Homesteading Forum banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,341 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
.

Article for New Jersey residents regarding a ban on fire arms .50 cal. and larger.
Worth taking a look at.:

Last week FCI staff joined forces with several other gun rights organizations on the floor of the New Jersey state legislature to prevent the passage of A-2116, a proposed 50 caliber ban. FCI Chairman John Burtt joined Scott Bach, President of the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs (ANJRPC) and Bob Viden, NRA Board Member to provide New Jersey legislators with accurate information on the effects A-2116 would have on the community of law abiding gun owners from that state. After two hours of testimony, the New Jersey Assembly Judiciary Committee passed A-2116 (http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/A2500/2116_I1.PDF) by a vote of 5-1.

As passed, the legislation will ban virtually all firearms .50 caliber and over.


.
 

·
In memoriam
Joined
·
79,016 Posts
.
I wonder if that ban includes muzzle loaders
Muzzleloaders can be up to 60 cal

This bill amends N.J.S.2C:39-1 to revise the definition of "destructive device" so that it includes weapons of 50 caliber or greater.

Although it centers primarily on devices or instruments designed to explode or produce uncontrolled combustion, the current statutory definition of "destructive device" also includes weapons which fire projectiles of greater than 60 caliber.

Under the bill, it would be unlawful to possess a firearm having a caliber of 50 caliber or greater. A person violating this provision would be guilty of a crime of the third degree. A crime of the third degree is punishable by a fine of up to $15,000, imprisonment for three to five years, or both.

The bill does, however, provide exemptions for 1) antique firearms; 2) antique handguns; 3) traditional muzzleloader rifles; and 4) black powder muzzleloaders having in-line ignition, a center hammer or an under hammer which have been approved for hunting in this State. These firearms would continue to be governed by the statute's current "greater than 60 caliber" restriction.
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/A2500/2116_I1.HTM


The wording of the bill would prohibit ALL 12 AND 20 gauge shotguns
 

·
If I need a Shelter
Joined
·
21,644 Posts
New Jersey could be a nice state,if it wasn't for some of the idiots.Thing is I'm afraid our New President is going to try and turn our whole country into the same.

big rockpile
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,840 Posts
Over the next few years watch for that 50 cal to start drifting down in hopes of no one noticing. NJ should throw out everyone that voted for the bill before Jan 1. Like Rockpile said,once Obama and all his antigun cohorts takes office,LOOKOUT:eek: Please let me rephrase,If any NJ residents that own guns,voted for any anti gun politicans to hold office, in the past election, they deserve to loose them all,and if they move to another state, that state should hold those previous NJ res to that NJ law. Eddie
 

·
MacCurmudgeon
Joined
·
2,246 Posts
I don't own, and have never shot (outside of the military) a larger than .50 calibre or greater rifle; the aforetomentioned muzzleloader excepted of course. What would one shoot with such a beast as a .50 or greater rifle? What percentage of hunters would use such a weapon afield? What percentage of gun owners would want to own such a weapon, and why?
 

·
in memoriam
Joined
·
12,697 Posts
A couple of friend of mine have 69Cal Muzzle loaders.

:D Al
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,774 Posts
realy the only people who use these rifles are colectors , and long range target shooters , and competitive long range shooters

yes occarionaly someone will use one for hunting in the mountains

but mostly these rifles are feared because of the few sceenes in movies where they are used so people are afraid of the thought of being able to shout consistant groups at distancaces of near of a mile and that they would go thru convertional police body armor

what they forget is that
1 ) these rifles cost around 2500 dollars , and need another 2500 in optics to make them usefull and rounds are about 5 dollars each and realy to get the kind of performance they are afraid of you would have to be a very precise hand loader. so you seen any crimes in the news comited with 5000 dollar rifles

2.) it takes what you would call a well diciplined marksman to do that kind of long distance shooting they are so afraid of

3.)if you did have a well funded criminal with the time money and dicipline to use one of these rifles , they would likely be a drug cartel and (A) would not care about some new jersy state law and (B) already have access to every weapon currently available to mexican and south american armies., somtimes they have access directly to the army viechles, solder and all

4.) they start out at 25 pounds with out optics bipods , stablizers or ammo with a barrel length of 36 inches and more than 90% are single shot .so when was the last time you saw in the news that someone comitted a crime with a sigle shot 30 pound gun 60 inches long that cost 2500 dollars , if they had that they could just sell it they wouldn't need to robe the licoure store or even bak where th eaverage take is 300 dollars and they serve 10 or more years

realy havent these people heard of internet crime it pays better and average 3000 and serve 3 or less years

the wall street journal did a study some years back i think around 1999 and found that of those who owned 50 cal cartrige rifles specificaly those based on the round fired from the armed services browning machine guns where colectors and competative shooters and the majoritywhere white men over 35 had college degrees and jobs where they made in excess of 100,000 dollars a year , with the few percent not fitting that catagory still having good jobs and where considered stable citizens
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
I don't own, and have never shot (outside of the military) a larger than .50 calibre or greater rifle; the aforetomentioned muzzleloader excepted of course. What would one shoot with such a beast as a .50 or greater rifle? What percentage of hunters would use such a weapon afield? What percentage of gun owners would want to own such a weapon, and why?
This would include shot guns, here in western new york rifles are illegal to hunt deer with slug guns only.
 

·
In memoriam
Joined
·
79,016 Posts
What would one shoot with such a beast as a .50 or greater rifle? What percentage of hunters would use such a weapon afield? What percentage of gun owners would want to own such a weapon, and why?

