NJ Governor To Sign Gun Control Bills

[thallub]

The bills include a universal background check.

The six measures to be signed will:

—Require the seizure of firearms when a mental health professional determines someone poses a threat.

—Allow for an extreme risk protective order if a court deems someone poses a significant danger to themselves or others. The temporary court order bars the subject from possessing or purchasing a firearm or ammunition.

—Require background checks for private gun sales

—Lower the magazine capacity from 15 rounds to 10, with an exception for a popular .22-caliber rifle.

—Require residents to show a "justifiable need" to get a carry permit.

—Prohibit body-armor-penetrating ammunition.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gov...id=HPCOMMDHP15

[Aguila Blanca]

Why do they have to show a "justifiable need" to get a carry permit in NJ? Carry permits in NJ are printed on unobtanium-based plastic already, why add a "need" requirement for something nobody can get anyway?

Prohibit body-armor piercing ammunition? So, no more centerfire rifles in New Jersey?

[mehavey]

why add a "need" requirement for something nobody can get anyway?
Prohibit body-armor piercing ammunition? So, no more centerfire rifles in New Jersey?

and your point is.... ?

[Aguila Blanca]

I guess my point is that this is further proof that the goal of the anti-gunners has nothing to do with safety. It's all about optics. Each new wave of politicians wants to be seen as "doing something." It doesn't matter to them that by now any new laws they pass are either unconstitutional or so similar to or repetitive of existing laws that they fully give life to the meme about "brought to you by the department of redundancy department."

Not to mention proving (once again) that laws are written by people who have no idea how the things they are regulating actually work.

[SIGSHR]

I live in NJ, these are what I call "harassment" laws, part of the "Surveillance and Snitch" Society. "Mental Health professionals" are the new Thought Police.

[FITASC]

Require the seizure of firearms when a mental health professional determines someone poses a threat.

The question then becomes WHO selects the mental health professional and how unbiased will he be?

[L2R]

I could make an argument that anyone with a gun is a threat, therefore everyone should be banned. Hmmmm........not a ignorant as we give them credit for.

[2ndsojourn]

It's already against the law to privately sell a firearm to anyone who does not have a Firearm Purchaser ID Card...which requires a background check to obtain. Does anyone think the gang bangers in Camden and Newark are going to line up for a background check?

[FITASC]

Not any different than the South side of Chicago. Blaming an inanimate object instead of their failed social programs form the Great Society, it is all part of the blame game and it will not stop until the only folks with guns are cops and criminals - and there are more criminals in NJ than cops, ESPECIALLY if you include the politicians! )

[MTT TL]

Let's take a look under the hood.

Ammo (and more):

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2018/Bi...00/2759_I1.HTM

Dum-dum or body armor penetrating bullets. (1) Any person, other than a law enforcement officer or persons engaged in activities pursuant to subsection f. of N.J.S.2C:39-6, who knowingly has in his possession any hollow nose or dum-dum bullet, or (2) any person, other than a collector of firearms or ammunition as curios or relics as defined in Title 18, United States Code, section 921 (a) (13) and has in his possession a valid Collector of Curios and Relics License issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, who knowingly has in his possession any body armor breaching or penetrating ammunition, which means: (a) ammunition primarily designed for use in a handgun, and (b) which is comprised of a bullet whose core or jacket, if the jacket is thicker than .025 of an inch, is made of tungsten carbide, or hard bronze, or other material which is harder than a rating of 72 or greater on the Rockwell B. Hardness Scale, and (c) is therefore capable of breaching or penetrating body armor, or (3) any person, other than a law enforcement officer, who knowingly has in his possession handgun ammunition which has a full metal jacket and an ogive with a steel penetrator tip followed by an aluminum core and is therefore capable of breaching or penetrating body armor is guilty of a crime of the fourth degree. For purposes of this section, a collector may possess not more than three examples of each distinctive variation of the ammunition described above. A distinctive variation includes a different head stamp, composition, design, or color.

also includes these interesting tidbits:

Stun guns. Any person who knowingly has in his possession any stun gun is guilty of a crime of the fourth degree.

