leahcim

A Glock Assault Rifle!

As long my as I am not forced to re breathe other people's smoke, or vape residue, or pay to their medical bills, I am okay with anything anyone wants to do.

For the left MSM: Anything from a do flintlock to a full auto, including any s/a handgun and revolvers.

Eventually...

I grew up there (Seattle suburbs) and there is a big difference between Seattle metro area and the suburbs and rural. Especially if you live East if the Cascade mountains. Completely different state. Until fairly recently I thought there was stronger 2A support, but recent laws and ballot initiatives have changed that. Still better than NJ, pretty sure you can still CCW with no major issues, but things are getting worse.

The statistics don't make it sound very safe, but I am sure they are skewed toward the high population cities. The antis cite statistics on gun ownership vs. violent crime, but it sounds like common sense is waking people up to the fact that criminals have guns, citizens do not. "Many civilians aren’t interested in gun statistics. Mr. Sotero Júnior, owner of the supplements store in São Paulo, said he would feel safer with one. In a country with more violent deaths than some war zones, he said he would rather be the man with a gun, than without. “I never wanted a gun, I don’t like them,” he said. “If I lived in a civilized country I wouldn’t need one, but I live in Brazil.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/brazil-has-an-idea-to-fix-rampant-gun-violence-more-guns-11546315200?mod=hp_lead_pos8 This is what we have been saying regarding crime and legal guns--and this is where America is headed if we deny citizen's rights to own and carry, otherwise only the criminals have guns: "Brazil racked up nearly 64,000 homicides in 2017, the highest overall number in the world. Over 70% of those were committed with firearms, widely available to criminals on the black market. Here in São Paulo, a megalopolis of 12 million people, over a quarter of residents say they have been held up at gunpoint at some moment in their lives, according to a study this year by the city’s business school Insper. “It’s not fair, we’ve become hostages in our own country,” said Mr. Sotero Júnior. “We can’t take it anymore.” Now, Brazil is set to embark on an experiment that will determine what happens when you loosen gun restrictions in a country battling an overpowering wave of gun crime." Interesting to see how this "experiment" works out in Brazil! "President-elect Jair Bolsonaro, who takes office Tuesday, adopted a signature finger-gun salute during his campaign. The ex-army captain has promised a dramatic reversal of the country’s 15-year-old gun legislation to make it easier for citizens to obtain firearms. “All the hoodlums already have guns, it’s only the good guys who don’t!” Mr. Bolsonaro said in a radio interview earlier this year. He said Saturday that he plans to issue a decree allowing all Brazilians without criminal records to own firearms. Supporters of the measure say arming law-abiding citizens might cause Brazil’s criminals to think twice about carrying out a crime like a carjacking or home break-in."

Happy New Year to all! Go Dawgs!

@Downtownv Saw similar article in the Blaze today: https://www.theblaze.com/news/report-new-jerseys-large-capacity-magazine-ban-isnt-going-well Sounds like LE have no idea on how to enforce other than as an add-on. I expect Murphy and Grewal will be presenting statistics over the next year or so to show how much gun crime and violence had been reduced as a direct result of the law.

YG67: Don't worry about it. We've all done it. It's no big deal, and it has made for a pretty entertaining thread. Don't let it stop you from posting in the future. I think we appreciate most views, even those we disagree with (well, with the exception of Arthur Kill, and maybe a few others).

Yeah, I was able to locate and neutralize all those tracking devices. I have a Faraday cage built into the house, but I hear they (DARPA and MLB) have ways to defeat that. So now I am installing active jamming and other countermeasures.;-)

No worries, it drew a lively discussion and resurrected the Taylor ham debate.

I was fully expecting and ready for SpecOps teams to deploy, crashing through my ceilings, demanding proof of proper disposition of my 10+ magazines, at 00:00:01 on 12/11/18. I am still waiting, but I do hear helos from Dix flying overhead at night. maybe they are just waiting for the best time to deploy. I will be staying alert for the 1st of January, and maybe keep an eye on Nappen's website for further information.

What happens January 1st that would cause "the State Police to go door to door confiscating guns?" Did I miss something?

Merry Christmas everyone. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord.... “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.” Luke

And don't forget to purchase a few more guns to keep within arms reach at all times.

IIRC, according to Aitken, he was driving from his parents house to his apartment in Hoboken when the Mount Laurel PD called. Told him his mother had contacted them with concerns about suicide and asked him to return to Mount Laurel. When Aitken balked, LEO told him that if he did not comply they'd issue a statewide APB and have him pulled over and brought back against his will (Aitken's story). This was most certainly BS from the LEO, but it worked--he turned around and drove back to home to talk with Police. (rule #1: in the words of Columbo "never believe a cop") From WIkipedia: "Aitken asked if he was legally required to return to which Officer Joy responded that he did not have to return to Mount Laurel. Aitken thanked Officer Joy and stated that he would not be returning; however, minutes later Officer Joy made another call to Aitken notifying him that a 'General Alert' had been issued to New Jersey jurisdictions and that the Police would "pick him up" and "bring him back" if he did not return on his own. Officer Joy testified at trial that Aitken was "not free to leave until we're through with the matter" despite the fact that Aitken had not been charged with, or suspected of committing, a crime." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Aitken Once he was there, police wanted permission for vehicle search. When he did not consent, they threatened involuntarily detention in a mental institution, for observation, based on their concern for his mental health and suicide risk. And also they'd have to impound his car, and of course make an inventory (search) of the contents. (Rule#2: Never consent to a search, especially in consideration of rule#1) Rule#0: Never say ANYTHING regarding your mental health, depression, anxiety, stress to anyone!

And nothing locked (unless it is in the trunk). A ziplock bag should meet the "closed and securely fastened" language.

Hope Murphy doesn't find out about this one.

It was a joke. The law seems to say that you must be moving to transport between residences. You cannot go from one residence to another if you do not move (in the Newtonian sense).

Agreed, as I said "Second mistake is to STFU (or maybe that was the first)."

Yeah, first mistake he made was to believe the police and comply with their request to turn around and drive back to Cherry Hill. Second mistake is to STFU (or maybe that was the first). Third mistake is consent to search. Agree the mag charge was overturned on technicality; but I believe there is a very good chance the possession charge would have been acquitted if the jury had been allowed to decide the moving/transport question rather than the judge telling them it did not apply. It is a good lesson of the NJ citizen owning guns at one's own peril. If you own guns in NJ, make sure you understand the law and stay well within.

However, it was the only charge that was upheld in the Aitken case. Yes, the probability is very low, but the consequences are quite high, so it is not something to take lightly. And I also find it interesting that the law is written so that everything else can be transported, and a casual reading of the law would incline one to believe HPs transport was within the law (I know I thought that way prior to Aitken). I would like to think that a reasonable person could follow the law without consulting an attorney or prior cases. And I know people have issues with the Aitken case and he allegedly had illegal magazines (although the prosecution was somehow to stupid to prove the ability to continuously feed part of the law); so I reckon it was an add-on, but in the end that add-on is the only charge that was upheld. Sure it is statically improbable, but that does not help when you are the outlier.

How do you get from one residence to another without moving? ;-) And make sure you do not transport hollow points between residences.

And that's the problem. You might ultimately win in court (ask Brian Aitken how that went) but it'll cost a lot and in Aitken's case included jail time even though he was ultimately acquitted on all but one count. Better to stay far from the edge in this case