Geek

NY had previously grandfathered pre-ban magazines. That went away with no compensation. There are also weapons that have been outlawed, but no compensation offered. As I understand it the loading a 10 round magazine to 7 rounds is a transition measure for one year, after which the magazine must only hold 7 rounds. In NJ I don't believe the bills provide any form of compensation, grandfathering, or really contemplate any form of transition. As a result, the bills are effectively confiscation without compensation. If they took a piece of land, they'd have to pay you for it. I would like to see a price tag pinned on these bills. Every gun, magazine, or round banned should be paid for.

By 2016 Hurricane Sandy will be old news, but NJ residents will still be living with whatever gun laws we have then. People in Wyoming won't care about Hurricane relief but they sure won't vote for gun control.

Do they have FID cards and P2P forms? They might want to know the consequences of not having those little pieces of paper.

I promise that if Christie signs any of this into law he will never get my vote again for any office whatsoever.

Perhaps you could help with this: http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/49900-estimate-of-cost-of-the-22-bills-in-nj-legislature/page__fromsearch__1 Thanks.

I agree that they do not intend to compensate firearms owners, but thanks to our NY bretheren this issue will get litigated. I'm trying to figure out how much we sue the state for. I am hopeful that non-gun owning voters will start to see this differently when their taxes go up to pay for this.

The cost will either be borne by gun owners or by taxpayers, so either way it is worth knowing the amount. In NY the takings clause is probably the issue that has gotten it to the NY Supreme Court so quickly. I think it is worth letting the legislature, and the public know that there is a price to pay, though it will probably take a court fight to get them to pony up. We at least need to figure out the amount we are going to sue for.

If by "handle" you mean simply hold the unloaded gun in your hand as part of the sales process, yes. Depending on the model you may also be able to rent one and try it out in the range. I have also noticed the supply of used handguns seems okay as people seem to have traded them for ARs. I wouldn't have guessed that in advance but it seems to be happening. With the additional difficulty of selling them quickly due to the permit process, you may run across something you like in a used handgun. For the OP concerned about the mag release on a Glock, there is an extended mag release that will probably solve your problem, though getting the part for a Gen 4 model in the current market may take awhile. The Gen 4 mag release is different than the Gen 1-3 part so be careful not to buy the wrong part.

Under the takings clause of the Constitution the state should be paying for guns, magazines or ammo that was legally purchased, but is being rendered illegal under one of the new bills. We have 1.4 million gun owners in NJ, most of whom own guns with magazines that are over 10 rounds, like most modern semi-automatic pistols. If we assume that the average gun owner has 5 such magazines at $30 apiece, it seems to me that the state will need to pony up $210,000,000 to compensate NJ gun owners for legally purchased magazines that are being rendered useless. I am not sure how much ammo needs to be purchased by the state, as it is unclear what existing ammo is being outlawed. Fortunately, 10 round magazines exist for most semi-automatics. If we went to 7 rounds like NY, taxpayers would need to pay for all the guns rendered completely useless under the act. I estimate in NY that would be a $2,000,000,000 cost. In NJ I am sure there will be some guns affected, but nowhere near the number in NY. If someone can come up with a good approximation, it would be helpful. For arguments sake let's say it is another $200,000,000, 10 percent of NYs number. With these numbers $500,000,000 might be a decent estimate for the price tag on these bills. Please help me refine these costs.

Apply for a FL concealed carry permit. :-)

I see no need to be rude to them, but with all the 6 points BS around drivers licenses, they should be acceptable as ID. If they need something more for current residence the same things that work for DMV should work for them, e.g. a utility bill. The local police are also not supposed to make up their own rules town by town. Fortunately, I had none of this experience. If I had, I would have been asking a lot of questions about what consitutes valid ID. I did run into something equally stupid recently. I travel a lot and decided to get a Global Entry ID. These are issued by Homeland Security. The first time I tried to present it to TSA, which is part of Homeland Security, they refused to accept it. Our local LEOs do not have a monopoly on dumb.

