|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 13, 2018, 12:43 PM | #1 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
NJ Governor To Sign Gun Control Bills
The bills include a universal background check.
Quote:
|
|
June 13, 2018, 01:11 PM | #2 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,467
|
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? |
June 13, 2018, 01:21 PM | #3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,894
|
Quote:
|
|
June 13, 2018, 02:19 PM | #4 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,467
|
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. |
June 13, 2018, 02:29 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,700
|
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.
|
June 13, 2018, 02:38 PM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 6, 2014
Posts: 6,446
|
Quote:
__________________
"I believe that people have a right to decide their own destinies; people own themselves. I also believe that, in a democracy, government exists because (and only so long as) individual citizens give it a 'temporary license to exist'—in exchange for a promise that it will behave itself. In a democracy, you own the government—it doesn't own you."- Frank Zappa |
|
June 13, 2018, 03:51 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 5, 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 358
|
how to determine if someone poses a threat
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.
__________________
L2R |
June 13, 2018, 03:53 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,416
|
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?
|
June 13, 2018, 04:20 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 6, 2014
Posts: 6,446
|
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! )
__________________
"I believe that people have a right to decide their own destinies; people own themselves. I also believe that, in a democracy, government exists because (and only so long as) individual citizens give it a 'temporary license to exist'—in exchange for a promise that it will behave itself. In a democracy, you own the government—it doesn't own you."- Frank Zappa |
June 13, 2018, 06:03 PM | #10 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Let's take a look under the hood.
Ammo (and more): http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2018/Bi...00/2759_I1.HTM Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2018/Bi...00/2758_I1.HTM Quote:
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2018/Bi...00/1181_I1.HTM Quote:
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.
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|||||
June 13, 2018, 08:17 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 4,322
|
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?
__________________
Cave illos in guns et backhoes |
June 14, 2018, 04:19 AM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2002
Posts: 1,936
|
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? |
June 14, 2018, 06:40 AM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
June 20, 2018, 08:13 PM | #14 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 25, 2013
Posts: 317
|
Quote:
|
|
June 21, 2018, 12:24 AM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
June 21, 2018, 02:41 AM | #16 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,832
|
Quote:
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...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
June 21, 2018, 09:59 AM | #17 |
Member
Join Date: February 27, 2017
Posts: 81
|
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.
__________________
Unconventional |
June 21, 2018, 01:03 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
"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.
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
June 21, 2018, 05:16 PM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 13, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 15,248
|
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.
__________________
Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs. But what do I know? Summit Arms Services |
June 21, 2018, 05:26 PM | #20 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,467
|
Quote:
Whoever posted that was prescient. |
|
June 21, 2018, 10:12 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 1, 2017
Posts: 391
|
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.
|
June 21, 2018, 10:34 PM | #22 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,467
|
Quote:
It's also plain to see that you don't work for the Veterans Administration. |
|
June 21, 2018, 11:05 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 1, 2017
Posts: 391
|
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. |
June 22, 2018, 12:18 AM | #24 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,832
|
Quote:
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.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
June 22, 2018, 07:10 AM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
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. |
|
|