NJ Gun Control Legislation; Coming Soon to a State Near You?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
chunkymonster

chunkymonster

Splendid
Jan 12, 2006
3,672
0
22,960
Below is a link to the NJ Second Amendment Society website which provide a list of the latest 40+ gun control proposals.

2013 New Jersey Firearms Legislation

Regardless of where you stand on gun control, pro or con, I urge you to read the proposals with an open mind and ask yourself if implemented, would they have stopped massacres like in Newtown from happening. For example;
■A3667 Requires mental health screening by licensed professional to purchase a firearm. How could that be bad, isn't that what people want, to stop the mentally ill from obtaining firearms? Yes, it is. But ask yourself, is anyone required to obtain a Public Speaking Certificate before exercising their 1st Amendment Right to free speech? Are you willing to allow qualifiers determine which Constitutional rights you can or can not freely exercise? This proposal also disregards the fact that anyone applying for a Firearms ID Card or wanting to purchase a handgun is already subject to a mental health background check.
■A3676 requires an in-home inspection and mental evaluation for anyone who wishes to purchase a handgun. Why does the State or Local Police need to visit my home for in order for me to purchase a handgun? What criteria would be used to determine if a person "was acceptable" to purchase a hand gun? This also ignores existing State law where would-be gun buyers are subject to a Mental Health background check to determine if you have a history of mental health issues or if you have ever been institutionalized due to mental health issues.
■A3748 Requires background check for private gun sales. Sounds reasonable enough, right? But it ignores existing State law that requires all private gun sales be conducted by a licensed firearms dealer and in order to buy through an FFL you are subject to the National Instant Criminal background check System (NICS). In other words, selling a gun privately without going through an FFL makes the sale and the purchase illegal and all parties involved criminals.
■S2471 Prohibits investment by State of pension and annuity funds in companies manufacturing, importing, and selling assault firearms for civilian use. What the heck does where the pension fund invests it's monies have to do with public safety and stopping gun violence?! This is the epitome of legislation that is NOT in the public interest but squarely AIMED to disenfranchise an industry simply because of the products they make.
■A3659 Revises definition of destructive device to include certain weapons of 50 caliber or greater. This is directly aimed at the .50 caliber sniper rifles used by the military. However, there has never been an instance in New Jersey where a .50 caliber sniper rifle was ever used to commit a crime. Also, the way the verbiage is written it would also ban rifle barreled shotguns (slug guns) over 20ga and certain handguns. This disregards existing law that allows only shotguns for hunting, no rifles are allowed for hunting in New Jersey. So, the legally allowed 12ga slug gun used today for hunting in New jersey would be illegal if this proposal passed.

Out of the 40+ proposals, 24 passed committee on 2/13/2013 and will be voted on by the full Legislature on 2/21/2013. Over 500 people showed to oppose these proposals with only 200 being able to fit inside the State House Committee hearing rooms. I was one of the 300 who stood outside the State House to exercise my 1st Amendment and support my 2nd Amendment rights. The opposition to these proposals was overwhelming to the point where the Committee subjected those who opposed the legislation to 2 minute time limit but allowed anyone who was in favor an unlimited amount of time. The Committee started out by hearing arguments from both sides before voting, but as more people stood up to oppose, the Committee suspended public comment so they could get through the votes. At the end of the day, a large and vocal public opposing the proposals was pushed aside in favor or political expediency; as a spokesperson for the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs stated, "This is a kangaroo court and the Committee has proven they do not want to hear the voice of the People."

Hopefully, the above examples show that the recent push for gun control at the Federal and State level has little to do with "saving the life of just one person" and has more to do with soft tyranny and slowly but surely passing laws that strip the people of the Constitutional rights.
 
Meh the only one I really disagree with is A3676. Im not too keen on the gov being in my bedroom for any reason.

The others seem fine to me.

You dont need a .50 caliber round, Im all down for mental health screening as long as nothing is duplicated (If a health screen for the feds and a health screen for the state could be combined Im down).