You're supposed to notify DMV when you move. They can check that as well. Unless they have some reason to think one of the things you suggest, the check is pointless. They've already checked your criminal record and mental health history. If you applied for a pistol purchase permit they've also checked references. Visiting your residence is a waste of everyone's time.

You can't renew your driver's license without proof of residence. Your driver's license should be enough to verify your residence. It is one thing to be courteous and drop off the permits. It is quite another to be doing useless checks.

In addition to the value of having the permit, it's faster than getting a FID or P2P in NJ.

I would suggest that if a landlord tries to insert such a clause in a lease that you require a clause making the landlord liable for any crime that happens to you, on or off premises. The off premises part is because you are effectively unable to legally own a weapon in state and are therefore defenseless against all crime. At a minimum this will make them think about how badly they want that clause.

I suggest a small AM/FM portable radio so you can find out what is going on when the power is out. Don't forget spare batteries. Definitely a knife or multi-tool, some paracord, a first aid kit, toilet paper and a flashlight. While winter is ending, warm clothes and a good pair of boots would be nice to have and essential when winter rolls around again. If you are trying to keep it light then think of an extra layer over, or under, whatever you would be likely to be wearing already. Skip the pre-packaged kits. You can get a decent pack for as little as $25 complete with Molle straps. Put in whatever you think you need. When you get a better idea, then change the contents. Toss the bag in your trunk so you have it when you need it.

I hate to break it to you guys, but you're too late. The Zombies already control the NJ legislature. :-)

Maybe Tennessee has a New Yorker in its prison system and could offer a prisoner exchange. :-)

Since the criteria are: 1) use the permit, 2) specific budget, 3) already have what you need. I suggest you use the permit on absolutely anything that you think is a bargain. Toss it in the safe, or resell it at a later date. Whatever funds remain use on ammo.

The people who would benefit most from concealed carry permits are law abiding citizens of Camden and similar places. It's a no-brainer.

We've got a chicken and egg problem here. To have responsibility for yourself, you have to have control over your own actions. If I have to deal with thousands of nitpicking rules governing every aspect of my life, am I in control of my actions, or is the government? To be specific, if I can't drive down the street with a GPS sitting on my dash for fear of a bogus ticket, am I responsible for the quality of my driving? I think we could get rid of 2/3 of the traffic cops and accidents would go down because people would stop trying to figure out whether there was a cop behind every bush.

I still haven't gotten an answer to my question: You ask the guy for paperwork. He doesn't have any. What's next? BLF suggested calling HQ, but that is a non-answer. What would HQ say? Without a contrary answer, my suspicion is you either 1) steal his gun or, 2) arrest him and charge him with a bogus gun crime he hasn't actually committed. We all hear plenty of stories about gun owners being thrown in jail when they've actually done nothing illegal. I'd love to hear something before this thread ends that causes me to see the situation differently, but so far nothing has been said that makes me think this scenario ends well.

As a society we have been willing to sacrifice our rights in the quest for safety. Bad choice IMHO.

I never got any of that in Finland. If you are in that area again, you might want to check out Helsinki. Wonderful place and wonderful people,

The issue isn't the police alone, though they are part of the chain. The problem, much like the OP expressed, is that people feel they have the right to limit what other people do in the name of safety. If we can't tolerate some other guy taking risks that we wouldn't take ourselves with an automobile, why would we tolerate him owning a gun? If we won't let him own a gun, then we've just given up the 2nd amendment. We all need to tolerate each other if we are going to get this genie back in the bottle. As I read many of the posts in this thread, many are ready to dictate rules to what they see as irresponsible drivers. If you think that, then don't be suprised when someone wants to dictate rules to "irresponsible" in their eyes, gun owners. If you can't tolerate people taking risks, or being just plain stupid, then you have no reason to expect them to respect what you think is your "right", but they think is unsafe.