Have not read the whole thing yet... but here is the bill.

3807_I1.pdf

I believe there is a pretty drastic error, as it only limits "fixed" magazines and not all magazines. 2C:39-1y remains unchanged. That's either a mistake, or they don't want their bill to be taken seriously.

2C:39-1w(4) would outlaw any semi-auto with a fixed mag over 10 rounds. Goodbye Marlin model 60 et al.

There is no provision for disposing of firearms and magazines already in possession, so you're a felon no matter what you do.

And, of course, no distinction between criminals and the law-abiding.

 

This legislation is a response to the recent horrific tragedy in Arizona where the assailant utilized a large capacity ammunition magazine in a shooting that resulted in the deaths of six people and injuries to 13 others, including Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.

 

I'd like to ask the bill's author if the Tucson shooter purchased his magazine in NJ, since this bill is needed to respond to a tragedy in a state 2000 miles away...

I believe there is a pretty drastic error, as it only limits "fixed" magazines and not all magazines. 2C:39-1y remains unchanged. That's either a mistake, or they don't want their bill to be taken seriously.

2C:39-1w(4) would outlaw any semi-auto with a fixed mag over 10 rounds. Goodbye Marlin model 60 et al.

There is no provision for disposing of firearms and magazines already in possession, so you're a felon no matter what you do.

And, of course, no distinction between criminals and the law-abiding.

 

 

I think you're right, it's probably a mistake. Then again, how many "well written" laws do we have in NJ?

I'd like to ask the bill's author if the Tucson shooter purchased his magazine in NJ, since this bill is needed to respond to a tragedy in a state 2000 miles away...

 

 

+1 for a simplistic counter point..

Doesn't say anything about handguns either does it?

I believe there is a pretty drastic error, as it only limits "fixed" magazines and not all magazines. 2C:39-1y remains unchanged. That's either a mistake, or they don't want their bill to be taken seriously.

2C:39-1w(4) would outlaw any semi-auto with a fixed mag over 10 rounds. Goodbye Marlin model 60 et al.

There is no provision for disposing of firearms and magazines already in possession, so you're a felon no matter what you do.

And, of course, no distinction between criminals and the law-abiding.

 

 

Well they only made 2 changes to the whole document:

 

[i.] i. "Machine gun" means any firearm, mechanism or...

 

(4) A semi-automatic rifle with a fixed magazine capacity

exceeding [15] 10 rounds.

 

Come on now, anyone who puts out a press release talking about 31-round "clips" for a 9mm Glock cant be expected to know what they are doing.

These people are literally retarded (no offense to retarded people). As others pointed out, the bill would not change the definition of "large capacity magazine", but only reduces the allowed capacity for semi-auto rifles with a fixed mag (eg, Marlin Model 60 as someone pointed out). This would not affect semi-automatic handguns or rifles with removable magazines. Good for us I guess, but I am fairly certain that this was an oversight -- Greenwald and his buddies clearly haven't bothered to read or incapable of understanding the statute. This makes even less sense than the ban he proposed. What f*****g idiots these people are.

These people are literally retarded (no offense to retarded people). As others pointed out, the bill would not change the definition of "large capacity magazine", but only reduces the allowed capacity for semi-auto rifles with a fixed mag (eg, Marlin Model 60 as someone pointed out). This would not affect semi-automatic handguns or rifles with removable magazines. Good for us I guess, but I am fairly certain that this was an oversight -- Greenwald and his buddies clearly haven't bothered to read or incapable of understanding the statute. This makes even less sense than the ban he proposed. What f*****g idiots these people are.

 

 

Don't talk too loud and maybe they won't see the oversight.

There has go to be more pages to it.

So they altered "A semi-automatic rifle with a fixed magazine capacity exceeding [15] 10 rounds."

 

ok... so they did not change at all... "Large capacity ammunition magazine" means a box, drum, tube or other container which is capable of holding more than 15 rounds of ammunition to be fed continuously and directly there from into a semi-automatic firearm."

 

Then the statement at the end is just a statement.

 

 

Everybody SHUTUP! Let them pass this...

Unless they want us to believe thay are actually that stupid. I wouldn't supprise me if they just deleted the "Fixed" at the 11th hour and hope we don't notice

 

So they altered "A semi-automatic rifle with a fixed magazine capacity exceeding [15] 10 rounds."

 

ok... so they did not change at all... "Large capacity ammunition magazine" means a box, drum, tube or other container which is capable of holding more than 15 rounds of ammunition to be fed continuously and directly there from into a semi-automatic firearm."

 

Then the statement at the end is just a statement.

 

 

Everybody SHUTUP! Let them pass this...

If this passes im sure they will just "define" what a "fixed magazine" means to encompass anything and everything.

more frothy hype by liberal lunatics. Greenwald is Norcross's tool When Norcross gets indicted for using his connor strong insurance agency as a personal business to get state contracts, greenwald will be at the wolves.