Close the private sale loophole. Im not sure where you copy pastes this info from but your link doesnt include any additional info about this one. I can only assume that this is in relation to being able to buy a firearm at a gun show without a background check, regardless of whether or not the seller is FFL certified.

S2471 - Im also willing to bet NJ doesnt let their pensions be invested in Porno.... Even though its completely legal.
 
I hope you are against it because you believe in ALL privacy rights, not just those sexually related.

I just keep thinking of the Parable of the Boiled Frog.

How's the water?

 


What happens between me and my assault rifle in the confines of my room is my business. I assume that most guns are stored in the bedroom, under the pillow, under the mattress, inside the mattress, gun closet laid down next to me so I can hold it while I sleep.....

They can stay out of pantry also, this also includes the dungeon.



Isn't that one of Gore's favorites?

You say tyranny I say common sense.

I would also like to point out that non of these are laws... yet. Most of the crazier ones (Gov house inspections, which again, was sponsored by one assembly woman) are small politicians trying to make a name for themselves. I would be curious to have the outcome reported here, you know... once they are laws not just pieces of paper.

Have you ever heard the parable of the boy who cried wolf?

Hows the flock?
 
Common sense?! Are you friggin' kidding me? HAHAHAHAHAHA!

I should be asking you how the flock is...it's this same apathy that allowed the State of New York to pass their recent slew of anti-gun laws.

Boy who cried wolf. Hahaha! That's funny! But who cares, right mingo? Who gives a flying flip since guns are not your issue. It's okay for the government to do whatever they want to anyone else as long as mingo can slip his wang-dangle into who and what whenever he wants; just remember to keep it in the bedroom.








 
How crazy of an idea to have a person who is BUYING a gun at a GUN SHOW to not be insane?!?!?! I find it a common sense law that says crazy people cant own a gun, I also find it common sense to not be able to own a 50 cal.


I dont agree with some of those (You link was kinda crap for a few of them) like the gov in the inspecting your house.... (Anecdotally its really hard in NH to be able to bake goods in your home for sale, the requirements are ridiculous).

But! Lets not forget about perspective, you have a bunch of very low level politicians sponsoring this crap, so save the outrage for something worth posting about (then you can whine like a small child when someone has a dissenting opinion from yours).


If you dont like people disagreeing with you Im sure there is some Glenn Beck forums you can troll.

I also fail to see what I said that would warrant a response like that.... My wang-dangle never hurt you.....
 
I can not afford to take the attitude that these are "low level politicians" looking to make a name for themselves. I am sure the people of New York thought the same way you do...

I am all for people disagreeing but take issue when that disagreement is dismissive and apathetic.

Your wang-dangle has never hurt me, but then again, my 20ga shotgun has never hurt you. The difference is my 20ga shotgun will illegal if the .50 caliber proposal passes and your wang-dangle will still be free to poke at what and who whenever you want.
 
(3) any weapon capable of firing a projectile of a caliber of 50 or greater [than 60 caliber], except a shotgun or shotgun ammunition generally recognized as suitable for sporting purposes.

From your link.

Really takes the bite out when you read it, eh?
 
Its always a few teachers, a few schools, a few pols,

Just like the lack of certain peoples misunderstanding of the economy, its like
Everett Dirkson said
A billion here, abillion there, and pretty soon youre talking real money.
 
Geez, that's a bunch of awful legislation.

1. A3667- this is probably the worst of the lot. No doc is going to want to touch that with a 39 1/2 foot pole. I can see it already- if anybody who you see once for a "gun screening exam" and pass 10 years later does something you WILL be held liable. I want to bet that docs probably won't be able to refuse to see patients for these exams either.

2. A3676- let's absolutely shred the Fourth Amendment and Fifth Amendment with random searches of private residences with absolutely no probable cause to harass gun owners. Let me guess they'll be no-knock, bash in the door and throw in a flash-bang at 0230 searches conducted by paramilitary SWAT teams carrying weapons civilians can't possess.

3. A3748- leads to a gun registry to allow the paramilitary government thugs in A3676 to seize weapons in the future. Bank on it, it's happened in other countries such as England and Australia. Expect crime to increase if anything as the vast majority of guns used in crimes are stolen/smuggled, not legally purchased and registered.

4. S2471- has the state economically punish things its politicians doesn't like. That will never, ever be abused by any corrupt politician...

5. A3659- essentially a duplicate of most of the existing federal regs plus some California-esque "ooh big super-expensive scary-looking gun that about four people even have- we must ban it!" Still idiotic but pales in comparison to the rest of the proposals.
 


Short answer: A black powder rifle has a rifled barrel and shoots a single projectile of generally fairly large diameter driven at low speeds by black powder. Most black powder rifles are single shot and load from the muzzle. A shotgun is a weapon originally designed to shoot multiple shot pellets at one firing from a smooth barrel. Most shotguns are repeating weapons using smokeless powder.

Long answer: There are many different kinds of black powder rifles, ranging from muzzle-loading rifles to metallic cartridge repeating rifles like the .45-70 lever action. There are also many different kinds of shotguns and recently there have been rifled barrels fitted to shotguns to allow for more accurate shooting of single projectiles (slugs). This is mainly due to legislation banning rifles for big-game hunting. In practice there isn't much of a difference between a larger black-powder cartridge repeating rifle like a .45-70/.45-90/.50-90 and a modern slug shotgun. Both shoot .45-50 caliber projectiles weighing 250-500 grains at a speed of 1300-1800 fps and can be reloaded and fired >10 times per minute. They all make effective weapons on big game up to about the size of an elk as long as you keep ranges to about 100-150 yards or so.

The legal distinction is that shotguns are originally designed to shoot shot from smooth barrels and are exempt from the Destructive Device clause of the 1932 NFA. This is because a .50 caliber shotgun is somewhere between a 28 gauge and a .410 bore (the two smallest commonly available shotguns) and not very useful- most shotguns are approximately .62 caliber (20 gauge) or .73 caliber (12 gauge.) Shotguns are also low-pressure firearms and not able to throw a large single projectile very far so are not thought to be a threat to the government such as a .50 caliber centerfire rifle like a .50 BMG would be. Thus the later modifications to allow rifled barrels and saboted projectiles from any weapon than chambers a shotgun shell was given an exemption to the NFA by BATFE.

The legal distinctions also allow any weapon made before 1898 to be exempt from the NFA regs and also any muzzle-loading weapon as well, regardless of date of manufacture. You can own a 6" bore muzzleloading cannon if you wish. You can also own a breech-loading 3" mortar such as a Hotchkiss Mountain Gun but only if it were made before 1898. (One such weapon was offered for sale on Pawn Stars for $40,000 a couple years ago.) 1899 and newer models are illegal without the NFA stamp and all of the paperwork that goes into them as they are defined as Destructive Devices.
 
Doesn't take the bite out of anything, it just shows your lack of firearms knowledge.

Shotguns come with both a smooth and rifled barrel. To distinguish the two in conversation, the rifled barrel shotgun is sometimes referred to as a slug gun. The term slug is used because instead of the typical shot shell containing multiple pellets, it holds a single solid projectile.

The current law in New Jersey clearly defines shotgun as having a "smooth bore" and a rifle as having a "rifled bore". The proposal redefines "destructive devices" to include anything over .50 caliber. The 20ga measures out to be .62 caliber. So, because the definition of shotgun as having only a smooth bore, plus the change in definition of destructive devices to include anything over .50 caliber, New Jersey Legislators and the proposal will not/do not make a distinction between a 20ga rifled shotgun and a molotov cocktail as a destructive device.

And you thought you were pointing out my ignorance of the laws being proposed. Silly mingo, tricks are for kids.
 


Black powder rifles do not come with smooth bores because no rifle has a smooth bore. A smoothbore muzzle-loading black powder weapon designed to shoot a single projectile is more accurately called a musket. A musket and a muzzle-loading shotgun are functionally identical as both have smooth bores and can shoot shot loads or single projectiles. Sorry to be pedantic but there is a ton of pedantry and hair-splitting with firearms terminology, especially now that the BATFE got involved. The original topic of discussion exemplifies this very well, with rifled-barreled "shotguns" not being classified as destructive devices while a .54-caliber black-powder cartridge rifle would be classified as one.
 
According to Jersey - “Shotgun” means any firearm designed to be fired from the shoulder and using the energy of the explosive in a fixed shotgun shell to fire through a smooth bore either a number of ball shots or a single projectile for each pull of the trigger, or any firearm designed to be fired from the shoulder which does not fire fixed ammunition.

The good news is OMG is safe with his black powder muskets (They dont call him a minute man for nothing).

Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (3) of this subsection, the term shall not include any of the following weapons capable of firing a projectile of a caliber of 50 or greater, but not exceeding a caliber of 60: antique firearm; antique handgun; muzzleloader rifle; or black powder muzzleloader having in-line ignition, a center hammer or an under hammer which has been, or subsequently is, approved for hunting in this State. The term also shall not include any firearm with a bore diameter greater than 60 caliber whose principle means of ignition are traditional flintlock or caplock and whose principle propellant is black powder.

Destructive Device - Any weapon capable of firing a projectile of a caliber of 50 or greater [than 60 caliber], except a shotgun or shotgun ammunition generally recognized as suitable for sporting purposes;
Click to expand...

I still fail to see why banning .62 caliber slugs is a bad thing.... Maybe someone can tell me what you use them for? Self defense, or just because?
 
Wouldnt game hunting fall under a sporting round? Im having difficulties finding a definition for what exactly a "Sporting Round" is, maybe its purposely vague to leave wiggle room for hunters?

Also from the way the law is written shotguns might be exempt from the gauge size laws.
 


A .62 caliber slug would be a 20-gauge full-bore-diameter slug such as a Foster-type "rifled" slug or an attached wad (Brenneke or Lightfield type) slug. You would use one for deer hunting with a smoothbore 20-gauge shotgun if you had absolutely nothing better to use as it is a low-power, short-range load.

As to the why does the slug need to be >.60 caliber, shotguns are very low-pressure firearms, roughly on par with black powder firearms with a maximum pressure of 12-15k PSI. A typical handgun round will be about 20k PSI, magnum handgun rounds are around 30-40k PSI, and common centerfire rifle rounds are usually 55-65k PSI. Shotguns absolutely depend on a large piston surface to generate enough energy to be useful for hunting and shooting due to Pascal's Law. A 20-gauge slug despite its large diameter is fairly marginal for deer hunting and roughly equal in power and performance to a .50 caliber blackpowder rifle using 1850s Minie balls and <100 grain powder charges or a .44 magnum handgun round shot from a carbine. 20 gauge slugs are the bare legal minimum for deer hunting in most areas. Most people use even larger 12-gauge slugs which are about in line with a typical newer in-line muzzle-loading blackpowder rifle in terms of range or performance. The slugs are huge but not particularly powerful and don't kill a deer any deader or much if any quicker than a "low-powered" deer rifle such as a .30-30 or a .260 Remington.
 
Well, I'm glad that you finally understand the proposal would ban a rifled shotgun. A rifled shotgun, up until this proposal, has maintained a legitimate sporting and hunting purpose.

Heavily populated States, like NJ, do no permit rifles for hunting due to the increased pressure of the round and the distance a rifle round can travel; for example, the .30-06 has an effective range of 600 yards. Whereas the shotgun fires a low pressure round and has a maximum effective range of 100-150 yards.

Without going into too much detail, after the shot shell is fired, the pellets form a rough "O" shape changing in diameter and losing velocity as the pellets fly down range. Shooting large game at a range of 100 yards or more, the pattern of the pellets may not be dense enough to kill the game with a single shot.

A rifled shotgun firing a single solid projectile is still a low pressure shell but comes with a minimal increase in maximum effective to 150 yds. The primary trade off between a shotgun shooting a mass of pellets compared to a sabot slug isn't the meager increase in range, but the significant increase in energy transferred to the target as a result of a large single projectile. A rifled shotgun is also made to accept telescopic sights increasing accuracy.

