The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 23, 2014, 06:51 AM   #1
2damnold4this
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2009
Location: Athens, Georgia
Posts: 1,412
The Brady Campaign has filed a smart gun lawsuit

It looks like the Brady Campaign has filed a lawsuit to force New Jersey's AG to issue a report on whether a viable smart gun is on the market in the US.

I don't know what will happen but it could mean that the New Jersey law requiring only smart guns be sold will be invoked.
2damnold4this is offline  
Old May 23, 2014, 07:03 AM   #2
2ndsojourn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 727
"... but it could mean that the New Jersey law requiring only smart guns be sold will be invoked."

I don't count on any anti gun bill in NJ to get revoked. Too many anti districts in North Jersey outnumbering the more sensible districts in the southern half. Check out the makeup of the voting district map. It's almost like mob rule.

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/districts/njmap210.html

Also, yesterday, a bill limiting magazines to 10 rounds passed state legislature and is now on Gov. Christie's desk. I don't think he has an NRA 'A' rating so who knows what he'll do. I'm expecting the worst.
2ndsojourn is offline  
Old May 23, 2014, 07:06 AM   #3
Armed_Chicagoan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2013
Location: Albany Park, Chicago
Posts: 312
Invoked, not revoked.
Armed_Chicagoan is offline  
Old May 23, 2014, 07:23 AM   #4
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,648
Moving this to Law & Civil Rights.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old May 23, 2014, 09:04 AM   #5
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,852
That may be a good thing as the law is so ridiculous as to force a backlash or repeal. But that is just a guess. We can see if Gov. Christie does whatever.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old May 23, 2014, 09:35 AM   #6
1-DAB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 5, 2010
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 159
fine, make the NJ state police be the first to trade in their guns for these. and when the president stops by to visit, his secret service detail has to do likewise.

what's that? they aren't reliable enough? guess you should consider scraping that law then.

if they aren't good enough for law enforcement, they aren't good enough for me.
1-DAB is offline  
Old May 23, 2014, 10:02 AM   #7
tomrkba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2011
Posts: 635
Quote:
That may be a good thing as the law is so ridiculous as to force a backlash or repeal.
EXCELLENT! This will show the true intent of the law.
tomrkba is offline  
Old May 23, 2014, 10:06 AM   #8
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,479
The law specifically exempts law enforcement.

I doubt the law would get struck down. Even by the Heller court. What you MIGHT see is a Peruta style ruling that "as applied" it doesn't pass muster, because the core of the right is self defense, and the only handgun on the market is 22LR in caliber.
JimDandy is offline  
Old May 23, 2014, 10:23 AM   #9
speedrrracer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2011
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 276
Quote:
I doubt the law would get struck down. Even by the Heller court. What you MIGHT see is a Peruta style ruling that "as applied" it doesn't pass muster, because the core of the right is self defense, and the only handgun on the market is 22LR in caliber.
The handgun that Dick Heller wanted to keep in D.C. was a .22LR, so I don't see how some anti-2A Northeast court would say anything other than "...and even as the Heller decision shows us that the 2A only protects firearms in the home, it clearly only protects 22 caliber revolvers, therefore we find against the plaintiff..."

Anyways, this kind of case needs to come to a head. Rosters, smart guns -- we need a ruling on this crap. I think it infringes not just from a 2A perspective, but also from a commerce perspective.
speedrrracer is offline  
Old May 23, 2014, 11:23 AM   #10
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,479
I have a feeling today's versions of Mr. Miller's attorneys would have the money to go to court if it got that far to demonstrate in common use for lawful purposes - and what could be called the highest lawful purpose i.e. the self defense of those who enforce the laws - unilaterally use higher caliber firearms.
JimDandy is offline  
Old May 23, 2014, 04:00 PM   #11
g.willikers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2008
Posts: 5,407
There's been a steady stream of articles in the Washington Post lately on this subject.
Surprisingly, not all have been as supportive as expected.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/newsse...t=Submit+Query
__________________
Lock the doors, they're coming in the windows.
g.willikers is offline  
Old May 24, 2014, 10:16 AM   #12
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,852
Interesting set of articles. I hit the pay wall though. Eugene makes reasonable points that a reliable gun would be attractive and a reasonable product for some. The problem is the mandate and maybe EMP. I suppose the latter would be a problem if fighting the MUTOs (from ?).

David points out that the real reason for the gun is not safety but to interfer with and eventually eliminate handgun ownership. He regards the mandate as not being acceptable under Heller. David knows much more about this than me but I could see it being acceptable under wily old Scalia's reasonable crappola. That certainly is showing up against us in many locales.

If a gun could work and not mandated, then it's a free market decision. The unintended consequence of increasing gun ownership would be funny. Gun stores might make a business out of re-keying used guns.

We will see.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old May 24, 2014, 02:55 PM   #13
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 11,845
I see the problem as the way the law is worded. Smart guns don't have to work, or be reliable, just SOLD somewhere in the US. Then 3 years after that date (determined by the NJ AG report - the one supposedly given every 6mo), the clock starts and when its up, all handguns sold in NJ have to be smart guns.

Doesn't this mean that previously owned (and legal) non-smart guns can no longer be sold? Not just new guns made in the traditional manner (non-smart), but all non-smart guns? (there goes your used market)

Right or wrong, it is the law in NJ, and I don't hold the Brady bunch in any less regard because they want that law enforced.

I don't think it's possible for me to hold them in less regard...but that's another matter...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old May 24, 2014, 07:02 PM   #14
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDandy
I have a feeling today's versions of Mr. Miller's attorneys would have the money to go to court if it got that far to demonstrate in common use for lawful purposes - and what could be called the highest lawful purpose i.e. the self defense of those who enforce the laws - unilaterally use higher caliber firearms.
Don't forget that the judges in both the New York challenge to the SAFE law and the Connecticut challenge to their new AWB both acknowledged that AR-15s are weapons in common use ... and decided it was okay to ban them anyway.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old May 24, 2014, 07:24 PM   #15
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,852
I read a book on judicial decision making - it's conclusion that was for the most part judges decide such issues on their own political beliefs and then look for precedents to support such.

So such things are and will be common. Antigun judges will take wily Old bird Scalia's words and use them for what they want.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

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 02:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10281 seconds with 9 queries