Handcuffs. Any person who knowingly has in his possession handcuffs as defined in P.L.1991, c.437 (C.2C:39-9.2), under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as handcuffs may have, is guilty of a disorderly persons offense.

"Justifiable Need"

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2018/Bi...00/2758_I1.HTM

in the case of a private citizen, shall specify in detail the urgent necessity for self-protection, as evidenced by specific threats or previous attacks which demonstrate a special danger to the applicant’s life that cannot be avoided by means other than by issuance of a permit to carry a handgun. Where possible, the applicant shall corroborate the existence of any specific threats or previous attacks by reference to reports of the incidents to the appropriate law enforcement agencies.

Mental Health:

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2018/Bi...00/1181_I1.HTM

Any person who is licensed in the State of New Jersey to practice psychology, psychiatry, medicine, nursing, clinical social work, or marriage counseling

Interesting cast of characters. Requires a reading.


Vote Counts:

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf...y_soon_to.html


With Christie gone it was only a matter of time.

Elections matter.

[TXAZ]

So the way I read this statute, if someone were to meet Licensed Marriage Counselor requirements (10 3 hour courses, 1 year supervised experience, take the national exam (which a couple web sites indicate is pretty easy), pay the $220 fee, then they can declare every legislator, police officer, member of the state executive branch a "threat", and have their weapons removed?

[publius42]

The confusing part to me is that they are now going to allow .22 assault weapons with tube magazines.

Why?

Those have been banned assault weapons in NJ for decades and now they're going to allow them.

It's puzzling because relaxing gun control in any way usually requires someone advocating the pro-gun side. I can't imagine any such person can be found in NJ government. So how did this happen?

[MTT TL]

So the way I read this statute, if someone were to meet Licensed Marriage Counselor requirements (10 3 hour courses, 1 year supervised experience, take the national exam (which a couple web sites indicate is pretty easy), pay the $220 fee, then they can declare every legislator, police officer, member of the state executive branch a "threat", and have their weapons removed?

If they were counseled by said counselor about their marriage and the court agreed with their assessment that appears to be true. Interesting thing here is a lot of clergy are marriage counselors. The idea is likely a couple in an abusive relationship.

[TDL]

If they were counseled by said counselor about their marriage and the court agreed with their assessment that appears to be true. Interesting thing here is a lot of clergy are marriage counselors. The idea is likely a couple in an abusive relationship.

So the net effect will be anyone with a firearm who has relationship issues, or even any mental health issues such as transient depression or anxiety is going to be best served by never seeking counseling or treatment.

[MTT TL]

So the net effect will be anyone with a firearm who has relationship issues, or even any mental health issues such as transient depression or anxiety is going to be best served by never seeking counseling or treatment.

I fail to see how you come to that conclusion.

[44 AMP]

I fail to see how you come to that conclusion.

I don't. TO me, its pretty obvious. If you own guns, and want to keep them, you won't seek any "official" help.

Because just the act of seeking help may be enough to trigger the system to "remove" your firearms for "public safety".

Their logic is, essentially, "if you're seeking help, its because you have a problem. If you have a problem, you shouldn't have access to firearms."

We've seen the VA do this, for decades. If you're a veteran, and report to them anything less than being completely happy and content with your life, you run the risk of them declaring you "depressed", which may result in a diagnosis of PTSD, which can result in confiscation of your firearms.

I know one person this happened to, and have heard of many others, the usual result is they "request" you get rid of your guns, otherwise, they will refuse to treat you. Most people voluntarily comply.

I can very easily see people NOT getting help, avoiding any kind of official counseling, or treatment, just out of the fear that while they are not a threat to anyone, they will be deemed so, and be required to forfeit their firearms, or have them taken.

The NJ law will give this authority to a huge number of people, and humans being who they are, at least some of them will use it for their own personal agenda...

[Unconventional]

Originally Posted by MTT TL

I fail to see how you come to that conclusion.

Oh, well I guess TDL must be wrong, then.

It's pretty obvious what TDL means, though I may not completely agree.

Willful ignorance does not a valid argument make.

[MTT TL]

"Best served" may be that if you are a gun owner who has been in a relationship where the other party has been abusing you that you go and seek treatment.

Casting such a wide net is ridiculous.

[Scorch]

So if you hold unpopular ideas (practice the wrong religion, practice the wrong free speech, practice the wrong training with your martial art or firearm, or someone declares you to be too scary), your inalienable rights can be taken away because it makes someone else feel better knowing that you won't be talking, practicing, or exercising those rights where it scares them. And if you object, we will put you in a detainment center (we might put "work will make you free" over the gate). What a change from the nation I was born into.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by TDL

So the net effect will be anyone with a firearm who has relationship issues, or even any mental health issues such as transient depression or anxiety is going to be best served by never seeking counseling or treatment.

Years ago, on another forum (might have been the old The High Road, pre-ownership squabble), someone posted that anyone who needs psychological counseling or therapy should find a shrink/counselor in another city, pay in cash, and use an assumed name.

Whoever posted that was prescient.

[SonOfScubaDiver]

It's plain to see that many of you have little to no idea of how the mental health system works. Merely having depression is not sufficient for one to be declared a threat to others or themselves. Neither is simply having marital diffculty. I've worked in mental health and know that there are long established guidlines for making such determinations, but go ahead and believe whatever nonsense you want that affirms your fears of the boogy man coming to take your guns.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by SonOfScubaDiver

It's plain to see that many of you have little to no idea of how the mental health system works. Merely having depression is not sufficient for one to be declared a threat to others or themselves. Neither is simply having marital diffculty. I've worked in mental health and know that there are long established guidlines for making such determinations, but go ahead and believe whatever nonsense you want that affirms your fears of the boogy man coming to take your guns.

It is equally plain to see that you must not live in a state that has enacted legislation allowing for ex parte restraining orders, and/or enacted legislation broadening both the criteria for which someone can be involuntarily admitted for evaluation, and at the same time broadening the scope of who is allowed to initiate that process.

It's also plain to see that you don't work for the Veterans Administration.

[SonOfScubaDiver]

Indiana allows for ex parte protective orders, but they're temporary--usually issued in domestic violence situations. Every state has standards on who can initiate an involuntatry commitment. And no, I don't work for the VA and never will.

None of this has a thing to do with the point I'm making--which is that there are established guidelines for determining when someone is a threat to themselves or others. This nonsense about not seeing a marriage counselor or getting help for depression because the person seeing you can arbitrarily decide to take away your guns because of it, is ridiculous. Not only would certain criteria have to be met, but a judge would have to agree that the criteria had been met. And contrary to the "they're coming to take our guns any way they can" paranoia that runs rampant on internet sites such as this one, proving that someone is a danger to themselves or others enough to warrant the suspension of 2A rights isn't easy.

[44 AMP]

proving that someone is a danger to themselves or others enough to warrant the suspension of 2A rights isn't easy.

permanently?? possibly...

Temporarily? seems pretty easy to me, after all that's something restraining orders do, isn't it? They seem to be pretty easy to get.

[thallub]

Yep, the VA has been accused of all kinds of stuff. Some stories are true and some are not.

i've gone to the VA for healthcare often since my retirement from the US Army in late 1979. Never have i ever been asked about guns orally or in writing. i'm also a veterans advocate and know dozens of veterans with PTSD. None have ever lost their Second Amendment rights.

1. If a veteran calls the VA hotline and says he is considering suicide, that's another matter.

2. When it comes to gun rights, PTSD does not matter. If, in addition to PTSD, the veteran is crazier than a loon, that's another matter.

3. If a veteran asks for a fiduciary to manage his VA funds he will be reported to NICS, 100 percent of the time. The VA is very clear about that:

https://www.benefits.va.gov/fiduciary/beneficiary.asp

So called "conservative" political hacks have made a lot of noise about veterans with fiduciaries being reported to NICS: But like former OK senator Coburn, they all lied. Coburn made a lot of noise about protecting veterans gun rights but later made an unholy deal with Chuckie Schumer. Schumer voted for something senate Republicans wanted very badly.