One objective (at least, on of my objectives) of hunting is to kill the game with one shot. The more accurate the weapon, the easier it is for the hunter to maintain point of impact, the more success a single shot will result in a kill. With this in mind, the rifled shotgun is a far more accurate and effective firearm when compared to smooth bore shotguns when hunting large game.

You will never find a definition for "sporting rounds". For the law to accurately define "sporting ammunition" the law would need to classify all ammunition by assigning arbitrary uses based on the caliber or gauge. But, that level of granularity ignores the basic fact that "sporting ammunition" is any ammunition that is being used for sporting purposes. Is the government then going to define what is and is not lawful sporting purposes? In which case, maybe skeet shooting would be legitimate, but what about high-power rifle competitions? Along with the same line of thinking, you will never find an accurate definition of a "sporting firearm" which is why all the "assault weapon bans" focus on the cosmetic features of the firearm, i.e.; pistol grips, bayonet lugs, detachable magazines, etc. All of which just goes to show how arbitrary and subjective these gun bans and anti-gun proposals really are.
 
"Destructive device" means any device, instrument or object designed to explode or produce uncontrolled combustion, including (1) any explosive or incendiary bomb, mine or grenade; (2) any rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces or any missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter of an ounce; (3) any weapon capable of firing a projectile of a caliber of 50 or greater, except a shotgun or shotgun ammunition generally recognized as suitable for sporting purposes; (4) any Molotov cocktail or other device consisting of a breakable container containing flammable liquid and having a wick or similar device capable of being ignited. The term [does] shall not include any device manufactured for the purpose of illumination, distress signaling, line-throwing, safety or similar purposes. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (3) of this subsection, the term shall not include any of the following weapons capable of firing a projectile of a caliber of 50 or greater, but not exceeding a caliber of 60: antique firearm; antique handgun; muzzleloader rifle; or black powder muzzleloader having in-line ignition, a center hammer or an under hammer which has been, or subsequently is, approved for hunting in this State. The term also shall not include any firearm with a bore diameter greater than 60 caliber whose principle means of ignition are traditional flintlock or caplock and whose principle propellant is black powder.
Click to expand...

So what exactly do you think they mean by (Im going to paraphrase here) You cant own a weapon that fires a .50 caliber round EXCEPT for SHOTGUNS? Do you think that.... maybe they put an exception in for shotguns? So you can still go dear hunt using that .62 round. So im not sure what you are arguing for? Do you hunt with a .50 caliber rifle? And just pick the pieces up after, Im willing to bet the force of the round would cook a piece here and there.

I dont know how else to phrase this besides in the link you gave it literally says shotguns are exempt.

So what say you MU can I kill a deer with anything besides a .62 caliber shotgun slug? Before shotguns people must have never caught anything......
 
The NJ definition of a shotgun specifies a weapon with a "smooth bore". By definition, the above exemption is intended to mean ONLY SMOOTH BORE shotguns.

I do not think they made any exceptions for other than what is already defined within existing New Jersey law. Nor do I presume to think that NJ Legislators understand the difference between a smooth bore shotgun and a rifled bore shotgun. I also do not think they understand a rifled shotgun is "suitable" for sporting purposes given there was nothing in the proposal to redefine a shotgun to include a rifled bore.

The redefinition of destructive devices to include weapons capable of firing .50 caliber or greater does not exempt RIFLED shotguns as you would like to believe based on the above destructive device clause and the existing legal definition of a shotgun.

If verbiage had been included to redefine shotguns to include rifled bores, I would agree with your argument. However, there is no such verbiage stating that rifled shotguns are suitable for sporting purposes and no such verbiage is being included to exempt rifled shotguns. So, by using the existing definitions and proposed verbiage, it is reasonable and logical to conclude that rifled shotguns over .50 caliber will be classified as a destructive device.

When, if, and until the verbiage specifies rifled shotguns as being exempt, or verbiage classifying rifled shotguns as "suitable for sporting purposes", or the definition of shotgun is revised to include rifled bore, there is no further point in continuing this discussion.
 


