JohnnyB

Okay, you just talked me out it!!! Damned PRNJ, we all have to be afraid of everything.

That is because I respect your opinions. Actually, I don't have any reservations about my office staff. It's all about the transport and purpose.

If I am within the law, what is the peril risk???

I feel the same way! If I am within the law, why can't I do this???

That's what my wife is screaming at me now!!! It's just not the same.

Dan, I would love to do that but being in South Jersey, the only close range to me is Hagues in West Deptford but they are damned expensive.

It's a small company and all the people there are cool. I would only show it to a select few anyway and then back in my trunk. One guy is an ex Army Ranger.

Thanks checko, I took out the part about show and tell as that makes it seem more sinister.

Hi, I recently purchased a Bushmaster A4 and I would like to transport it (with no ammo) to my office to show some friends. I have a FID card and the owner of my company has no problems with it. I am aware that I can carry a rifle in my trunk with a FID card, but can bring it into my office? My co-workers are all cool and I would transport it in a hard case again with no ammo at all in my car or in the rifle.

+1

+1

If CC ordered the new books and CC remains Governor, what makes you so certain CC won't confiscate??? If he looses his chance for a national race, he may just show his true colors!

This has to be a joke! ryan_j asked a simple question and a good one. We all find out the Gestapo is forcing FFL's to keep a separate book for AW look alikes apparently ordered by Christy and now you "shoot the messenger"??? If the posts I quoted were tongue in cheek, I apologize!

It's Molon Labe Time! Or..... I guess I need to call the gun shop I bought my M4 from and ask which book I am in. If I am in the AW book, should I sell my gun or do I wait for the PRNJ to knock on my door to confiscate it??? If only I could move to PA, to free America, but my kids and my job are here in the PRNJ. Damn this fascist State for putting me in this position!!! Or am I stupid for thinking I could buy an A4 and really get to keep it in this political climate? I am both confused and angry right now!!!

Anchors Away! U.S. Navy FTG-3

:rofl: :rofl: Funny!!!!

You are a class act JeremyP! You give hope to and set an example for your comrades in the PRNJ. Words mean nothing.....Action is everything and you took action. I thank you sir! I am now off to renew my expired membership with the NJ2AS. Done.

The link above the text is to the Fox News interview. According to the polls, Fox News has many viewers. Pretty mainstream I would say.

Link to Interview>>>>>>> http://video.foxnews.com/v/3018466403001/study-gun-control-laws-do-not-reduce-violent-crime/ Days after a new Connecticut gun-control law spurred long lines of people trying to register firearms deemed to be “assault weapons,” a study from a Quinnipiac University professor has found that bans on assault weapons on the state level had no significant effect on murder rates around the country. And it also found that states with more restrictive concealed weapons laws had higher gun-related murder rates on average than states with less restricted concealed weapons. But the study’s author says more research is needed on the issue before lawmakers run with its conclusions. Mark Gius, an economics professor at Quinnipiac for two decades, admitted he was a little bit flabbergasted Monday at the response his study has been getting since it was published in the November issue of the academic journal, “Applied Economics Letters.” He had just returned Monday afternoon from Hartford, where he appeared in a segment on Fox News Channel about the study. “I’ve actually done other research on gun control and gun ownership,” Gius said. “So it’s kind of amazing that, for some reason, this article really took off.” Gius, a 51-year-old Democrat, said economics professors often do research on policy issues and laws on crime and guns “to see if they have the desired impact.” His topic was his own idea, not funded by any company, he said. But he said he’s half-regretting it, given the number of media people who want to talk about it. Gius was on Al Jazeera America Sunday night and is getting interview requests from the Washington Times and other papers. He can’t put his finger on why this one attracted the media when others did not, but he has some clues. About a month ago, Gius was contacted by John Lott Jr., who wrote a study on the topic in 1997 with David Mustard that produced similar findings. He sent Lott a requested copy of the paper. (Lott’s study and subsequent work about “More guns, less crime,” have been sharply debated by gun-control advocates.) For Gius, Lott’s interest may have helped shine a spotlight on his modest paper that taps into a hot-button topic in post-Newtown America. Gius’ paper studied a broader swath of time, 1980-2009, than previous ones and focused on the gun-related murder rate instead of the more-general homicide rate. The results suggest to some that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level. But nothing is simple in the gun debate, as Gius pointed out with another finding of the study. “During the period of the federal assault weapons ban (which was repealed in 2004), murder rates were approximately 20 percent higher than in the nonfederal weapons period,” he said. “But even there, you have to think about the time the assault weapons ban was in effect. It was right at the tail end of the crack epidemic... early to ’mid-90s. From 1994 to 2004 and since then, there’s been a pretty dramatic decline in the crime rate, even the violent crime rate.” The federal assault weapons ban also wasn’t effective because it grandfathered in all existing assault weapons, he said, and it banned only certain features of the weapons. Ron Pinciaro, executive director of Connecticut Against Gun Violence, said the problem with the assault-weapons comparison is that it shouldn’t be linked to the overall murder rate. “Most gun homicides are committed in urban centers and they’re not committed with assault weapons,” he said. “If you were to compare, say, mass shootings in a state before and after an assault weapons ban, you’d get a very different result.” Pinciaro said on concealed-weapons laws, it’s also not fair to compare states with large urban populations with states with high rural populations. “If you’re talking about Montana, for instance, their gun homicide rate is quite low but their gun death rate is among the highest in the country,” he said. “Connecticut now has the second-strongest gun laws in the nation and we also have the sixth-lowest rate of gun deaths in the nation. If it weren’t for Newtown, typically we’d have the third- or fourth-lowest rate.” Gius also notes in the paper that gun laws are affected by loopholes and exemptions, and that for the purposes of the study, his paper assumes assault-weapons bans are the same from state to state (when they may not be). He concedes there that the study’s results may be because “the most violent states may also have the toughest gun control measures.” Gius doesn’t think his paper alone supports public policy changes in regard to guns. “I’m saying in my paper we need more research in this area,” Gius said. “Mine isn’t the first study on this topic. There are three or four that found that really restrictive laws either reduced the murder rate or had no effect on the rate. And then there are ... three or four that found the opposite, like mine.” “The thing is, it’s just another data point in the spectrum of the research. It’s a good data point, I think... but ... it just calls for more reflection on this,” he said.

If justifiable need is redefined and the PD's approve them, the Superior Court judge would surely be overwhelmed with LAWFUL applications and if he denied them without just cause, his decisions would most certainly be challenged by a higher court for not following NJ law and clearly violating our Constitutional right to defend ourselves under the 2nd Amendment and NJ statute. We need clarification from someone like Evan Nappen to see if this could work.

Let's Roll!!!!!!!!!!!! Mods, I think this subject is important and should NOT end up in the Litterbox.

I found my hat! Mipafox is right and we need to act now. Let's come up with some ideas on how proceed on a unified front!

If redefining JN is that simple and would give Christie a boost in the 47 free states. We need to make a concerted effort along with the NRA, NJ2AS and all other pro 2A groups to make this known to him and force his hand! How well can he do in a Presidential Election having been the Governor of the state with the worst anti 2A laws in the nation??? If he can change the JN clause, he can use that fact on the stump to garner more free state Republican and independent voters, If now is indeed our best time to act then we must do so NOW! Let's collectively put all our efforts on Christie. He has ambition and he can't win with his current record in the worst 2A state in the nation. Voters who live in the 47 free states will never vote for him for fear of him taking away all states 2A rights and turning the U.S.A. into a giant PRNJ! My tin foil hat just fell off. What the hell was I saying??? I don't remember now! :unknw:

Happy New Year to all!

BB gun control: In New Jersey, kids’ rite of passage could mean felony By Perry Chiaramonte Published December 10, 2013FoxNews.com The Red Ryder BB gun was made famous in the 1983 film "A Christmas Story." (Courtesy of Daisy Outdoor Products/Daisy Museum) Not only could you "shoot your eye out, kid," you might also go to jail for owning that BB gun in certain states. New Jersey and other jurisdictions make little or no distinction between Daisy's classic Red Ryder BB gun immortalized in the film "A Christmas Story," and real guns. They must be registered and are subject to the same laws as any firearms. “In all honesty, kids who are charged are looking at mandatory jail time,” said New Jersey attorney William Proetta, adding that under the state’s Graves Act, a conviction could lead to prison time. “The only defense is to request a waiver but if that’s not granted, young kids can get a felony charge and their lives are basically over.” “In all honesty, kids who are charged are looking at mandatory jail time.” - William Proetta, New Jersey attorney Virginia, which treats the rite-of-passage toys as firearms if they are used during criminal conduct, and other municipalities also heavily regulate BB guns. But New Jersey goes the farthest, according to Proetta. New Jersey's strict Graves Act gun law covers possession of a BB gun right alongside serious gun control measures outlawing sawed-off shotguns, filing serial numbers off of guns or using firearms to commit crimes. Violating the act can bring a minimum three-year prison term and steep fines. And the law is enforced. As recently as October, a man was arrested in New Jersey for shooting an airsoft gun at a rubber duck for target practice, in his own yard. Idyriss Thomas, 22, was arrested in Glassboro, N.J., after police responded to multiple 911 calls from neighbors who reported seeing a man with a gun. Once police determined the gun was unlicensed, Thomas was taken to jail and charged with unlawful possession of a weapon. His family posted a $2,500 bond. "I didn't realize that what I had in my hand would cause the events that happened today,” Thomas told Philadelphia's WPVI. “I had the airsoft gun in my hand, playing with it, taking shots at a rubber ducky - not harming anybody." Proetta said that depending which county in New Jersey a hearing is held in, a judge will issue a waiver on the Graves Act, or allow charges to be downgraded. But they don't have to. “Courts will work closely on each case,” Proetta said. “But in a few counties like you could face some serious charges.” A spokesperson for Rogers, Ark.,-based Daisy, told FoxNews.com that while the company disagrees with BB gun regulations like that seen in New Jersey, the company makes every effort to uphold the law. "In our opinion and the federal government's, our products are not firearms as there is no combustion in the chamber," Daisy spokesman Joe Murfin said. "While we disagree, we respect a state's law for whatever reason they may have one."