We will know in a month if greenwald's district gets realigned and maybe we can get a well funded challenger in there....

I was looking at some stats and I saw a stat that makes the argument against the limits better than anything else.

 

There was a study that NYPD police had about one hit per 5 shots. Lets assume an untrained person like myself can shoot just as well. That means w/ 10 rounds I would have 2 hits (I hope 3 people dont break in) That is not even close to making me confident. It stands to reason that the more shots, the better my chance is to defend myself. Can you imagine someone who wasnt trained or didn care enough to practice like myself. Even with a 30 round magazine, we are looking at only 6 hits.

I was looking at some stats and I saw a stat that makes the argument against the limits better than anything else.

 

There was a study that NYPD police had about one hit per 5 shots. Lets assume an untrained person like myself can shoot just as well. That means w/ 10 rounds I would have 2 hits (I hope 3 people dont break in) That is not even close to making me confident. It stands to reason that the more shots, the better my chance is to defend myself. Can you imagine someone who wasnt trained or didn care enough to practice like myself. Even with a 30 round magazine, we are looking at only 6 hits.

 

 

and their argument is that with 10 rds you shot the bad guy twice but you just killed 8 other people

and their argument is that with 10 rds you shot the bad guy twice but you just killed 8 other people

 

What were the 8 other people doing in my house at 2 am?

got me there. although i meant if you were to carry, that could be the outcome

Bad a$z zombie party?!

 

What were the 8 other people doing in my house at 2 am?

What if only robots with guns protected the people? What if Microsoft controlled the robots?

What were the 8 other people doing in my house at 2 am?

 

Don't forget that school bus full of children on their way to help at the old folks home.....

What if only robots with guns protected the people? What if Microsoft controlled the robots?

 

 

You joke, but let us not forget the Smart Gun legislation passed and is law - it's just out there waiting to bite us in the a$$. With the current anti-gun AG, we had best be vigilant. We need to get rid of this smart-gun law.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

What were the 8 other people doing in my house at 2 am?

 

They don't have to be in the house. When you use those vest-busting, cop-killing, infant-barbequeing, nun-raping, heat-seeking, hollow point bullets, everyone innocent man, woman, and child in a 32 mile radius are vaporized instantly! That's why they have to be BANNED! BANNED, I tell you!!! Except for cops. Cops need to be able to BBQ infants.

 

The funny thing is, this is how the general public views HPs in NJ. Go read some of the comments on NJ.com whenever somebody gets arrested for illegal possession of HPs...

What is the reasoning behind the ban of hp bullets? I mean the reasoning they use? I always thought they were a better choice. Sure they are more deadly to the guy shot with them but less chance of exiting the other side.

What is the reasoning behind the ban of hp bullets? I mean the reasoning they use? I always thought they were a better choice. Sure they are more deadly to the guy shot with them but less chance of exiting the other side.

 

1. They are more effective, which disturbs people who think the goal should be to wound an attacker and avoid killing at all costs

2. People who saw the movie "Lethal Weapon" confuse them with armor piercing bullets. Ask any non firearm owner in NJ to describe a 'cop killer' bullet and they will answer "hollowpoint.'

1. They are more effective, which disturbs people who think the goal should be to wound an attacker and avoid killing at all costs

2. People who saw the movie "Lethal Weapon" confuse them with armor piercing bullets. Ask any non firearm owner in NJ to describe a 'cop killer' bullet and they will answer "hollowpoint.'

 

 

Ding ding, we have a winner. My sister in law is Jane Q. Public, she is not an anti, but believes everything they say. She thinks semi-autos are machine guns and hollow points are cop-killers. Whenever the topic comes up I try and educate her but it always ends with me asking how she could be soooooooo ignorant.

Ding ding, we have a winner. My sister in law is Jane Q. Public, she is not an anti, but believes everything they say. She thinks semi-autos are machine guns and hollow points are cop-killers. Whenever the topic comes up I try and educate her but it always ends with me asking how she could be soooooooo ignorant.

 

 

next time you have the conversation be more neutral.. tell her you don't care of she is for or against guns you just want her to know what she is talking about.. lol

So you are saying there is no reason at all

It's a tack-on charge, and it's "per bullet". The spirit of the law is such that when they nab the banger with 17 rounds in a Glock 17, they get him for violating the magazine law, and add 17 counts of illegal possession of HP ammo. The practice of the law is such that they tack on the HP charges, so that the banger has something to plead away. As for the law abiding among us? It's just another arbitrary law meant to keep the serfs in check.

 

If the law was really meant to do what they said, it would have been written in such a way as to be a crime to commit a crime using HP ammo; not a ban on HP ammo except where otherwise allowed (i.e. home/range).

Are hollowpoints really used in crimes? I'd imagine most of the time they'd just use the cheapest stuff they could find.