Why should any of that MATTER?
 

·
MacCurmudgeon
Joined
·
2,246 Posts
Why should any of that MATTER?
It shouldn't but it does to some folk, and how does one rationally defend the "need" or "right" to own such a weapon as a .50 or greater calibre rifle?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,840 Posts
the same way one rationally defends the right to own an 8 million dollar house or half million dollar sports car that can almost triple the highest interstate speed limit.
am i the only one who is sick of people wanting me to justify things i do that harm no one else?
seriously i am so sick of being put upon that if i didn't have kids to raise i'd already be taking a baseball bat to some people at the brady center.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Well, those rifles are the "weapons of choice" for gang shootings. I mean, every gang member I know of carries around a 30lb rifle that is 4' long and costs on the sunny side of $8K. Yeah, I'm sure everybody in New Jersey feels safer now.

And mark me down as somebody who doesn't *need* justification to own a sports car that will cruise at "go directly to jail" speeds or a rifle that hits like a truck at crazy distances. I want it, and until I actually *hurt* somebody there is zero reason for me not to have it.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,774 Posts
This would include shot guns, here in western new york rifles are illegal to hunt deer with slug guns only.

I was thinking it could but thought only the truly stupid would leave out an exception for shotgun slugs because that is what most places prefer you hunt deer with if they are more than sparcly populated. as in more than aproximatly 3 houses per square mile on average

realy don't you think they would be much smarter to define a statute based on distance of efective travel rather than singling out thing sbased on size

realy if they would make a staute that said it is hereby illeagal to own without written concent of your county sherrif a firearm having a velocity at 1500 yards greater than 1100 feet per second or an efective range greater than 1760 yards and define efective range as the ability to penitrate greater than 9 inches in 10% balistic geliting with a displasment of greater than 3 cubic inches in more than 50% of rounds fired. at lease it would point out they are afraid of long range balistic capabilities.

but i suppose that all this will realy do is keep the state of newjersy from purchasing or getting servce any barnette gun the same as it does for califorina if you read it it is printed at the bottom of all thier ads.

maybe all firearms manufactres who recive their primary revinues from citizens and not from goverment agencys should merly put out a statment that unless the citizens of the state can own it legaly the goverment agencys of the state can not purchase thier product...
when police departments are left unable to purchse the brands they like , ruger , sig , taurus, s&w, springfield, glock , beretta, maybe centiment will change.
 

·
In memoriam
Joined
·
79,016 Posts
It shouldn't but it does to some folk, and how does one rationally defend the "need" or "right" to own such a weapon as a .50 or greater calibre rifle?
How does one RATIONALLY QUESTION anyone's RIGHTS?
There's no need to "defend " anything to you or anyone else
And the law doesnt say "rifle", it says FIREARM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
From my reading of the bill, shotguns used for hunting are excepted. Current owners are grandfathered. But take a look at the list of banned guns, there are many that are used by target shooters and hunters. Scary stuff people!
 

·
In memoriam
Joined
·
79,016 Posts
From my reading of the bill, shotguns used for hunting are excepted. Current owners are grandfathered
I didnt see any exception for shotguns, and the "grandfather" clause only applies to
"PERSONS who ALREADY own them". I take this to mean they cannot be transferred or left to your heirs



Finally, the bill affords an exemption to persons who lawfully possessed a firearm of a caliber of 50 caliber or greater on or before the effective date of the bill. This "grandfather" provision will permit those persons to continue to possess lawfully their large caliber firearms.
The wording is WAY too ambiguous
 

·
MacCurmudgeon
Joined
·
2,246 Posts
There's no need to "defend " anything to you or anyone else
Which may go far in explaining why gun ownership "privileges" continue to be "infringed" upon.
 

·
In memoriam
Joined
·
79,016 Posts
Which may go far in explaining why gun ownership "privileges" continue to be "infringed" upon.
They continue to be infringed upon because of ignorance, half truths, and outright lies from those who would prefer to see EVERYONE but THEMSELVES disarmed.


They rely on the stupidity of the masses to parrot mindless phrases like "cop killer bullets" and "assault weapons", when in fact they have no real knowledge of the subject.

If 50 caliber weapons are such a "threat" then why is it most have never heard of them until the GOVT decides to MAKE an issue of them?
 

·
MacCurmudgeon
Joined
·
2,246 Posts
They continue to be infringed upon because of ignorance, half truths, and outright lies from those who would prefer to see EVERYONE but THEMSELVES disarmed.


They rely on the stupidity of the masses to parrot mindless phrases like "cop killer bullets" and "assault weapons", when in fact they have no real knowledge of the subject.

If 50 caliber weapons are such a "threat" then why is it most have never heard of them until the GOVT decides to MAKE an issue of them?
All freedoms are eventually "because of ignorance, half truths, and outrights lies"; the problem is, that once anything, true or not, has been repeted a few times, folk take it as being true, whether it be on the issue of pro-gun vs. anti-gun, or any number of other issues. Which brings us full circle; how does one convince anti-gun folk that "Joe the Gun-Owner" needs or should be allowed to privately own and/or keep near their person any .50 calibre or greater firearm?

I am a gun owner, a life-long gun owner, and a person who thinks there should be no limit on the ownerships of arms; none, but it is only rarely that I hear from the pro-gun ownership folk a valid arguement enough to convince me they should be allowed near a firearm, even one rendered useless. If they can't persuade me over to their side, what chances do they have with someone who actually is anti-gun ownership?
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top