PDM

Seems that rural areas are perhaps more dangerous than the burbs. Larger properties, more isolated from the neighbors, etc. Not that home invasions/burglaries don't happen in the burbs, but they seem to be more common in the styx.

Jules -- I fully support background checks, as I believe most gun owners do. I also support some training requirements and permitting for concealed carry, which some but not all on this forum agree with. Problem is, the laws in the state go way beyond background checks for purchase of a firearm and no one, no matter how well trained or responsible, can obtain a carry permit (other than retired LEO and a few connected politicians and judges). What possible benefit is there to requiring someone to go down to the PD to drop off an application (which usually can only be done during very limited hours), get fingerprinted, wait anywhere from 6 weeks to a year despite the 30 day requirement in the statute, etc., etc. etc? How can you, as a police officer, support a system that wastes countless precious police man hours on pointless and redundant paperwork? Why isn't the NICS check good enough or at least a system where you get one permit, one time, within 30 days, and don't need to repeatedly go back for pistol permits? If you object to the possibility of untrained people carrying in public, what would be the problem with allowing anyone who 1) passes a background and mental health check and 2) passes the same qualification course as retired LEO to carry? Curious as to your answers to those questions.

Don't really care whether he was "instructed" or "advised". He still f-d up. Unless he saw a violent attack in progress, he had no business -- zero, zilch, zip, nada -- getting out and following someone. He isn't a police officer. His job was to watch and report, that's it. Yes, he had a right to carry a firearm for self-defense, but with rights come responsibilities and he acted irresponsibly by putting himself in that situation. If the schmuck had sat in his car and waited for the police Martin would be alive and Zimmerman wouldn't have ruined his own life.

I don't get what the sudden uproar is all about. We already know that Zimmerman is being railroaded. As Alan Dershowitz pointed out, there is absolutely nothing in the Prosecutor's affidavit that would support a 2nd degree murder charge, or even a manslaughter charge for that matter. The prosecutor is acting in bad faith, pursuing a politically motivated case. We also know that Zimmerman is not an innocent party here. He f-d up big time when he ignored police direction and followed Martin. Further, did anyone really doubt that the two of them got into a scuffle? The blackeyes and broken nose on Zimmerman and the injuries to Martin's knuckles only confirm that, but aren't really all that surprising. And, even if they were in a scuffle, that doesn't necessarily mean that Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin. He may or may not have been -- it would depend on how badly he was being beaten and also on who started the physical altercation. Lawyers like to say that bad facts make bad law. In this case, there are bad facts or incomplete facts all around, and that is leading to warped policy discussions (unjustified criticism of stand your ground and concealed carry laws), race baiting, and idiots who are putting out those "hoodie targets" that only serve to make gun owners look like ignorant a-holes.

When I get the "why" question my usual response is "its better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it." I find that the biggest objection I get to gun ownership is that it is just too dangerous to have a gun in the home, followed by guns are designed for only one thing -- to kill. People that raise those objections will usually dismiss the enjoyment of recreational shooting as not worth the cost. I've also noticed more and more people coming around and expressing interest in applying for an FID. Problem is that the barriers are so high (having to take off from work to drop off the application at the PD) that people often don't get around to it.

Ask a silly question ... and you get answers like these. The answer is it depends. Were you just threatened or did the person have a firearm? A knife? Did they point it at you? How far were you from your house? Was it a stranger or someone you knew? Did you have an argument with the person before the incident? Etc., etc., etc. Even in NJ, if your life is clearly in imminent danger and you defend yourself you probably won't go to prison and may not even be prosecuted (although there is a good chance you will be arrested, especially if outside your home). The less clear the imminent danger the more likely it becomes you'll wind up behind bars. Personally, it seems to me that the attitude towards self defense should be no different in NJ than it is in Pennsylvania, Georgia or Florida. Outside the home do everything in your power to de-escalate and get away. If someone threatens you verbally try your best to get away -- if close to your house run not walk towards your front door. If actually being attacked with a deadly weapon on your property and you have a firearm, seems to me you have no alternative but to protect yourself and let the chips fall where they may.

I assume this is tongue in cheek, but let's run with it for a moment. Do you really believe stuff like this happens? Considering that offering to bribe an official is a serious felony, I always assumed that things like this fall more into the urban legend category, but perhaps I'm naive (especially since this is NJ, after all).

I was at a range and the former mayor of Englewood (a Democrat) strolled in with a glock on his hip. I know he is not former LEO. I wonder what the process was there, exactly? I wish I had asked him. A wink and an nudge to the Englewood Police Chief perhaps, but what about the judge? Is there any record of the approval/denial of permits? I'm betting that there are other politicians who have permits. I'd love to see the record on how their applications are approved.

Every time I read these posts I get nervous and buy another case of ammo from Natchez or some other place online. If online sales to NJ really do dry up, we are in deep doo doo b/c the local stores are expensive, inconvenient and not very well stocked.

I've used them a number of times. Nothing but positive experiences. Great prices, huge selection, reliable service, and all of the guns have arrived as advertised. Don't expect to get them on the phone -- they do appear to be swamped with orders. For guns up to $500 or so, I try to use local stores since the savings from Buds, once you factor in the FFL fee, isn't all that much. But for higher priced guns the savings can be substantial when you factor in their lower price, no tax, and free shipping. Keep in mind that their advertised price is the cash price, and the credit card price is 3% higher (which they disclose).

I have used and like Mpro7, but you still need a lubricant with it (I find any quality gun oil will do, and Tetra gun grease is great for slide rails and other specific areas. However, on the recommendation of the guys at the Sig Sauer academy (after a pistol I was using got gummed up from gun oil) I started using Frog Lube. All natural and non-toxic, smells like wintergreen, and a CLP all-in one product. You can google it and read the reviews. For me, it's greatly simplified gun cleaning, my guns operate well, and it smells good.

A Sig Sauer Mosquito? Don't feel so bad, it probably would have taken you a year to get it to work right anyway.

I just ordered a Sig 1911 Tac Ops Traditional and have it on layaway since I also just bought a Walther PPQ. Will take delivery after the 30 days is up and will post a short review after I receive it and shoot it. I haven't fired one, but have done a ton of research and it seems like one of the best options for an under $1k 1911. I have a S&W 1911 that was roughly the same price as the Sig, but it did have some reliability problems that were fixed after a trip back to S&W so decided to give Sig a try.

Minimum 8 week wait to order a new 1911 from Sig. Buds' Gunshop is out of an awful lot of things they usually have in stock. It does seem like 2009 all over again.

I purchased my first firearm and became interested in 2A issues 4 years ago. It's unbelieveable how much has changed in just four years. Perhaps not legislatively (other than OGAM making things worse), but on a grass roots level. NJ2AS has taken off and already had some success with its legal efforts, a number of well thought out and managed law suits have been brought here in NJ and nationally, GFH keeps expanding and attracting new blood and is producing a successful podcast, etc, etc. And nationally, it is clear that interest in firearms and acceptance of 2A rights is on the upswing. While it's true that there is no hope for most NJ politicians when it comes to 2A rights, attitudes at a grass roots level are most definitely changing for the better, and quite rapidly to boot. That is why all the naysayers and pessimists here will be proven wrong, even if it takes some time.

I had to be at my daughter's school and unfortunately couldn't make it. What was the NJ2AS victory?

The fact that under this bill I will be able to carry in NYC with my Florida CCW but not in my home state of NJ is beyond ridiculous. A federal CCW permit valid in 50 states, with a background check and training requirement, would have made a lot more sense and been much simpler and could have left all the current state laws in place as well. Oh well. If it passes this bill will be better than nothing and will certainly bring pressure on NJ. Between the Md District court ruling in the Woollard decision, vastly increased grass roots activisim in this state, and national reciprocity, I really don't think all the pessimism is warranted. I had a conversation with a friend who ran for office here and is connected with the Democratic party. His view was that a change to NJ CCW law is inevtiable.

Yeah, I didn't think that Kagan said what KdPipes claims she said. Unfortunately, "our side" is not immune to inaccuracy and hyperbole. Odds are certainly very, very strong that Kagan will vote with the "anti" 2A justices, but I think there is at least a remote chance that she could be a pleasant surprise on 2A issues.

I haven't seen that, not that it would be surprising. I'm curious, where did she state that?

This will definitely help when Muller v Maenza makes it to the 3rd circuit ct of appeals. Remember Judge Walls (NJ District judge who heard the carry case and granted the state summary judgment)? He asked whether Jensen could name one other court that held the 2A applies outside the home. Well, now there is a good answer. This is a very, very good decision and a huge win IMO.

I'm glad you took my comment in the spirit it was intended (humor). I do actually share your frustration. The S Ct is certainly imperfect and often gets things very, very wrong. But no institution is perfect and overall, I think our system is the best ever created by man (and one influenced by our Creator, in my opinion). We need to live within it and try to make it better, not ignore it or tear it down. Any alternative to what we have -- either tyrrany or anarchy -- would be far worse.

Mipafox -- You may want to consider spending more time in your bunker.

No, for the following reason: Justice Scalia in Heller made it clear that the 2A applies to arms that are commonly owned for self-defense. Firearms with 10, 15 and 20 rd magazines easily fit that definition. So, even if there were "incontrovertible evidence" that a "large cap" magazine ban would save lives, such a ban could not be reconciled with Constitutional requirements. A ban on 30 rd mags is probably a different story. Some people argue that the 2A requires no lines to be drawn -- ie no regulation on machine gunes, bazookas, or howitzers if you choose. I am not one of those people and think the "what part of 'infringe' don't you understand" is a very simplistic argument. The Supreme Court has drawn a line -- a reasonable and historically supportable one in my opinion -- and we need to live with it. But, I think you missed my point. My point was that we don't even need to get to the 2A constitutional argument when no one proposing a "large cap" ban has ever offerred a shred of support for the proposition that 10 rds is safer than 15 or 20. For that reason alone the idea need not be considered.

Of course the counter argument to that is, if 3 ten rounds are equally has effective as a 30, why do you care so much? What's the big deal? Of course, the counter, counter argument is that a mag ban has many other effects, including rendering lawfully owned property non-transferrable and, even with a "grandfather clause", leaving law abiding gun owners having to prove their innocence if found in possession of a formerly legal large cap magazine. Still, I don't think the 3 tens is as good as a 30 is a good argument, because it does cut both ways and isn't completely truthful. The reality is that, yes, "large" (ie regular) capacity magazines are more useful for lawful purposes in some circumstances, such as certain self defense encounters. That is one reason law abding gun owners (and law enforcement) want them. And yes, in the hands of a criminal or nut job, a twenty round magazine may be marginally more dangerous/effective than a 10 rounder, even if the 10 rounder can be swapped out almost as quickly with some training. The real point is that there is literally zero evidence that a law mandating 10 round magazines will make anyone one iota safer, and there are a number of significant downsides and burden on law abiding people associated with it. We shouldn't pass feel-good laws that have no empirical basis.

Recognizing in advance that the answers given to my question will have very little practical value, I am curious what people think would happen if an individual, lawfully carrying an unloaded long gun (ie with an FID card and not in a prohibited area)) was faced with an imminent deadly threat, loaded his long gun, and shot his assailant. Assume it was a clear case of justifiable self-defense. Do you think there would be some charge nonetheless and what could that be?