The reason we are against the restriction on .50+ caliber rifles is part based on practicality and part on principle. The practicality part is because there are more than one .50 caliber rifle. You are thinking that any .50 caliber centerfire rifle is a .50 BMG. The .50 BMG is probably only appropriate for hunting the very largest dangerous game in Africa from long distances. However it's not inappproriate for sporting use. It is an excellent very long-range target round. You have guys who enjoy shooting half-court shots in basketball (not practical but fun) instead of free throws or 3-pointers, you have guys who like to shoot 1000 yards instead of 100 or 300 yards. A Big Fifty is going to do a whole lot better at hitting a target at 1000 yards than a .308 or .223. Getting back on topic, there are many other .50 caliber centerfire rifles. Most are low-powered numbers based off of converted black powder cartridges like the .50-90 Sharps or very large handgun cartridges adapted for rifles such as the .500 S&W. They are very reasonable to use on deer as they are roughly as powerful as a muzzle-loading rifle. A .54 caliber version of the latter rounds isn't going to be all that much more powerful and there is no reason to ban it. Also, we stand on principle that the government has shredded the Constitution for its own nefarious ends and seek to stop it from further shredding the Constitution whenever possible.
 
Well, the thinking big is bad is easy to understand, if youre coming from a "we dont really approve" attitude, and simply not knowing what theyre talking about hasnt stopped governments before, especially if it gets them attention, and (read my sig) makes them appear to care.
I would rather say, throw the bums out, whether because of their deception, or ignorance.
If, on the other hand, there were reasonable reasons, then I have ears, but this?
Ludicrous
 
chunky, max effective range is not the problem. Max effective range of the 30-06 is about a 1000 yards in the hands of a competent rifleman. Max range is several miles when fired at a 45 degree angle.

Hey, wanamingo. If the purpose of gun control is to reduce crime, tell me how many times a .50 cal BMG rifle has been used to commit a crime. For that matter, considering that the category of weapons loosely (and inaccurately) defined as "assault weapons" have been banned based on appearance, tell me how many robberies, muggings, and deaths have been done with fixed bayonets.

If gun control equals crime control, why are the death rates due to guns so high in areas with very strict gun laws. Chicago, New York City, and Washington, DC come to mind.

Ever notice that most of the public figures pushing gun control have armed security? Who finds that hypocritical?

"Gun free zone" = "target rich environment".

And you do not really need a .50 cal rifle for long distance shooting:
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/05/best-wallet-grou-ever-1-86-group-at-1000-yards-not-bad-for-practice/

For those of you who are metrically challenged, 6.5 mm = .243 cal.

 


Nope. 6 mm = .243. 6.5 mm = .264. There are some famous 6 mm long-range rounds like the 6 mm PPC but the 6.5 rounds, especially that 6.5-284, owns the small-bore long-range shooting world right now.
 
LEGISLATION UPDATE!

The 22 gun control proposals passed the New Jersey Assembly on 2/21/2013. The next step is move these proposals to the NJ Senate in which they will also face committee hearings and the eventual State Senate vote. While some local media and pro-gun advocates believe these bills have a long uphill battle and will most likely be defeated in the Senate, I just want to remind them that the NJ Senate is Democrat controlled 24 to 16. The Senate Committee hearing and vote is tentatively scheduled for March/April.

N.J. Assembly passes package of gun bills despite Republicans' protest

Here's the flip side argument for these gun control proposals. You know, to be fair and balanced...
N.J. Assembly gun control bills would save lives: Editorial

I really don't care if guns are not your issue and you don't care if all firearms are banned but do not be so ignorant to recognize the commonality and effect that anti-gun laws have on our privacy rights and personal freedoms. If you believe in maintaining your privacy, believe in individual liberty, believe that government should not limit the marketplace, and believe in the principle that the best form of government is a government that leaves it to the people to decide what is best for themselves, then you owe it to yourself and future generations to oppose anti-gun laws at both the Federal and State levels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom