Old Glock guy

I'm kind of surprised by this, as I thought that group was among the few that could actually get CCW permits in NJ.

Funny how little it's mentioned in the media that the Clintons trashed and looted the White House when then left.

Dave, you are usually a voice of sanity and reason on this board, but in this case you disappoint me. Let's concede for the sake of this discussion that we don't know if the homeowner felt threatened, so we can't judge whether shooting the perp was an appropriate response or not. But if the issue is just loss of property, please tell me you and others don't really believe that the use of lethal force is warranted. Regardless of the laws in a particular state, lethal force should only be used to protect against loss of life or serious bodily injury. Not only do I believe that to be morally correct, but no less of an expert than Massad Ayoob would agree with me. Do people here really have such little regard for human life that they would kill someone to prevent them from running away with their Ipad or television? I really don't think so. I sincerely hope that's just bluster from being caught up in this heated discussion.

Kevin, sorry to single you out, but in the hypothetical scenarios that you and others have presented, you completely ignore the fact that in the first 10 seconds of the video, the newscaster says, "Police say that she shot and killed the teenaged thief as he was climbing out her window." If the perp is fleeing, and no longer a threat, neither I, nor the law, can see any justification for shooting him.

We recently had a discussion on these boards about a similar situation. So just to be the cold voice of reason, why did she need to shoot him if he was exiting the house (climbing out a window), according to the report? Lethal force should not be used to protect property, only to defend against the threat of loss of life or serious bodily harm. Like it or not, if you can't accept that on a moral basis, recognize the legality of it, because failure to do so could get you jail time and/or cost you a hell of a lot of hard earned money.

It appeared to be relatively balanced. But even if it weren't, I enjoy seeing pieces that are biased against gun owners, as it gives me a chance to see what the other side is saying, and to help refine my pro-gun arguments.

Yes, you are correct. And I didn't mean to quash your enthusiasm. I guess I really am getting grumpy and cynical in my old age.

Agreed. He will passionately and eloquently express the conservative opinion on whatever issues are before before the committee, then whatever liberal measure is being proposed (e.g. five round mag limits) will be approved along party lines.

It's on right now at 9:00 DST, if anyone is interested. Discussion to follow.

Unless I'm missing something, the case law of not being able to move HP's from one residence to another seems totally absurd and arbitrary. So in other words, if someone owns two houses, he or she would have to buy separate HP's for each house and never move them between, without stopping at a range on the way? What about moving them from home to a place of business and back? Should one assume that's illegal as well?

As noted, I'm hoping to make it there by around 12:30-1:00, and spend a few hours. I drive a Jeep Wrangler, and look... well, old.

Very true. Heard him speak once at an NJ2AS meeting a year or so ago. Seemed like a decent guy who got caught in the NJ web. I would recommend his book to anyone in our community who has not read it. There but for the grace of god...

Pete, I understand what you're saying, and I like your thinking. The SCOTUS ruling on gay marriage established the same precedent. Under the 14th Amendment, a right in one state cannot be denied in another state. In other words, everyone is entitled to equal protection under the law. Logically, that should open the door to CCW reciprocity, but unfortunately, it seems that logic does not apply to gun laws. Which is really weird,because the RKBA is enumerated in the Constitution, while gay marriage is never mentioned.

Thanks siderman! Downright neighborly of you. Now I'll just sit here holding my breath while I await their reply. Hope you mentioned that they could sell half a dozen or so of them right here on this forum. On a serious note, in the Bizarro world of NJ gun laws, the solution you mention would probably make things OK.

Strange, because I have seen them for sale in this state, at RTSP for one. I think the legality of them may be subject to some discussion. Although to your point, Evan Nappen has said that these are illegal, or at least the 9mm version, as I probably have noted elsewhere in this thread.

I'm sure I'm stating the obvious, but that was a great firefight scene in last night's episode. The Talking Dead discussed the moral lines being crossed in going in and murdering people they didn't even know, for no reason other than that the Hillside Group wanted them to do it.

I'm planning to be up at Cherry Ridge this Wednesday, 3/9 by around 12:30-1:00. It's supposed to be a beautiful day. Anyone else going to be there?

Very nice. What amazing slow motion cinematography!

I was at the last class, which I thought was very good. Hoping to make it to this one.

Just wanted to jump in here to say that I took TIM 1 last year, and I recently attended Dave's trial edition of TIM 2, and I would heartily recommend both for someone who is looking for training in the management of traumatic injuries. IMHO, both classes are well worth the time and money. I've searched for similar classes, and had been unable to find any that didn't involve travel and multiple days off from work. Dave's extensive experience allows him to present a very practical, down and dirty (figuratively, of course) approach to this subject. It's not a CPR class. You can find those anywhere. This is real nuts and bolts stuff that is not readily available.

I don't see the writers getting rid of Rick, Darryl, Carl, Judith, or Michonne. Probably not Maggie either, unless she and Glenn go out together. I think everyone else is vulnerable.

I understand the point you're making, but that was actually pretty funny, and helped to put it into perspective. Of course, as others have noted, it's not just about mag limits, but about sweeping legislation to curtail gun rights in NJ. I would bet that most people's response would be similar to yours, that their roots are too deep here to pull up and leave over changes in gun laws. But others would take that as a last straw and pack up and leave. There's no right or wrong on this. Everybody's situation and tolerance are different.

Agreed. Of course, no one can say with certainty what is coming, but the likelihood is that we are in for a $h*tstorm of new anti-gun laws, as our legislators try to outdo those of NY, establishing "model legislation" for the rest of the nation. That said, I'm seriously looking at Florida real estate. Even if I don't move there right away, at least I want to have a place to keep my stuff.

FWIW. I have met Newtonian and swapped a few pm's with him, and he is really not a bad guy. As someone who is approximately my contemporary (in other words, old), I think he has seen enough over the years for him to have a hard time finding cause for optimism. I think that is a fairly common response, to shield oneself from further disappointment by maintaining a guarded pessimism. Bottom line, I believe he is a friend to our cause, but often does not come across that way for the reasons noted above.

Guys, could we please keep this thread on track? Mods, if there is enough interest in what Trump reloads, I would suggest we discuss it in a separate thread, and leave this discussion to the progress of the SAPPA lawsuit.