HBecwithFn7

No worries. I'll just be careful. I wanted to ensure that it wasn't a "trap" sort of thing where the speed fluctuates to give LE a chance to take drivers down...

I don't know either what line 19 means. It all depends on how the courts might interpret it. That is, of course, if the language survives the final revision and is sent to the Gov's desk. The concern would be in a "HD/SD break in" scenario. A kid is "home alone." The house is broken into. The kid hides and calls their parent(s). The parent tells them where to find the gun to defend them self (ie. gives combination to the safe, etc.). Kid gets gun and keeps hiding and/or calls 911. BG eventually breaks into wherever the kid is hiding, and kid "neutralizes" the BG. Would this scenario be covered under "line 19?" I can see where LE might oppose this, for the obvious reasons....

I own a Shield 9mm (starting to use it for EDC), and I'm considering an M & P .22 Full size to help train/mentor my niece/nephew.

I have had only one transaction via Gunboker, but it was very successful. I bought my Mossberg 930 from them. The site itself is fine. You just have to be aware of the merchant with whom you're dealing. I'll vote "Aye" for the one I worked... "Independence Firearms," in Texas.

The language is "questionable." From my post above, I'm not sure how the courts might interpret this last statement. Still, the bill has "bi-partisan" support and sponsorship. We'll see.

Not yet. Heading to the Assembly house first, then probably to a conference committee since there is a companion Assembly bill (A1230). Then for re-votes, then to the Gov's desk. But what is somewhat telling is that this bill seems to have a lot of republican support. The Senate Vote was 31-6. Thankfully, my senator voted "No!" To see the vote for this bill, go to this website, enter "S516" for the bill, Click on the red S516 link, and then at the bottom, click on the "roll call" link under "Session Voting." What will be critical will be to see if line #19 survives the conference. Refer to my post above an the line in red.

Unless otherwise stated, the "Firearms" course is now "all encompassing....". Shotgun, rifle, and muzzle loader, all in one integrated course lasting 4 hours. I'm not sure there is a separate course for muzzle loader only, anymore. It's now the full "Firearms" course. But check the F & W Website to be sure.

Precisely. The I-81 route seems to minimize the time and mileage traveled in MD. At one point, I was going to go US 13 down to the bridge/tunnel, but I determined it just wasn't worth the extra time, simply for the novelty of going through the bridge/tunnel. There are plenty of YouTube videos showing that journey, and it just wasn't worth it. I'd much rather minimize time in MD. I-81 is the new answer. I did some research. The speed limit on I-81 through MD starts at 65mph at each end and drops to 60mph through the middle, correct?

The "fixed" ones are often attached to a 15-20ft. pole, if they can't be attached to anything else. They are normally aimed toward the license plate area. Often it's the camera pointed in the opposite direction of traffic flow, since many cars don't have a front plate. The mobile cameras can be mounted anywhere on a cruiser. That's good. But hardly an indicator. I guess it really depends on their custom at the point I'd be rollin' through.

I had a Chamber of Commerce dinner tonight, and several of the legislators in my area were in attendance (including 2 of the 3 from the 24th district). I was able to speak with them personally and thank them face to face. Trust me, they are all in our corner on this. We need to support them as much as we can....

Just curious - Did you note any ALPRs along the MD portion of I-81? Either fixed or mobile?

Likewise, I worry about Florida.

