get these concepts in their head as bureaucrats with an overdeveloped sens of authority and deem certain products as existing specifically to spite them. What they really want are the importers to accept "NO" as an answer, and they can't come up with a way to legally justify a no answer, so they grab a bunch at the border and make sure they can't turn an upper into a machine gun, and that the trigger group can't be put into a semi lower to make it a machine gun. The dimensions on ANY part of it change a milimeter, they do it again and escalate the sample size. The internet talks about it, and all the sudden they are SURE they heard someone is doing it despite the reality being all they are hearing is an echo of their own stupidity, and the next time will be even more escalated.

+1 even if you don't care about any possible making good on it, they need to know if they have pushed bad product out the door, especially with the current madness. Think of it as helping out another shooter form having their gun kaboom.

Not really true. Playing the electoral map game is all about the pink and lavender states, not the hard red or blue. THe last couple go rounds, lots of those pastel states went for Obama, he's hardly the poison pill you think he is. Probably not even for running in primaries. The GOP fund raising machine might be a different story, but if they want someone who owes them in office after they spent all their money, they WILL have to fund a ticket that gives them some electoral options.

When things run low, the store is always worth a shot IF yo are near there anyway. Also, always snag someone in the gun area, but NOT at the counter to see if what you want is in back. Especially powder. They get more powder than they have shelf space for, and with the hoards of locusts, it's not always getting on the shelf as soon as the shelf empties. I've never had much luck with asking about bullets, but I have with powder and primers in the previous shortages. For primers always ask for anything you can use. Like if you need small pistol, ask for SP, SP magnum, SR, and the match versions of those.

Yeah, you will have to readjust your perspective. I used to buy loaded ammo a case at a time. Then I started competing and shooting .45. That stopped when it turned into buying a case every other month. I started reloading with 2-3 months of supplies on hand. That got ditched for 6 months. THEN the shortages hit. I got burned a little. Updated it to a year. Got burned a lot, then I kept a rolling 18 months. At the end of 2011, start of 2012 I said screw it and stockpiled about 4 years of stuff while it was at good prices. The price jump on components hasn't really hit hard yet, and even if I could get delivery in a timely manner, I still saved over 20% over current pricing, and if the past is an indicator, expect primers to jump form $25-30 to $35-50 per 1000. MY advice is figure out what you want as a rolling inventory. If you are less price sensitive, my advice is no less than a year's worth and at WORST start shopping when your stock hits 6 months worth. last couple of shortages, that is about how bad it got to get bullets, primers and powder to your door in reasonable quantities. Order of precedence would be primers, then brass, then bullets, then primers. Primers are the most sensitive to supply and demand as there really are no primer manufacturers that focus only on the reloading aftermarket. Commercial ammo production can and has sucked up 100% of supply. Brass is in a similar boat, both aggravated and eased by the fact you get multiple uses out of it. It's hard to determine how much you have and how much you will need. Bullets have companies dedicated primarily to serving the reloading community. They CAN dry up if the commercial ammo industry is really willing to explore all supply channels. Powder has been the least problematic. I don't think I've even seen the price jump significantly outside of dealing with the value of the dollar vs other currencies. It's mostly a matter of inventory availability.

Most of them will believe that there is a different option until it is too late. They want to have their fun and screw your fun if it interferes.

Not getting a warning, although you should get a warning form most browsers if you submit the form over an unecrypted page, which that is.

I don't care that he likes ass. I do care that he's telling me that I'm the key to a culture of violence destroying our nation while he's a fan of people assaulting others on the street for his entertainment.

Doesn't matter for this. Cryan would have to be done by the voters in his district. You might be able to shop the recall to some friendly politician to get the go ahead for signatures, but in the end you wind up with your pile of signatures, even if sufficient, and the government can still jsut tell you to go scratch. We have VERY weak recall rules compared to many other states. ETA: looks like cryan might be doable to hit the letter of the law. THen you'd probably be told that it's a waste of money to replicate the results of the previous election as only about 25% voted against him.

It means the DNC is pushing this. They have told all their players to get in line, that there will be consequences for those who don't, and there will be punch and pie for those who do. Look what happened in Colorado so far, and there has been MASSIVE opposition. For all the bills, between 3 and 5 Ds said no.

Contact nj2as. Frankly, they are asking your company to break the law disclosing personal health information. Nothing like the cops trying to force people to break the law.