Sunday, January 29, 2012

Gun Control. Do we need it? New Jersey to BAN all handgun ammo.



New Jersey Assembly Law & Public Safety Committee is considering passing legislation to ban all handgun ammo and some rifle ammo under the guise of "protecting police" with Assembly Bill 588 and Assembly Bill 1013 on Monday January 30th.

The law looks to add to the already banned "armor piercing ammunition" any handgun ammo that is deemed "dangerous" or "a threat to the safety and well being of law enforcement.”

Due to the vagueness of the bill, as with every bill now a days, it would also add to the ban all "common hunting, target, and self-defense ammunition would be subject to ban, along with BB’s, airgun pellets, and non-metallic ammunition like plastic airsoft pellets.” according to Ammoland


The NRA agrees with Ammoland that while the bill deals only with handgun ammo, it encompasses all other forms of ammo including rifle ammo.

Although the bill only mentions handgun ammunition, it is in fact not limited to handgun ammunition, and would apply to all rifle ammunition for which a handgun is ever made. As an increasing number of gun manufacturers make handgun models that shoot rifle caliber ammunition, the line between “handgun” vs. “rifle” ammunition has become blurred, and the New Jersey State Police have already begun treating rifle ammunition in this category as if it were handgun ammunition for regulatory purposes. As long as a handgun exists that shoots a particular caliber of rifle ammunition, New Jersey treats that ammunition as if it were handgun ammunition

Not only will it ban ammo but it would also "criminalize the use of a defaced or stolen firearm" which due to the vagueness of the bills would restrict the LEGAL ownership of any restored or modified firearm.




Here is my problem with this, ignorance. The Police have repeatedly proven their inefficiency with protecting the citizens (just Google police misconduct and brutality) and they have admitted their inability to protect us, and that THEY HAVE NO LEGAL RIGHT TO PROTECT US. 

7/15/05 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 04-278 TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK, COLORADO, PETITIONER v. JESSICA GONZALES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT BEST FRIEND OF HER DECEASED MINOR CHILDREN, REBECCA GONZALES, KATHERYN GONZALES, AND LESLIE GONZALES
    On June 27, in the case of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, the Supreme Court found that Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to individual police protection even in the presence of a restraining order. Mrs. Gonzales' husband with a track record of violence, stabbing Mrs. Gonzales to death, Mrs. Gonzales' family could not get the Supreme Court to change their unanimous decision for one's individual protection. YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN FOLKS AND GOVERNMENT BODIES ARE REFUSING TO PASS THE Safety Ordinance.
    (1) Richard W. Stevens. 1999. Dial 911 and Die. Hartford, Wisconsin: Mazel Freedom Press.
    (2) Barillari v. City of Milwaukee, 533 N.W.2d 759 (Wis. 1995).
    (3) Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982).
    (4) DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989).
    (5) Ford v. Town of Grafton, 693 N.E.2d 1047 (Mass. App. 1998).
    (6) Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. 1981).
    "...a government and its agencies are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen..." -Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App. 1981)
    (7) "What makes the City's position particularly difficult to understand is that, in conformity to the dictates of the law, Linda did not carry any weapon for self-defense. Thus by a rather bitter irony she was required to rely for protection on the City of NY which now denies all responsibility to her."
    Riss v. New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579,293 N.Y.S.2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 806 (1958).
    (8) "Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others; instead their duty is to preserve the peace and arrest law breakers for the protection of the general public."
    Lynch v. N.C. Dept. of Justice, 376 S.E. 2nd 247 (N.C. App. 1989)
    New York Times, Washington DC
    Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone By LINDA GREENHOUSE Published: June 28, 2005
    The ruling applies even for a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.


==================

So given the above, they still choose to propose a poorly written bill to remove the right to buy ammunition by LAW ABIDING CITIZENS (criminals don't care about laws) to protect the police? Who are not required to protect us?

lolwut?

What do we do then? Wait? Hide? "Oh please mr bad man, dont hurt/kill/rob/rape/torture me or my mom/dad/sister/brother/dog/cat/cousin/aunt/grandma!!"

If you are going to pass laws like this, at least leave it to the professionals.


Some more facts for you guys



In states with widespread gun ownership and tough punishment for gun misuse, criminals surveyed were often unarmed: 54% in Oklahoma, 62% in Georgia, 40% in Maryland, 43% in Missouri, and 35% in Florida. In Massachusetts, however, only 29% of the felon-respondents were unarmed. In that state, it is difficult lawfully to acquire a firearm, and the illegal carrying of a firearm, rather than the criminal misuse of a gun, is subject to the mandatory penalty. The survey data indicate that the criminals' fear of an armed victim relates directly to the severity of the gun laws in the state surveyed. Where gun laws are less restrictive, such as Georgia and Maryland, criminals think twice before running the risk of facing an armed victim; they are much less concerned in Massachusetts.
Fifty-six percent of the felons surveyed agreed that "A criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun;" 74% agreed that "One reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot."

A 57% majority agreed that "Most criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police." In asking felons what they personally thought about while committing crimes, 34% indicated that they thought about getting "shot at by police" or "shot by victim.


Taken from

NRA-ILA The Armed Criminal in America


What criminals think below


What politicians don't read or know or care about below


That's the United States Constitution by the way

So what do you guys think? Leave a comment below.

Important:
ACTA - Worse then SOPA/PIPA

How to bypass Internet Censorship SOPA/ACTA

22 comments:

  1. "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -Thomas Jefferson

    ReplyDelete
  2. obviously if you can't buy it in a store you'll find a way to make it at home, that's what happened with armor piercing rounds, for the paranoid that won't go out of state to get it

    but this is a perfect example of a VERY recent issue I had. Guy I don't know calls and threatens me, then comes by the house and shoots at me, calls again and says he's coming back (which he later did do that night and shoot again) the cops took two hours to show up, when they did they issued me a "complaint number" for a "POTENTIAL threat" regardless of all my neighbors and a full house of people having seen and heard the gunshot, I'm amazed nobody was hurt, the cops then left and never returned even after I called again after the second shooting

    when they were there the first time they told me if I shot back at him from my porch they'd arrest me
    WTF!!!
    I don't care, I've got my assault rifle, best (least jamming) machine gun, and my main handgun loaded and with me at all times now, I won't just let someone keep shooting at me and hoping they won't get lucky / do nothing about it
    the only reason I'm here now is some woman he'd more or less kidnapped warned me, guy wanted me dead for something I didn't even do

    she was kind enough to give me and the cops all his info, including but not limited to info on his cars including plates which the plates he was using was off his other car which I'd written down myself, the info where he was staying (at his moms) and his actual house, cell phone number which he obviously had on, a nice picture of his face from my security cameras, full name, etc etc etc and the cops won't even do anything with it, it's like they want me dead

    and here they're trying to take away my ammo? Now way that'll fly, I'll make my own, and it'll be in a grey area probably because it'll be illegal to buy not illegal to own or something like that

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ehh, not so sure this is the most important thing on the plate at the moment...

    ReplyDelete
  4. They should just ban all private used gun for everyone who isn't an active hunter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Care to explain why? Why should I, a legal law obeying American give up my constitutional 2nd amendment right to own a gun?

      Because it scares you? I hope you are attacked and are unable to defend yourself while waiting for the police, ahem, I mean historians, to record in their logs how you were violated.

      Delete
  5. The bottom line, just because you make something illegal, doesn't mean it won't exist. Kind of like the drug laws... that's working real well.

    ReplyDelete
  6. There will always be those who feel getting rid of guns will make the world a better place. The thing is, once something is invented, it’s here to stay. Criminals will always find a way to get guns and although there are some awesome police in our country, there are also some horribly trained police and I have no idea which one will show up at my door to ‘protect’ me. No one has the right to take what isn’t theirs from someone else… be that property, body or life… so I will protect what is mine in the way I feel is best. I would protect my body and life with much more determination than I would my stereo or car because I have the ability to know what is more important and to understand the consequences behind my choices. For the government to come in and say ‘you’re too stupid to know how to protect yourself’ is an assumption on their part they should not make.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wow, thats bat shit insane. Lets ban forks and spoons too, because they are the leading cause of obesity and heart disease lol. These law makers are fools and this is extremely unconstitutional. The police fail miserably at preventing crime and have become almost entirely reactionary, doing extremely little to actually protect you and I from a situation where we would need to use deadly force.

    People fail to understand that with current gun control, people who are law abiding citizens have to jump through hoops and pay ridiculous amounts of money and taxes to purchase a weapon/permit/ammo to protect themselves or for sports and collecting.

    But a criminal can get an unregistered gun (that was stolen from a supplier, bought from an illegal arms dealer, or shit GIVEN TO THEM BY THE FEDS like the US did in Mexico) for next to nothing or for free and rob the shit out of you or kill you. Gun control is a joke that politicians play on dumbasses to get their tax dollars and get elected. We have enough (too much in my opinion) gun control already.

    Historically, many places that have disarmed their citizens went full retard and became extremely oppressive, the citizens could do nothing to stop it after being disarmed (germany, many places in africa, russia, china)...And the US is playing around with bills and regulations that completely throw your rights away and people dont give a shit because its for "security" or for your protection, or to protect the police so they can protect you...HAhahaha

    Sorry for my rant, this stuff gets me fired up because of the potential for societal butt rape by a police state against an uneducated and unarmed people.

    I had to carry for work for years (armored car). My truck was getting knocked over once, we called 911. The police didnt show up for 36 minutes. We had to fight them off ourselves. 2 against 6. The police didnt believe us at first, until other people started calling it in, then they were too afraid to get close.

    Dont trust your life to the government, you will be disappointed or dead. Dont be afraid of guns, learn about them.
    Do yourself a favor. Buy a gun, take a saftey course, learn to shoot and respect weapons and not fear them. You may safe your life or someone elses one day.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's better to have a gun and not need it, than to need a gun and not have it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. they shouldn't be able to constitutionally ban it. They can try to regulate it, but a hard ban should be met with heavy opposition.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well there goes my gun-shopping plan for this year! Last summer I had a home invasion. When this guy entered my home at 4 AM, my 'other self' appeared and I charged him and chased him out of the house. I did not really sleep for 5 or 6 weeks following this and I've finally come full circle after 5 months of therapy. When I told a security person I was considering a gun, he noted that I'd have to make a split second decision as to whether I would shoot because, if I hesitated, the attacker may use the weapon against me. Believe me, I have no doubt I would NOT hesitate to protect me and my home. I guess the knife in my bedroom is going to stay right where its at. :(

    ReplyDelete
  11. I don't think I'm allowed to comment on this one..most British civilians would probably start crying on mention of a gun haha. (Apart from the 15 year olds...for some reason, they all seem to know how to use one)

    GM x

    ReplyDelete
  12. So guns are still allowed but ammunition is banned? How am I supposed to use a friggin' handgun then? Throw it at people? I'd have better luck throwing rocks instead.

    ReplyDelete
  13. That's a good idea Phrozen! There'd probably be a lot less needless killings if we all just threw rocks. We could have cavemen police!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. well you should check out my blog i have a very interesting post about that..
      http://popgunreview.blogspot.com/2012/01/rock-precursor-to-gun.html luls

      Delete
  14. You have done a steg!llar job with this post! I don't know where to start because you've covered so much territory here. The way that bill is written would outlaw hunting. No country in the free world does that. The right to hunt is the right to eat. You guys cannot allow this to happen in your country. It's good to know someone is awake and paying attention. Keep blogging!

    ReplyDelete
  15. great post certainaly got ppl typing hard and fast ^_^ always a good thing :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I kinda expected this to turn into some kinda shitstorm lol. Doesn't seem to be one but you are right it got people typing lol.

      Delete