New Jersey Introduces 11 New Gun Ban Bills

NJ hearts gun control (courtesy nj.com)

From njgunforums.com and NJ2AS

A3748 Requires background check for private gun sales. Introduced by Jason O’Donnell, Charles Mainor, John F. McKeon No text for the bill available yet.

A3717 (S2492) Requires Submission of certain mental health records to National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Introduced 1/28/13 by Pamela R Lampitt, Troy Singleton

STATEMENT . . .

This bill requires the State to submit certain mental health records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

The United States Department of Justice established the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) for federally licensed gun dealers to conduct background checks on prospective gun purchasers. The NICS attains or accesses records from state police, local police and other agencies to determine if the prospective gun purchaser is prohibited from owning a firearm. The NICS relies on states to submit this information. As a result, if the states do not submit the information, the NICS database will have incomplete or inaccurate records, thereby allowing some individuals to purchase guns who should be prohibited.

This State has begun the process of implementing an electronic system to submit mental health records to NICS, however submission of these records is not mandatory under current State law. The provisions of this bill would make the submission mandatory.

A3707 – Establishes Ballistics Identifier Program for Certain Firearms – Introduced by Joseph Cryan

STATEMENT

This bill directs the Superintendent of State Police to establish a ballistics identifier program which law enforcement agencies can utilize for investigative and prosecutorial purposes.

Under the provisions of the bill, no person may sell or transfer a handgun and no licensed retail dealer may sell or transfer a rifle unless a ballistics identifier has been obtained for that firearm and that information has been entered into a qualified database maintained by either a federal or State law enforcement agency and available for investigative and prosecutorial purposes. If the manufacturer or wholesaler of the firearm does not provide certification that a ballistics identifier has been obtained and incorporated within a qualified database, the seller is responsible for obtaining a ballistics identifier for the firearm. To obtain such a ballistics identifier, the seller must transport the firearm to a regional center where the State Police will determine the particular ballistics identifier for each firearm. The cost of ascertaining a firearm’s ballistics identifier is to be borne by the State Police. To help defray the transportation and other administrative costs, retail dealers are to receive $5 for each firearm they bring to the State Police for processing at a regional center.

The bill also directs the superintendent to establish a voluntary ballistics identifier program for existing firearms owners. To inform New Jersey firearms owners about the program, the superintendent is to develop and undertake a public education campaign.

Finally, the superintendent is directed to issue a report every other year to the Governor and the Legislature. The report is to include information concerning (1) the number of handguns and rifles processed for ballistics identifiers at regional centers by the State Police; (2) the number of handguns and rifles processed under the mandatory ballistics identifier program and the number processed under the voluntary ballistics identifier program; (3) the number of criminal investigations during the reporting period in which ballistics identifiers played a role; and (4) any other information or data the superintendent may deem appropriate.

A “ballistics identifier” is defined in the bill as a digitized or electronic image of a bullet and shell casing fired by a handgun and clearly showing the distinctive firing pin, ejection, extraction and land marks for that particular handgun or rifle and which can be utilized, through comparative computer analysis, for investigative and prosecutorial purposes by law enforcement agencies.

Funding for the program is to come from the moneys the Attorney General annually obtains from the forfeiture and disposal of property seized in criminal cases.

A3752 – Requires firearms to be unloaded and securely locked or stored within home Introduced by Joseph Cryan, Annette Quijano, Charles Mainor, John F McKeon, Jason O’Donnell. NO TEXT FOR THIS BILL POSTED YET

STATEMENT

A3727 Imposes additional five percent tax on sale of firearms and ammunition to fund safety infrastructure improvements in public buildings. Introduced 1/28/13 by Connie Wagner, Timothy Eustace.

This bill imposes an additional five percent retail tax on the sale of firearms and ammunition.

The revenue generated from this new tax would be deposited in a special account known as the “Safety Infrastructure Fund.” The monies in the fund would be earmarked for safety infrastructure improvements in schools and other publicly-owned buildings, such as libraries and municipal buildings. The money would be available for safety features such as security cameras, electronic notification systems for school-wide emergencies, devices controlling means of entrances and exits, panic buttons, and locks on doors that can only be locked from the inside.

A3750 (S2525) Establishes regulatory and reporting program for all ammunition sales Introduced by Joseph Cryan, Jason O’Donnell, Annette Quijano, Charles Mainor, John F. Mckeon. NO TEXT FOR THIS BILL POSTED YET.

A3754 Requires firearms seizure when mental health professional determines patient poses threat of harm to self or others. Introduced by Joseph Cryan, Jason O’Donnell, Annette Quijano, Charles Mainor, John F. McKeon NO TEXT FOR THIS BILL POSTED YET.

A3753 Increases references required for application for handgun permit and firearms identification card from two to five. Introduced by Joseph Cryan, Jason O’Donnell, Annette Quijano, Charles Mainor, John F. McKeon NO TEXT FOR THIS BILL POSTED YET.

A3772 Requires that firearms purchaser identification cards display picture, mandates that firearms purchaser identification cards be renewed every five years. Introduced by Timothy Eustace, Connie Wagner, Valerie Vaineri Huttle. NO TEXT FOR THIS BILL POSTED YET.

A3773 Increases firearms purchaser identification card and permit to purchase a handgun fee. Introduced by Timothy Eustace, Valerie Vainieri Huttle. NO TEXT FOR THIS BILL POSTED YET.

A3788 Codifies regulation exempting firearms records from States open public records law; abolishes common law right of access to these records. Introduced by Davide Rible, Ronald Dancer. NO TEXT FOR THIS BILL POSTED YET.

ACR176 Memorializes Congress and the President of the United States to enact legislation enforcing stricter firearms control measures. Introduced by Angel Fuentes, Gilbert L. Wilson, Ruben J. Ramos Jr., Annette Quijano, Mila M. Jasey, Jason O’Donnell, Charles Mainor, Marlene Caride, Valerie Vainieri Huttle. NO TEXT FOR THIS POSTED YET.

AR143 Expresses support for Attorney General’s gun buyback program. Introduced by Annette Quijano, Joseph Cryan, Jason O’Donnell, Charles Mainor, John F. McKeon. NO TEXT FOR THIS POSTED YET.

SCR136 (ACR63) Urges President and Congress of United States to Enact assault weapons ban including prohibition against large capacity ammunition feeding devices. Introduced in Senate on 1/28/13 Robert Gordon, Richard Codey sponsors.

This resolution urges the President and Congress of the United States to enact an assault weapons ban including a prohibition against large capacity ammunition feeding devices.

The federal “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994” which included provisions that banned the sale of semi-automatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices expired when Congress failed to reauthorize the act in 2004.

Assault weapons have been used in some of the nation’s most horrific crimes including the recent tragedy in Arizona in which six people were killed and 13 others, including Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, were injured.

Recognizing that assault weapons pose a serious threat to law enforcement and to the safety of the citizens in New Jersey, in 1990 New Jersey enacted legislation banning assault weapons and certain large capacity ammunition feeding devices.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

66 Responses to New Jersey Introduces 11 New Gun Ban Bills

  1. avatarsquarebob says:

    What part of “shall not be infringed” do they not understand?

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      I’ve realized what the problem is – back when all of these ancient anti-gun politicians were in law school in 1937, there was a typo in their textbook and it said “the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL be infringed”. 86 years later and they still haven’t realized that what they learned in school was a typo.

    • avatarBilly Wardlaw says:

      Apparently they think that means that no fringe should ever be used on a fire arm…I concur.

    • avatarWilliam says:

      That’s a foreign language to them.

      And anyway, THEY DON’T CARE about no stinkin’ Constitution. It’s a roadblock to their agenda.

    • avatarS.CROCK says:

      they don’t understand the “not” part of it.

  2. avatarSammy says:

    Hey S.B. they understand it completely, what they are doing is ignoring it. This is out and out stupid.

  3. avatarBilly Wardlaw says:

    I can shoot holes through that Ballistic I.D. program all day. Have these guys ever heard of after market parts?

    • avatarchuck bobuck says:

      Have they ever heard of the New York COBIS program? Cost the tax payers $10,000,000 and never solved 1 crime. Ballistic I.D. is so worthless, even F#cked up New York stopped doing it.

    • avatarMike in NC says:

      Unless a firearm has some damage that leaves some detectible trait, I’d wager that such ID programs are virtually useless on firearms manufactured since the 70′s and probably hard to find any useful differences until you get back to the 30′s or earlier production.

  4. avatarsquarebob says:

    I wonder what Christie the RINO thinks about these?

  5. avatarHoustorm says:

    A3788 Codifies regulation exempting firearms records from States open public records law; abolishes common law right of access to these records. Introduced by Davide Rible, Ronald Dancer. NO TEXT FOR THIS BILL POSTED YET.

    Unless I am missing something, this would be pro-gun legislation to me.

    • avatarBilly Wardlaw says:

      No way to know till you see the text. That could easily be a gun registration program in disguise.

  6. avatarMr Pierogie says:

    I bet many of these will pass and Christie will gladly stand behind them. You know, for the children.

  7. I can’t wait to get out of NJ. I’m a mechanical engineer actively looking for a new job in PA.

    The ballistic identifier is rediculous, sounds like microstamping but they avoided using the term.

    I’m surprised there wasn’t a mag reduction to 10, NJ is at 15 now. Like that will do anything.

    The increase in references for your FID and handgun permits is stupid. As is it’s 2. When you apply for your FID, and subsequently for any handgun permits, a questionnaire is mailed to your work as well as two references you must provide. They have to answer questions like do they think you are suitable to own a firearm, abuse alcohol, abuse drugs, etc. and mail them back to the police.

    • avatarDrewN says:

      So if you are unemployed you can’t buy a gun? WTF?

    • avatarMark says:

      There is one out there already trying to reduce it to 5…thats why you didnt see the one down to 10.

    • avatarSammy says:

      What if your boss is a dick? And why should they be able to nullify your application with a negative statement? Shouldn’t they have to give evidence of any statement resulting in a denial?

      • avatarAnonymous says:

        > What if your boss is a dick?

        In our capitalist system, you are free to get another job.

        The market will solve the problem of dickish bosses.

      • avatarMr Pierogie says:

        It does not have to be from work. Anybody who knows you for at least 1 year is fine.

        Now they want 5 instead of 2??? WTF!!! I think that it’s unfair to a law abiding citizen with a clean record to ask for any references in order to exercise our 2A rights, and now these clowns want to increase it to 5. This will in effect prohibit people from buying guns legally. Most of the people I know are anti-gun. Trying to find 2 who are gun owners and don’t mind being your reference is hard enough, and good luck finding 5. The media do a great job demonizing all guns, so even reasonable people feel uneasy when you ask them to be your reference for a gun purchase. So it won’t surprise me if this passes, because it will seem ‘reasonable’ to the idiot politicians we have here.

  8. avatarWalter says:

    Could a “ballistics identifier” system be able trace an expanded JHP?

  9. avatarKen says:

    So glad I left that toilet of a state.

  10. avatarDave S says:

    Uh, assault weapons used in the Gifford shooting? thought that was a Glock handgun?
    Oh i forgot about the assault magazine!

  11. avatarMark says:

    Holy F)(*& I need to move out of this state! I’ve had it with the idiots here.

  12. avatarSebudei says:

    The picture behind the zombie implies that the 30 round PMAG shown is a 100 round drum magazine.

    How shocking to find a lie in a picture supporting civilian disarmament.

  13. avatarTex74 says:

    Dang! I bet the thugs in Camden are worried about this! I’m sure they’ll line right up to turn in anything they possess to the local PD. Wait, do they still even have a police department?

  14. avatarBrian S says:

    “NO TEXT FOR THIS BILL POSTED YET.”

    this so they can act on it before anyone has a chance to know/understand the details, al-la the SAFE act in NY?

    Wish I could get paid (twice as much as I get now prob) to just toss out random ideas.

    Also, I laugh every time I read these state level bills that rely on federal level budgets and programs that prob don’t exist. Are they trying to get these created so they can push for more of this crap on a national level with the rationale that the programs and funding is in place?

  15. avatarDaniel Silverman says:

    I like it they know they can’t go and get sporting rifles sooo they want to urge congress to do it for them. My lord are these people idiots??

  16. avatarMilsurp Collector says:

    As an NJ gun owner all of this is just sad and rife with tactics to make “processing your application” take even longer and all sorts of other abuse. The death tolls in Newark and Camden will go unchanged as usual.

  17. avatarSakiri says:

    A3752 – Requires firearms to be unloaded and securely locked or stored within home Introduced by Joseph Cryan, Annette Quijano, Charles Mainor, John F McKeon, Jason O’Donnell. NO TEXT FOR THIS BILL POSTED YET

    Hey, wait a second.. wasn’t something like this JUST STRUCK DOWN IN DC a few years back?

    Because you know, you can’t use it for HOME DEFENSE if it’s locked and unloaded.

  18. avatarVoice of Reason says:

    Like most recent proposals, this one does not go nearly far enough. We need several further outright bans:

    Sights. Like pistol grips, these are objectionable because they are a military feature and make the weapon easier to use for its intended purpose. An especially vicious form of sights is the scope, which gives a close-up, pornographic view of the carnage which appeals to some sick minds. Ban sights, save lives.

    Firing pins. Let’s face it, politics requires compromise. The Voice of Reason wants to take 100% of your gun, you want me to take 0% of it. I’ll meet you 99% of the way there. All I’ll take is that 1% that is the firing pin (another military feature, by the way). You keep all the rest of the gun! Still not satisfied? Okay, you can keep the firing pin if there is a safety device installed that prevents it from ever protruding beyond the breech face. You keep 100% of the gun, with just a few millimeters’ difference in the movement of one tiny part. Not even you loonies could say no to that.

    Shooting with your eyes open. We live in dangerous times. Millions of Americans are even now planning killing sprees, as shown by the following evidence: (A) assault weapons can be used only for killing sprees, and (B) millions of Americans have bought them. We need desperate measures. Now, the V of R is nothing if not open to rational proof, and the research demonstrates that shooting with your eyes open greatly increases the danger of hitting the target. Just imagine that next spree killer trying to kill lots of people with his eyes closed! Note that I am not endorsing the more radical proposal that all gun owners be required to have their eyes surgically removed. I am the V of R, not some sort of extremist.

    Shooting at all. On second thought, that last idea may not go far enough. It seems that even when shooting with your eyes closed you may hit something, in fact you’re almost certain to. I did some legal analysis and found that your precious 2A mentions keeping and bearing, but says nothing about shooting. I smell loophole! So we’ll just ban shooting. Note that you will still be allowed the full recreational experience of aiming the gun, so long as it has no sights and you keep your eyes closed.

    I hope we can come together on these commonsense proposals.

    • avatarJean-Marcque says:

      Brilliant. Brings tears of sadness to my eyes, because it’s so true, it’s sick . . . and it’s so sick, it’s true. Why, oh why, did I move to New Jersey?

  19. avatarEvan says:

    So this brings the legislation count in NJ up to 43. Yup, forty-three.

    http://www.ammoland.com/2013/01/legislative-feeding-frenzy-nj-anti-gun-bill-count-reaches-43/

  20. avatarJay Dunn says:

    The rabidly anti-gun, and rapidly failing, Louisville Courier-Journal had a front page article today with the results of a poll it, itself, sponsored. Seems 65% of Kentuckians value “firearms freedom” more than “additional personal safety”.

    Can you see why, when I have to visit the Northeast, I feel like I’m leaving America?

  21. avatarBrad says:

    I don’t know what’s more disturbing, the blatant disregard for our Constitution, or the race to see who can be the first to violate it more.

  22. avatarRalph says:

    In other news, New Jersey Assemblyman Joseph Cryan has introduced a bill regulating unicorns. Scientific studies show that unicorns haven’t been taxed yet, and besides, there are more unicorns in New Jersey than there are legal guns ever since Gov. Christie ate the last unicorn.

  23. avatarLance says:

    To all gun owners in New Jersey for both health (too much toxic waste in NJ in air water land ect.) and your firearms rights. LEAVE the STATE move to Texas! Let those idiots get sick in there own toxic waste in the dump of NJ!

    • avatarJohn Fritz says:

      Or as an alternative move next door to Pennsylvania. The state which (surprisingly, to me) has more liberal gun laws than Texas.

      • avatarandarm16 says:

        My understanding is that Texas is the California of the red states gun wise. (Of course, I live in Illinois, so there are only a few states that are worse than me)

  24. avatarLSUTigersFan says:

    A little off topic, but a bill preventing any Federal agent from confiscating guns in Louisiana was introduced (this week I think). My boss regularly talks to Bobby Jindal, the governor. So, he gets the good intel. I know other right-minded states have done this already. Sorry we were late to the party. There was was some drinkin’ going on…

  25. avatarAharon says:

    Someone today sold me 500 rounds of .22 LR :)

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      Wow! That’s enough for three “caches” or two “arsenals” at current exchange rates.

    • avatarBill F says:

      500 rounds? And you’re telling it here? I can see the headline already: “Internet leak prompts investigation! Quick action by federal agents uncovers gigantic ammunition cache buried deep in sock drawer!”

  26. avatarAskjel says:

    This needs to go viral.
    Obviously the current administration wants to ignore this, because it doesn’t fit their political agenda. In fact it would squash all of their gun ban plans. By law, they can’t ignore this. Wake up America…

    LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG RECORD: LINK: http://lccn.loc.gov/96190993

    DICK ACT of 1902
    … CAN’T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) – Protection Against Tyrannical Government

    CAN NOT BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) The Trump Card Enacted by the Congress Further Asserting the Second Amendment as Untouchable. The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.

    The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy. The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders. The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard. Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, the Organized Militia (the National Guard) cannot be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States.

    The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached. During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.

    The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states. Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold .Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states: The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States.

    In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it.

    This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power.

    The Honorable William Gordon More Info With over 300 Million guns in the United States, the federal CORPORATE government (federal gov’t defined as corporation under 28 U.S.C. Section 3002 (15) and the states are subdivisions of the corporation, 28 U.S.C. Section 3002 (10), cannot ban arms or stop people from defending themselves against a tyrannical government. I read somewhere that just the State of North Carolina can call up 20-30 divisions of unorganized militia (would be about 200,000-300,000 armed North Carolinians) on a moment’s notice.

    Imagine the State of Texas or Oklahoma if that’s the case? Amazingly, even if the US tries to ban all arms through backdoor measures like domestic violence laws (Violence Against Women Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 922 (g)) or through an unconstitutional U.N. declaration adopted by our current Marxist unconstitutional Congress, no treaty can supersede the Constitution: “This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty.” – Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg. 17. This case involved the question: Does the NATO Status of Forces Agreement (treaty) supersede the U.S. Constitution?

    Keep reading. The Reid Court (U.S. Supreme Court) held in their Opinion that, “… No agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or any other branch of government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution. Article VI, the Supremacy clause of the Constitution declares, “This Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all the Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land…”

    There is nothing in this language which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification which even suggest such a result…”It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power UNDER an international agreement, without observing constitutional prohibitions. (See: Elliot’s Debates 1836 ed. pgs. 500-519).”In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V.

    The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and Senate combined. Did you understand what the Supreme Court said here? No Executive Order, Presidential Directive, Executive Agreement, no NAFTA, GATT/WTO agreement/treaty, passed by ANYONE, can supersede the Constitution. FACT. No question!

    At this point the Court paused to quote from another of their Opinions; 7Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258 at pg. 267 where the Court held at that time that, “The treaty power as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or a change in the character of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter without its consent.”

    Assessing the GATT/WTO parasitic organism in light of this part of the Opinion, we see that it cannot attach itself to its host (our Republic or States) in the fashion the traitors in our government wish, without our acquiescing to it. The Reid Court continues with its Opinion: “This Court has also repeatedly taken the position that an Act of Congress, which MUST comply with the Constitution, is on full parity with a treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict, renders the treaty null. It would be completely anomalous to say that a treaty need not comply with the Constitution when such an agreement can be overridden by a statute that must conform to that instrument.”

    The U.S. Supreme court could not have made it more clear : TREATIES DO NOT OVERRIDE THE CONSTITUTION, AND CANNOT, IN ANY FASHION, AMEND IT!!! CASE CLOSED.

  27. avatarBob23 says:

    I so want to get out of New Jersey but I have a boat anchor attached to me… and it looks exactly like my mother-in-law (face2palm)…. I would like to live in a free state at some point in my life before they are all gone…

    • avatarMy Name Is Bob says:

      I live in PA, and moved here from NJ years ago ***solely**** bc of the gun laws. I was dating a nice woman from NJ and we became engaged. We started discussing mutually agreeable places to live and I eventually called off the engagement when it became absolutely clear that she would never leave her beloved NJ, and that I would never again call NJ my home. True story!

  28. avatarSadie from Warren says:

    Sooo………How do I defend myself in my home if my firearm is locked away and unloaded? Maybe the home invaders will wait for me.

  29. avatarO.E says:

    So the witch hunt for the deranged men in hockey masks & boiler suits continues, much to celebration of those middle class nitwits.

    Enter the need for a Federally recognized psychiatrists psychometric testing results to be presented when application for a concealed carry license is provided to the issuer.

    Let the kick backs through Obama care begin.

  30. avatarJavier says:

    “It is true that the provisions of the Bill of Rights were designed to meet ancient evils. But they are the same kind of human evils that have emerged from century to century whenever excessive power is sought by the few at the expense of the many.”
    ─ Justice Hugo Black

    Here’s a question if a drug dealer gets arrested should you be punished for his crime?

    If you believe this is what should happen then take yourself to jail.

    Why then should taxes be made higher on ammunition or further restrictions be placed on those who legally own firearms for legal reasons hunting, competitions, or self-defense, mind you LEGAL, for the act of a disturbed individual.
    Criminals don’t and won’t obey the laws current laws on the books need to be enforced and the punishments for those crimes should be heavier. I and many like me have done all the legal bureaucratic paper work and hoop jumping required of US.
    Drug dealers are still dealing, murder is both immoral and illegal and it still happens.
    How about this we raise a tax on politicians who use picture messaging (Anthony D. Weiner) to prevent further misuse of technology by politicians. Call it the Weiner act. Sounds about right only politicians pay for that one though.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.