maintenanceguy

Actually, in NJ, both the Dems and The Republicans are anti-gun. A few exceptions exist but only a few. Three of those exceptions are the pro-gun DEMOCRATS from Cumberland County who have sponsored this bill. Senator Jeff Van Drew, Assemblyman Bob Andrzejczak, & Assemblyman Bruce Land. Is it going to become law - no chance. VanDrew's been sponsoring some version of this bill for 10 years. It never makes it to a committee hearing.

Most of those refugees are just refugees and I really want to help them. But I'm sure that a few will be looking to do harm to America. It only took 19 terrorists to kill 3,000 Americans, take down the twin towers, knock out much of the Pentagon, and almost take out the white house.

Whatever they are using to verify a finger is live could be spoofed too. Given time, I'm sure I could build it in my garage. I'm certain the FBI could figure out a way.

Apple is being told to do three things: Create new software that will allow the FBI to brute force the phone's password. Make that software so that it runs in memory and does not alter the existing operating system. Give a copy of that software to the FBI. It's not only wrong that a private company is being told that they must create a new product for the government's use. It's not only that this new software might get into the wrong hands. The big problem is that Apple is being told to give this software over to the FBI so the FBI can use it anytime they want on any phone they want. If the FBI really only wanted to get into this phone, they would ask the judge to make Apple assist them in breaking in. They aren't asking for that. They asked the judge to force Apple to write software that the FBI will get to keep. This has little to do with this particular terrorist's phone. This is really about the FBI wanting to make sure nobody can have any secrets from the FBI.

I didn't know anything about shipping a firearm. Turns out you can do it yourself as long as you're shipping to a FFL, which includes the manufacturer. They can ship it back to the address the gun came from only. And it can't ship USPS. Both FedEx and UPS want guns shipped by next day air, which isn't cheap to UT. I have a commercial UPS account so I get a discounted price and I spent $105 on shipping round trip.

My father had the NAA mini with the smaller, rounded grips. Could get just about a finger and a half on the grip - but still a neat gun. Just so you know, NAA won't sell the conversion cylinders unless you return the gun to have them time the new cylinder. I really don't know what they do when they have the gun or why this is necessary. Maybe one slipped though quality control once upon a time with a defect and somebody got hurt. But, worth considering if you want to use a foreign cylinder with your gun.

I ordered a North American Arms Hogleg revolver. It's one of the NAA "magnum" size guns which is a little larger than the .22 and .22 short "mini's" they make. this model has a 6 inch barrel. I wanted it with the conversion cylinder so I can shoot .22 mags or .22lr and .22 shorts. All that was available was the .22mag cylinder with the gun. As soon as I got it, I shipped it right back to the manufacturer in UT to have a .22lr cylinder added and have the new cylinder timed. It came back a week after I shipped it. To load the cylinder, the arm under the barrel folds down similar to an old black powder revolver. Once it's out of the way, the cylinder pin is removed and the cylinder can be removed from the gun. The new cylinder was only $50. I didn't realize it had to ship UPS or FedEx next day from NJ to UT. The shipping each way cost me twice what the cylinder cost. But I'm not complaining. I've already put a box of mags through it and half a box of .22lr. Looking forward to the warm up this weekend to give it a real trial. forgive the terrible second picture, just wanted to give an idea of how big (or little) it is in the hand.

A lot of people feeling the same. Gun shops have been full of customers for the last 8 years. 8 years ago it was hard core gun owners who wanted to get what they could before they were made illegal. It's a completely different crowd now. First time gun buyers or casual owners who want something for self protection.

Once again I say start the process with the right contractor - somebody who's already been vetted by your friends and who's references check out. That guy will want to know your budget and what you want the finished project to look like. There are lots of honest contractors, contrary to public opinion. The honest contractor will tell you if you can build what you want for that price, what your plans will cost, and what extras you could throw in if your budget allows.

It's not tragic that we all believe it. It's tragic that so many of our Supreme Court justices have wandered so far from the constitution that the fate of the republic could even conceivably hinge on the vote of a single man.

If your repair is a slow, even hump on the wall - no problem. It just needs to be a slow, very even, and slight hump. Walls aren't flat - just mostly flat. Getting is smooth is the easy part - matching the paint is the hard part. If you have the original paint it's still hard to match the sheen, texture, and age. Paint the spot with the same type (same nap) roller that was used on the original wall. After you've painted the repair, let your roller run dry - very dry and feather out a wide area around the patch. The almost dry roller will leave only a little paint making the old blend in more closely with the new. I also used to work for a chain of hotels. A big part of my work was getting guest rooms perfect during monthly "room preventative maintenance. Lots of tricks to hide imperfections. Easiest is to repaint the whole wall. Slight color changes at corners just look like shadows. You can also transition from the old paint to the new by intentionally making it look like a shadow. Make your transition line from from old to new start at a corner of a door or window. Come from that point an angle across the wall and it will appear as if it's just a shadow - even if there's no reason for a shadow to be there.

Price seems reasonable. I hire contractors for a living. My advice is not to purchase based on price. Purchase based on finding the right contractor. Ask friends who they've used and have been happy with and then ask that contractor for references. Once you have the right contractor, the world of possibilities are open to you because you can work with that guy to get what you really want. Don't keep your budget a secret thinking that you can negotiate a better deal if he doesn't know what you can spend. Letting him know what you can spend lets him design to that budget. It's so much faster and easier for both parties. But it depends on having the right contractor first. Conventional advice is to get multiple quotes from multiple contractors and award the job to the lowest bidder. That only works if you have a rock solid set of project specifications and you are there to make sure every letter of the specs are followed. Otherwise, somebody will find a way to cut corners to lower the price and win the job. When you go lowest bid, you ALWAYS end up with the guy who is going to cut corners. Lowest bid is a terrible way to end up happy with your project.

I was pulled over in PA several years ago. The officer came up to my window and asked if I knew why he had pulled me over. I replied that I thought I probably did (I was speeding badly) but that I hoped he wouldn't be offended if I didn't volunteer that information. He said that was fine, took my documentation back to his car, and returned a few minutes later with a ticket. He explained that I had been speeding but instead of writing me a speeding ticket that included points, he wrote me a no point ticket for "failing to obey a posted sign". I shook his hand, thanked him and drove off. No question that I deserved a ticket. Even after I refused to answer his question, he still did me a small favor by writing me a no-point ticket and saving me money on insurance. You can politely, respectfully, not answer questions. But keep this in mind. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled (very badly) that simply being silent is not the same as exercising your right to be silent. The prosecution, in a criminal case, had told the jury that the defendant had refused to answer questions asked by the police. The prosecution treated this as evidence of guilt - why would an innocent person not answer? The defense took the case to the supreme court arguing that you can't use the exercising of a right as evidence of guilt. Exercising a right can not have a penalty attached to it. The Supreme Court screwed up badly and ruled that silence is not enough, you must invoke your right to remain silent by saying something like: "I am choosing to exercise my right to remain silent" or it can be used against you.

NJ2AS' website has a mission statement but no goals so I don't know what their goal is but I can't think of how this premature announcement would achieve one. Every action should be tested against the goal before it's done - whatever goal that is.

Plus all the hours and administrative costs of doing all of the government's accounting work for them. For a small successful business, easily half the profits are eaten up by government taxes, fees, and complying with regulations. That's not the super rich making millions each year. That's your local electrician, plumber, and dry cleaner who works 70 hours a week and often ends up with less per hour than he would have made if he just had a regular job.

Remember that your taxes change - whether you're a corp or a sole proprietor. When you're on your own, you pay your own taxes plus the employer's portion of your taxes. I get angry every quarter when I write a check to the government for 46% of the money I worked for. You'll soon understand why the economy is in such bad shape - the burden placed on people who create jobs is so large that most either never start or have to stop. The government will be the biggest threat to your success.

