The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 18, 2014, 07:39 PM   #1
Unlicensed Dremel
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2014
Location: Flathead Valley, MT
Posts: 2,187
New Jersey: Marlin model 60s and Rem Nylon 66s about to be banned & confiscated....

if this passes:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...n-22-caliber-/

It applies to all rifles with magazines which can hold more than 10 rounds, and no exception for rimfire.

No registration; no grace period. Just instant felon if you don't immediately turn them in for confiscation - at least according to this article.

And it's NJ, which means it will probably pass the legislature. Christie will probably veto it, of course, thankfully, but it goes to show what could happen if they had a different governor.

Last edited by Unlicensed Dremel; March 18, 2014 at 08:28 PM.
Unlicensed Dremel is offline  
Old March 19, 2014, 06:36 AM   #2
2ndsojourn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,416
IMHO, it's up in the air if Christie will veto it. There are a few bills that he just hasn't signed and this may be one of them.

The Philadelphia Inquirer caried a similar story the other day on the same proposed bill. The legislator who sponsored the bill (I forget his name but can't forget what he said) was quoted saying "We don't need those high magazine capacity clips. The range isn't shooting back".
2ndsojourn is offline  
Old March 19, 2014, 10:08 AM   #3
doofus47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent
Posts: 2,483
I think that the headlines for the rest of us (not in NJ) would be that we can use this sort of legislation in NJ and California and the SAFE act as a one sentence rebuttal to anyone who claims "no one's trying to take your guns!"
Well all available evidence says that they are: everywhere that anti-gunners have had the legislative upper hand, they keep tightening the availability and rules of legality at every opportunity regardless of whether the new rules would be any more effective than previous rules in keeping citizens safe.

And if our goal is to keep citizens safe, why do we want to make it more difficult for the citizens to acquire tools to make them safe in the most dangerous of circumstances?

Sorry NJ, hopefully your governor does the right thing.
__________________
I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time.
doofus47 is offline  
Old March 19, 2014, 11:53 AM   #4
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
Does anyone have a bill number for it? If so, we can find a list of cosponsors and see if it's got a chance of passage.

That said, it's pretty extreme. Without a grandfather clause or amnesty, I don't see Christie signing it.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old March 19, 2014, 08:20 PM   #5
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 8,563
Link to the bill:

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2014/Bi...00/2006_I1.HTM

Last edited by Tom Servo; March 19, 2014 at 09:11 PM. Reason: Added context
Hal is offline  
Old March 19, 2014, 08:38 PM   #6
tynman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 361
Oh cripy cream Christie will sign it if he has something that he wants passed and they wont pass it..... They make deals on our behave all the time. They dont care about us and yes he is just like the rest of them... NO BETTER...
tynman is offline  
Old March 19, 2014, 08:52 PM   #7
Quentin2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 18, 2009
Location: NorthWest USA
Posts: 1,996
Christie no doubt has 2016 on his mind. I doubt he'd sign the bill, it wouldn't look good on the resume. But what do I know, he's a politician.
Quentin2 is offline  
Old March 19, 2014, 09:00 PM   #8
JERRYS.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,968
Christie will do what is best for him, not you.

if he was running for governor again he'd sign it, but since he's looking at prez, he wont.
JERRYS. is offline  
Old March 19, 2014, 11:02 PM   #9
war_elephant
Member
 
Join Date: June 29, 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 70
I don't see him signing it because it would end his 2016 chances Period. That being said, if there was a Democrat Gov, it would be signed. There is no doubt that it will pass both the NJ assembly and senate.
__________________
Marine, Retired LEO, Firearms Instructor, Life Member NRA Tea Party Member, and general all around trouble maker.
war_elephant is offline  
Old March 20, 2014, 12:46 AM   #10
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
Let's leave the Democrat/Republican stuff out of it. There are Democrats who support the 2nd Amendment and Republicans who don't.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old March 20, 2014, 10:58 AM   #11
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the real point of the bill is not gun control. It could be a double edged sword, aimed at the Governor.

If he signs it, they get a win in gun control, and a win by putting the Gov in bad light in the eyes of gun owners, threatening his chances in the upcoming presidential race.

If he doesn't sign it, they get to shout to their followers what a bad guy the Gov is, for not "dealing with this important public safety issue". AND, by not signing it, the Gov essentially gets no added support from gun owners, and possibly added opposition from fence sitters on this issue.

Few people, other than gun owners will take a look at the details of the bill, and fewer still will realize that its really not about public safety.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old March 20, 2014, 11:26 AM   #12
Kappe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 28, 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 149
It's funny, really. Just a couple weeks ago my neighbor got his FOID and was talking about getting a S&W 15-22 as his first gun.
I told him to consider a Marlin Model 60 or Ruger 10/22 instead because NJ is always looking to increase restrictions on AR-type rifles.
Kappe is offline  
Old March 26, 2014, 07:32 AM   #13
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 8,563
?

Why was this "PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2014 SESSION" and based on an event that happened over three years ago?

" According to the sponsor, this legislation is in 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."

Is that odd or is that SOP?
Hal is offline  
Old March 26, 2014, 09:33 AM   #14
2ndsojourn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,416
Hal, odd is SOP for the NJ legislature.
2ndsojourn is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.07980 seconds with 10 queries