Did not see this posted, mods please move/delete if I missed it.

Got an email from ANRJPC today, the State's attempt to quash the challenge on the "High Cap Mag Ban" failed. The case will continue to the Third Circuit. Too bad they wouldn't put the ban on hold until it has run through all appeals and is settled. From what I've read Trump has made the Third Circuit more 2A friendly, yes/no?

Source:

https://www.anjrpc.org/page/NJAttempttoKillMagBanChallengeFAILS

Just now, kc17 said:

Did not see this posted, mods please move/delete if I missed it.

Got an email from ANRJPC today, the State's attempt to quash the challenge on the "High Cap Mag Ban" failed. The case will continue to the Third Circuit. Too bad they wouldn't put the ban on hold until it has run through all appeals and is settled. From what I've read Trump has made the Third Circuit more 2A friendly, yes/no?

Source:

https://www.anjrpc.org/page/NJAttempttoKillMagBanChallengeFAILS

No different then the Remington issue. Our legal system works slowly and it’s probably a benefit.    Viva la pasta!

Great news. 
 

Congratulations @gunforhire .  Thanks for keeping up the fight!

I'll take it! Now we will get to see the new fortitude of the 3rd circuit at work, whenever....

37 minutes ago, kc17 said:

Got an email from ANRJPC today,

NJ'S ATTEMPT TO KILL MAG BAN CHALLENGE FAILS AS THIRD CIRCUIT REQUIRES CASE TO CONTINUE!

November 18, 2019. Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied a motion made by the State of New Jersey to dismiss and end ANJRPC's case challenging NJ's ban on magazines holding over 10 rounds of ammunition. The decision means that New Jersey's rush to end the case has been defeated and that the case will proceed.   New Jersey officials prematurely declared victory in press releases very early in the case, when the lowest federal court declined to hear it. On appeal to the Third Circuit (middle-level federal appeals court), NJ urged the court to dismiss that appeal as well, but the court has now refused. That means that the appeal will proceed, and New Jersey will be forced to defend its unconstitutional law on appeal.

Sounds good. Only thing this law was meant to do was turn law abiding citizens into felons and steal our property.

1 hour ago, Greenday said:

Only thing this law was meant to do was turn law abiding citizens into felons and steal our property.

News Flash... Your "Blue Team" has been doing that to us for quite a while. You just noticing that now?

Hope they worded it that any mag cap limit is unconstitutional! 

13 hours ago, Kwin said:

Hope they worded it that any mag cap limit is unconstitutional! 

Three things that need to be settled by the SCOTUS are:

1. Mag Capacity Restrictions

2. AWB

3. Concealed Carry - May Issue/Shall Issue 

 

 

4. Red flag laws

1 hour ago, diamondd817 said:

Three things that need to be settled by the SCOTUS are:

Infringements. 

5. Concealed carry reciprocity 

6. Reparations to gun owners for legal firearms, magazines, etc. outlawed at the state level with no grandfathering or compensation.

7 minutes ago, 10X said:

6. Reparations to gun owners for legal firearms, magazines, etc. outlawed at the state level with no grandfathering or compensation.

Ya I want reparations too!

2 minutes ago, Zeke said:

Ya I want reparations too!

Yeah. Are they going to replace all the mags we turned in?

1 minute ago, BobA said:

Yeah. Are they going to replace all the mags we turned in?

Or buy my 10’s?

Just now, Zeke said:

Or buy my 10’s?

Yeah. That. 

2 hours ago, tomk62 said:

5. Concealed carry reciprocity 

Exactly, since we were half way there in 2018.

On 11/18/2019 at 9:49 PM, Greenday said:

Sounds good. Only thing this law was meant to do was turn law abiding citizens into felons and steal our property.

Very seriously. You back the DNC a lot. This is LITERALLY their platform right now. 

In general, I ask you to ask yourself why they do so, and if any of those reasons are really something you want to support. 

Concealed carry reciprocity has nothing to do with the Supreme Court.  The Court will eventually decide the carry/possession outside the home question, probably in the NYS Rifle and Pistol Association Case.

And saying they need to decide "infringements" is silly. 

You do realize there is nothing magical about the term "shall not be infringed" just because it only appears in the 2A?  The first amendment prohibits "abridging free speech".  The 4th amendment says the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures "shall not be violated".  Those are also the only places those particular terms are used.  And yet the 1st and 4th amendments are subject to the parameters set by the Supreme Court.  Same with the Second. 

I  really wish Second Amendment absolutists would stop throwing out the idiotic "what part of 'shall not be infringed' don't you understand" argument.  The 2A is an individual right and it should be subject to strict scrutiny.  But as Scalia wrote its not without limits.  Some gun laws will and should pass constitutional muster.  And the words "shall not be infringed" don't magically negate Marbury vs Madison and the whole concept of Supreme Court review.

On ‎11‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 5:14 PM, BobA said:

Yeah. Are they going to replace all the mags we turned in?

Who turned mags in?

11 minutes ago, CMJeepster said:

Who turned mags in?

I turned in 96 and want them all back. 

29 minutes ago, CMJeepster said:

Who turned mags in?

 

Wow I’m sorry you turned all those in! If you live in a smaller town and are friendly with the police I would go back in and see if they would give you some back cause let’s be honest, most are probably now the personal property of the officers. 
 

Everybody seems so anti gun PDM that I rather no law “pass muster”. 

23 minutes ago, Kwin said:

Wow I’m sorry you turned all those in! If you live in a smaller town and are friendly with the police I would go back in and see if they would give you some back cause let’s be honest, most are probably now the personal property of the officers. 
 

Everybody seems so anti gun PDM that I rather no law “pass muster”. 

He was joking. 

According to the state police NO ONE TURNED IN THEIR 15 ROUND MAGS. 

7 minutes ago, silverado427 said:

According to the state police NO ONE TURNED IN THEIR 15 ROUND MAGS. 

So, how many are.....

1 hour ago, PK90 said:

He was joking. 

Thanks. It doesn't get any easier. 

Quote

 

If the court sides with 2A they would be saying the ban is unconstitutional? If that be the case I'd like to see a class action law suit against the state for recovery of all the mags we were unconstitutionally required to dispose of or permanently modify (destroy its original functionality).

On 11/21/2019 at 9:34 AM, BobA said:

I turned in 96 and want them all back. 

Did you get a receipt?