Like you, I am a NJ owner that often travels to FL, although I do not yet own property there (trust me, I'd like to.... ). In fact, I'll be traveling very soon. This will be the 2nd time I will transport my inventory via FOPA rules, although I also now have LTCF in FL, UT and AZ. I'm trying a new route that will minimize my travel time in MD. From Northwestern NJ, I go I-78 W --> (through Penn.). I-81 South --> (turns down and crosses over to MD west of Haggerstown. About 12 miles, 10 min.). Cross into West Va. then Va. I-77 South---> All through Virgina to Roanoke and beyond to Charlotte, NC (Stop overnight). Then past Columbia SC I-26 E --> From Columbia SC --> just north of Walterboro, SC. I-95 Down from Walterboro SC --> Florida. If I needed to go through the DC area, I'd use the Eastern Shore Route US 301 and go across the Chesapeake Bay Bridge. Then US 301/50 to the Beltway (I-495) and then down the beltway to I-95 the whole way down. But I would not go through the trouble and expense of shipping my inventory, just to avoid traveling with them, even in MD. I'd simply pack up the car FOPA style. I might avoid I-95 going through MD and avoid the tunnels. I think that's where you'd find the greatest LE scrutiny. But stick to the speed limit and don't drive erratically, and you should be fine. Just out of curiosity, if you have property in both NJ & FL, why not change your primary domicile? I can't wait to do that Do you need to spend more time in NJ than in FL? I guess you have to declare your primary domicile to be wherever it is you spend more than 183 days out of the year. Trust me, the 1st opportunity I get to do that, I will! Bottom Line: I would not bother to ship my inventory via carrier and pay extra for it. It will travel with me.

The late Idi Amin, former president/dictator of Uganda.

Unfortunately, #18 applies only to what's covered under NJSA: .2C:58-6.1, none of which has to do with "HD/SD."

Quick Question: In re: the question about a minor accessing the weapon for HD/SD, I've read the current version of the bill, which includes the following: Is this language not sufficient to protect the HD/SD scenario (i.e. kid is home alone, house is broken into, kid calls parent and parent tells kid by phone where/how to get gun)... Or, has this language somehow been removed from the version that was voted on?

Just to clarify, in re: the $50.00 fee for " NJ.Com just corrected the story.... "Appealing" the denial of a P2P is what will cost $50.00, not the denial itself. I was wondering how the judiciary would be "collecting" that $50.00 For a moment there.....

How close are you to Salem? There is this place.... Quinton Sportsmen's Club - Quinton (Salem) NJ. I took their "Multi-State CCW" course to get my CCWs. They have an outdoor range. Also, for PA ranges, I'd do some research on this forum... Penn. Firearm Owners Assoc..

Welcome from Warren County, NJ!

That would be my "intuitive" understanding as well. Because a semi-auto's action can eject spent shells/brass, it's what makes it a semi-auto. Same with a semi-auto vs. pump or O/U shotgun. Semi-Auto requires one press of the trigger for each round fired. A full auto, obviously being able to fire/eject multiple rounds with only one trigger press.

Well, hopefully, today's "Non Sequitur" cartoon will offer a bit of a chuckle... I have to hope that it was poking fun at the antis.....

I suspect the editorial board feel they don't have much to lose. How many pro-2A people still have subscriptions to the Star Ledger? I also wonder who is on that board? Maybe we can figure out who wrote it.... Update - Tom Moran is one known SLEB member.

Since the antis/MSM wanted to try and spin the issue that way to further their "anti" agenda. The "sheeples" might not feel the need for hunting, but they could definitely understand (and rally behind) guns for HD/SD. And the antis don't want the discussion going towards the HD/SD talking point (one of our stronger points and, conversely, a weaker one for them), for a number of reasons. So, the more they (antis/MSM) associate guns with "hunting," the NRA, etc. the less the "sheeples" associate it with HD/SD. I guess that's their logic. I think that's why we need to emphasize HD/SD when we speak of it.

I guess HIPPA laws would, somehow, be circumvented???

Well, if they're allowed to remain there on the "Voire/Dire" days of Ms. Allen's trial (should it get that far), then we may have something. But, I seriously doubt it. I think the Deputy Sheriffs will "encourage" the "enlighteners" to leave, and offer them the appropriate "incentives" to do so. If he court has to DQ a great many candidates because they "saw the light" outside, the day is not going to go well for anyone. All I said was, "use caution."