The judge said that the lower court used the wrong standard to decide the case, not that the decision was wrong. He sent it back to the lower court with instructions to consider the case again using "strict scrutiny" as the standard. Strict scrutiny only means that the law is bad unless the government has a "compelling interest" in having the law. A compelling interest isn't that hard to find if the court is willing to cooperate with the state and pretend it exists. Since this court already ruled in favor of the law, I'd suspect they want to see the law stay and will look under every rock until they find that compelling interest. If I'm wrong and the lower court does change it's ruling, there will be a split in the courts. We all thought a split in the courts on the right to carry would force SCOTUS to take up that question. But it didn't. I feel that SCOTUS is done with gun laws for a while. Even if they took this up, it's one thing to say that everyone has the right to own a gun. It's another to say that everyone has the right to own scary looking guns. It could easily be a loss instead of a win. Right now the court is 3 conservatives, four liberals, one undependable conservative (Roberts), and one justice who seems to use a random coin flip to decide cases (Kennedy).

+1

We did this 3 years ago. I figure we had at least 1,500 people there. We filled the senate committee hearing room with several hundred, they opened a second hearing room and set up a video stream of the hearing. And we had several hundred outside waiting in the cold. Dozens of us testified. Roughly 30 anti-gun people showed up. They had special seating cordoned off for them before we got there. They were given priority in speaking. Many of them had actually been invited by the committee and flown in from other states. We still outnumbered them 50 to 1. It made no difference. They passed every bill anyway. We also showed up by the hundreds a few weeks later when the bills made it to the Assembly for a vote. This time the vote was in our favor - except that the committee chair stopped the vote in progress, in violation of assembly rules, as soon as he realized the bills were not going to pass. They voted at a later date in secret and they all passed. They don't care what we think.

No grandfathering if you already own these and it takes effect immediately so there is no time to sell what you own out of state or otherwise dispose of it. If this passes, they will create hundreds of thousands of felons overnight with no opportunity to comply. And...since all handgun purchases in NJ require a separate permit, they have a list of all the newly created felons. Read the bill, you'll be shocked what becomes an "assault weapon".

NJ2AS would love to have a copy of the conversation or any follow up conversation. They've been documenting and publicizing these sorts of things all over the state.

Finders Keepers - Losers Weepers

Bruce Land and Bob Andrzejcak are relatively new assemblymen from my district. They're part of the Senator Jeff VanDrew's team. Andrzejcak is very pro 2A. I don't know Land but if he's connected with VanDrew, he is too. Jeff VanDrew has voted with us every single time on every single gun bill. He had another version of a ccw bill that he sponsored every year for many, many years. His bill had a $500 application fee which I didn't like but I suspect he was hoping to get support from his greedy colleagues by making it a cash cow for the state. I've sent him several thank you emails for voting with us and always got a nice personal reply back. I've also met with VanDrew at his office a few times about issues not related to 2A and I can assure you he's a solid guy. Very Pro 2A and very pro veteran. He and his team are the only democrats I vote for and I'll go to the polls just to make sure they get my vote. VanDrew has sponsored a Senate version of this Assembly bill. In year's past, he had a couple of other NJ Senators who were co-sponsors. I don't remember who they were. I see he's all alone this time. That's not good. You can see the Senate bill here: http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2016/Bills/S0500/300_I1.HTM Send these guys a thank you email to let them know you appreciate what they're trying to do for you. http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/members/abcroster.asp

I'm not sure I understand the problem. Obviously, THE problem is that there's a permitting process at all. But, if you can get past that, the permitting process requires that the police verify the information on your application. Verifying your address is part of that - if they police want to bother to do so. So let them come to your address, greet them at the door, thank them for their thoroughness, and send them on their way.

1- It's stupid that you need a permit to make a movie. 2 - It's stupid that you can be arrested for playing with a toy gun. If the police got a call and their investigation showed that some guys were using a toy gun as a prop to make a movie, a stern talking too is enough. I can't believe the number of posts here that are some version of "He got what he deserved." Anyone who feels that way is THE reason the laws in NJ are so out of control.