New Jersey State Police (courtest tumblr.com)

“Backers said they didn’t extend the law to police to prevent complications in the bill’s passage.” – New Gun May Trigger Old Law; New Jersey Measure Would Require That Pistols Be Operable Only by Specific Users [via wsj.com]

Recommended For You

59 Responses to Quote of the Day: LEO Carve-Outs. It’s Complicated

  1. Carve outs for officers and specifically retired officers do nothing but keep officer organizations and membership quiet. There is no logical/crime prevention reason that a gun grabber can make as to why a retired LEO “needs” more than 7 rounds in a magazine. Or “needs” an ‘assault weapon’ or anything else.
    They do it to divide the LEOs from other gun owners and keep the police organizations from screaming in the legislative process. And they have been great at doing this. We need to fight EVERY SINGLE CARVE OUT. whether it is hardware related, carry location/GFZ related or even more expansive carry rights.

    LEOs need to be in this fight with us. And for too long we have allowed special carve outs that keep them from being part of the rest of the gun owning community.

  2. Because rushing bad legislation through with bribes and special favors on a straight party line vote is the Democratic party way.

  3. Nothing but added risk of showing up to a gunfight with a super expensive paperweight. Manufacturing cost of circuitry will jack gun prices up sky high. Combo that with the addition of new concerns to surviving a gunfight such as….
    1- Did I wear my special watch today?
    2- Is my gun/watch batteries charged?
    3- Is this microwave going to jam my signal?
    4- Wait thug shooting at me, I need to wipe the blood off my finger so I can activate my gun…

    I could keep going all day

  4. “Backers said they didn’t extend the law to ANYONE AFFILIATED WITH GOVERNMENT to prevent complications in the bill’s passage.”

    -fixed that for you. same old story.

    • I knew they were from NJ before I even scrolled down to see the source of the article…

      If you think they look like Nazi’s, just pull up some video of how they act during NJ Senate hearings, etc… yanking people who are testifying out of the chambers just because the Senators don’t agree with what they are saying.

    • Yes they can. It has always been a joke that the New Jersey state police uniform is almost exactly the same design as the Waffen SS uniform. Just change the colors slightly, and add the SS insignias.

      But they make up for the uniform difference by their actions, in that they enforce laws that violate the constitution.

    • I think they look like the 3rd world dictatorships that tried to dress up like Nazi’s, weren’t the Bolivians or something into blue uniforms? I find that laugh out loud funny, in a sad way. I’m pretty sure parade observers anywhere on the Left Coast would at least get the giggles if cops walked by dressed up like that….

      On the other hand, no one turns a hair at “black tacticool duty uniforms” which is even worse for militarizing the police.

    • When I first saw this picture, I thought it was a picture of a Neo-Nazi protest. Who in their right mind would dress their police officers with that uniform.

  5. It make sense in a sick and twisted way. However, the cost would be prohibitive to anyone but the very wealthy. Not the mention the idea of a person not being able to sell their own property.

    • If you think the motivation for these features is “safety” you’re being fooled, unless you mean safety for the attacker.

      For example, Grabbers have been citing “safety” for increased restrictions on guns in CA forever; until the last go around when the Democrats sponsoring a couple of bills were called on it and they ignored the challenge. It was clear their proposed restrictions had no impact on, and had nothing to do with “safety”.

      It always has been, and always will be ultimately about confiscation.

  6. “Our thought was that the bill, if passed, would save lives every year, without infringing anyone’s rights,” said Stephen Teret, a professor of public health at Johns Hopkins University who helped New Jersey craft the law.”

    How is this not an infringement? You’re adding more expense and red tape to NJ’s already restrictive gun laws? And, mandating only a few, select guns (who’s functionality is in question) are legal?

    This is the slippery slope we keep talking about, they use the last infringement as justification for passage of the next. If one law isn’t an infringement, then two isn’t, or three, or four, until we reach this kind of lunacy.

    This is why I refuse to compromise on gun rights, I say push back, go on the offensive, start repealing gun laws, that’s my vote.

    • A recent court decision has also held that NJ’s gun laws must be Constitutional, because “they’ve been in effect for a long time”.

      So you’re right, they chip away, try to to call that precedent, and then chip away some more.

      • Ah… here’s their plan!

        Only one manufacturer exists with the technology to make smart guns. That’s the only one NJ residents can buy. But then, that manufacturer gets dinged for having a monopoly on the market, so they are banned from selling their products inside the state without competition!

  7. The next step of course would be that the police would be able to send a lock code (wireless remember) or jam your unlock code to your weapon.

    I have never be an Aluminum foil hat guy, but now I’m pissed I have to make one for my gun.

    • No matter what electronics are in front of it, a gun is a mechanical device when it comes to striking a primer. I imagine it would take all of 5 minutes before there are YouTube videos of how to replace/modify one or two parts to bring these guns back down to the “dumb” level.

      • But you’ll have to spend $1400 plus to get it and if you had to use it face prison time for doing the modification. Swell.

    • I would bet senate president swiney has one in his back pocket waiting for the year after its fully implemented.

  8. Look at those jack-booted pigs, looking like they’re ready to invade Canada? They’re dressed like SS officers. What a sick state, demented state.

  9. “For the law to take effect, the state’s attorney general must certify that a pistol model for sale in the U.S. includes personalization technology and meets ‘reliability standards generally used in the industry.’ ”

    Wouldn’t that mean that the police would need to be using them?

    • “…meets ‘reliability standards generally used in the industry.’” Unless they’ve been written recently, there are none.

  10. As an added bonus: A gizmo could be invented (for LE only) to pick up the signal from your watch/ring transmitter, identifying legitimate gun owners who are carrying. And maybe the transmitter could be linked to a mood ring to prevent folks from discharging their firearm if they’re mad, sad, scared or feeling a little blue.

    • But, it’s not an infringement, Hannibal.

      You can exercise your 2nd Amendement rights with that one gun. Well, if you pass a background check and do the proper paperwork. And, pay the fees, and regrister the gun. Oh, and regrister yourself in our data base, but after that you’re golden. Just make sure you don’t exercise your gun rights outside of your house, or we will take away your gun rights.

      Tommorow we’re going to mandate that only one religion and political party are legal, so people can exercise more rights, can you smell the freedom in the air?

  11. Not to disparage LEO’s, not too much anyway, but the photo for the article looks like NAZI’s marching to me…

  12. Another reason for the .gov and JBTs not wanting to be armed with Smart Guns. All it would take would be some enterprising young felon (or group of terrorists) to activate an EMP weapon and all the cop’s guns would be deactivated.

  13. Article quoted someone that the technology works on the iPhone. So on one, if it fails, I miss a phone call. On the other I get killed. Seems fair, huh?

  14. This kind of garbage is why everyone needs to contact the GOP and tell them we do NOT want Christie in the next presidential election.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *