JSF01

I do not think so. Technically he would only be allowed to travel directly to an back from the range, which means him stopping at the store would be illegal as far as NJ's laws go. And since his destination was NJ he is not protected by federal interstate transportation laws. Even if he was heading up to NY stopping in NJ to go shopping while transporting a firearm, the federal transportation laws would not protect you any more.

Simply being an acquaintance for a few months is good enough for me to be their reference, assuming of course I believe they are of good character. I don't really see a reason not too. I personally think references are stupid because is any one going to go to some one that would not say they are a good person. Even if a person was completely evil he will find some one to say that he is good.

That right there tells me that this article is BS. When was the last time you went to the gun show and they has a list of people attending. This article is simply an attempt to try to turn gun owners against the NRA

I disagree with calling them morons. She was obviously brand new to shooting and never fired one before. It is easy to understand how such a person could make that mistake. He on the other hand was out their introducing his girlfriend to firearms. Now while you could argue he was a moron because he did not teach her that stuff before letting her fire the rifle, I think that is being to harsh. Considering his reaction when he got muzzle swept, It was quite obvious he understood the danger, as well as being fully aware of the situation. I have seen people get muzzle swept and not react at all. That tells me he has some decent smarts. To me it seems more like he has been around firearms for quite awhile though probably has never dealt with a complete newbie to firearms. To people like us, it is quite obvious and common sense that you never point a firearm at something you do not want to destroy or kill. Think about it like this, you invite an adult over to grill for the first time, do you tell them that parts the grill will get hot enough to burn them? I'd say probably not since it is common sense that a metal box containing a fire will probably get really hot. I think he probably thought that not pointing a firearm at someone else was a "No Duh" thing and went without saying. It turned out to be a bad assumption obviously, but unless you have taught newbies before or are as big into the shooting sports as we are, it is understandable why he would think like that. I'd say it was simply an honest mistake due to lack of experience.

I can tell you the fate of the missing US citizen that trucked the safe across the border, he is dead. To me it sounds like he was part of a smuggling operation and when he delivered the wrong safe they killed him for that 1/2 million dollar mistake.

Just want to point out that I never thought that it was remotely likely to shoot down a plan while flying, but like how carguy here says on take of and landing a plane is a little more vulnerable. While I know that know airplane has ever been shot down by a .50 cal rifle, I cant say for sure that, while unlikely, some sort of plane some where in the world some how got hit by a .50 cal fired by rifle. One thing you are forgetting is while many antis will say that a .50 bmg rifle can bring down a plane and happily let people think they mean jet airliners. If however one of the people in the group that the anti is telling this supposed fact too questions it, many of them will than clarify they are talking about small planes. So when consider small private planes on take of and landing that may be doable by a very good sniper. Of course when you are talking about a plane that small, a terrorist sniper is not going to waste his time firing an extremely large, expensive, and loud rifle, that he would have to pretty much abandon as soon as he fires a shot if he wants to escape before police arrive, for the small chance he would even hit the plane, much less shoot it down, and kill if he is extremely lucky maybe 4 people. That sniper record happened in 2002. It has since been beaten by a British sniper in 2009 with a .338 lapua at a distance of 1.53 miles (49 yards farther)

You must be new to this whole internet thing. The internet proved that years ago using Rule 34. as a fair warning you probably do not want to try to disprove Rule 34 you probably wish you never saw what you will find.

I am pretty sure that has not happed any where in the world, though I do know for sure a 50 cal rifle has never brought down an airplane any where in the world

Pretty much every thing you said here is false. For one the studies that show a negative impact are generally considered not credible. It's like pointing to a study performed by the VPC and saying it proves guns are bad. Most studies show no correlation between violence and violent video games. At best a couple of studies have concluded that after playing violent video games there was a temporary slight increase in aggression though that is also true of just about any game or sport. Mass Shootings have always happened, the only difference now we now have mass instant communication and news. Back in the 50's and 60's when such events happened the news tended to be contained to the local area, since it took longer for the news of such event to spread. Back then you did not have TV news networks that played he news 24 hours a day. You would get maybe a two hour news broadcast, so they would tend to focus more on local news, or national news that actually affected everybody. Similarly with news papers because it would take them longer to gather enough information to publish a story, it would take like a week for them to have gathered all the information needed for the full story, and since the story was not local, nor did it effect the local area, there was not much interest in publishing the story. Whether or not all that extra violence is helping or not consider this, since the release of the PlayStation 1 generation, ever increasing numbers of kids are playing violent video games, and the games have been becoming more and more violent (as well as music and movies as well I believe), Violent crime has been falling, Homicides have been falling, and yes even the number of mass shootings have been falling. While correlation does not prove causation, it is at the very least pretty good evidence that they sure as hell aren't hurting anything.

How long until the case makes it to the supreme court? My guess 2-5 years, unfortunately for us, due to our political situation in NJ Court cases are the fastest way to increase our rights. Court cases such as this will help lay down the logic needed for more questionable laws to be challenged and be successful in over turning. For the restraining order example, If your ex takes out a restraining order on you, you lose your right to firearms until the courts decide weather or not the restraining order is valid. You are losing your firearms rights without Due process , It's the same exact thing as loosing your rights due to having your name put on a terror watch list. Unfortunately if you tried challenging the restraining order laws on firearms, I guarantee that all the lower courts will find it constitutional, due to the fact that lower the lower courts tend to vote in favor of gun laws and in this case they will not want to take responsibility for over turning protection of women, and the supreme court probably will not hear it, and even if they did the question of morality here would probably be enough for a vote in favor of the law. With the terror watch list there is a lot less moral ambiguity to cloud the decision making, due to the terror watch list having so many names it is provable that it has a lot of incorrect information. Once the law is struck down due to it being a violation of due process from the supreme court it paves the way for other cases to be brought forward with due process violations, and since that type of due process violation has already been found in violation of the constitution those other laws would have to be struck down for consistency's sake. In NJ at least for now this is our fastest option to restore our rights, since the only other way would be for a culture shift in NJ to happen. Right now though, what we our considering big victories have been simply preventing the passing off some new gun laws, which quickly got washed away after Newtown.

This whole terrorist watch list names being denied civil rights may actually turn out to be a good thing for us in the long run. I am guessing right now somebody is already putting together a lawsuit over it. (if not why aren't we) Since this is something so blatantly unconstitutional it will hopefully reach the supreme court and than be struck down. That in turn would give us an easy avenue to challenge things like losing your rights to firearms when some one takes out a restraining order against you just because they hope to make you look worse in court even though you never did any thing that warrants then taking a restraining order against you. In the long run such unconstitutional things such as this can help far more by laying down the basis for the logic needed for the lower courts to actually start treating the Second Amendment as a right instead of a privilege, and in turn hopefully the rest of the government follows suit.

Agreed Those prices are a bit high. Last weekend I saw a Bushmaster C-15 for $699 which I was really tempted to buy. I decided against it because I knew nothing about the C-15, and was not sure if they were a good quality, and or if a carbon fiber firearm would last.

I lived in NJ first eventually moved to Montana now I am currently in VA. I am still technically a NJ resident though. The one thing going for NJ though compared to Montana is durring the winters it does not drop to below -20°F

Saw an opinion piece in the Asbery park press complaining the NJ2AS complaining about the raffle and oh this raffle is making all gun owners look like gun nuts, and how gun owners need to work with gun control advocates to solve the very real problem of gun violence and get guns off the streets... The article made me want to punch the author in the face for being so stupid, because it was quite clear the author was one of those that believed any gun control idea was a good idea, while trying to pretend to be neutral.

I want to know how did he have a $4000 bill. Even when I lived in Montana even if you had electric heat durring the winters your monthly bill would be around $300, which would be over a years worth of winter bills, to get to $4000. Now granted electricity is more expensive in nj but still that's still seems like it would be over a years worth of usage and not paying the bill.

OK this as an extremely easy solution, if you are worried about it that much just answer the question "No", problem solved. Now in reality those of you are who are worried about it, let me put your mind at unease, it's stupid being worried about it considering we are in NJ, or have you forgotten about that fpid that you all have. Not only that but considering that we now know for a fact that the NSA records pretty much every thing online, all they would need to do is a simple search for people that have bought ammo online, and they would have most of your names.

I am sorry I just could not help myself.

I would think so but I don't know much about those magazines. Are there differences in the magazine body compared to typical AR-15 mags or are the same except for the follower. Because if they are the same except for the follower they could potentially get you on it being "easily convertible to hold more then 15 rounds, if they really wanted to, though I doubt it unless you really pissed of the police and they were looking for any excuse to stick you with something. Even then the charge might not stick.

LOL something tells me that your doctors password is something like 123456, his birthday, or a name

So does the CMP currently have any thing else besides M1 Garands in stock at the store? I know on their website does not have anything listed.

Ah but are all those creatures really scifi monsters.

^^^ Agreed That was theft what they did. Now don't get me wrong there are times when I believe that there is a ligament reason to break into a store to acquire emergency items. For example if they broke in for first aid supplies and rescue gear in order to immediately save lives that's completely fine in my opinion. "Because the first responders were soaked and needed dry cloths" however is not.

I know, but the fact that they were trying to pull that in the first place pisses me off, along with their arrogant attitude about the whole thing up to the point they did that 180 (the "we have a system for those people as well, it's called the 360")

I never liked the PS controllers, so have been moor of an Xbox fan, or at least I was, until they tried pulling all of that anti used games crap, which really pissed me off. I may eventually get an Xbone but it will not be for a while.

Is this actually true, that he got a guy off based on the fact that the drum mag was for a fully automatic and not semi auto? While I agree with what is being said, on the magazine must be capable of feeding continuously into a semi auto firearm, technically in that story that drum mag would still be illegal because there are semi auto "tommy guns" that are made which use original tommy gun mags, so the drum would be capable of feeding a semi auto. Was that a case were the prosecution decided to drop that one particular charge because they had him on another charge any way or the prosecution was not prepared to argue the case because they were not expecting that "technicality".