NJ Senate Committee Passes .22 Rifle Ban, Magazine Ban By 3 to 2 Vote

Status
Not open for further replies.

Midwest

Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
2,569
Location
Kentucky
NJ Senate Committee Passes .22 Rifle Ban, Magazine Ban By 3 to 2 Vote

This means that even .22 lr tube fed rifles that carry more than 10 rounds will be considered an "assault rifle" will be banned (no I am not joking).


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...s-22-Rifle-Ban-Magazine-Ban-By-Vote-Of-3-to-2


".......the ban will outlaw 43 rifles including .22 rifles like the "Marlin Model 60, Remington Nylon 66, and Winchester 190." The ban does this by broadening the label of "assault firearm" to include .22 rifles with a fixed magazine exceeding 10 rounds....."


.
 
Does Christi have to sign the bill? That could show his true colors. I understand he is not exactly a 2nd Amendment Minuteman.
 
Does that particular legislation make existing owned .22 rifles contraband, or does it allow registration as "assault weapons" and continued possession for current owners (but preventing passing down old .22 semiauto's as family heirlooms)?
 
Oh yeah

My 12 round 22 Marlin 60 is an assault rifle...Geeze...does that include pellet guns too ?

People better step up or you can kiss ALL gun ownership goodbye in NJ. What the hell do they think they are accomplishing ? That MAYBE they will catch a bad guy and give them stiffer charges ? I have news for them....BAD GUYS AREN"T THINKING ABOUT THAT - If the were, they would probably NOT be bad guys...sheesh
 
Simply unreal...because of higher capacity

In other words people with no clue making laws.

How about people go out and buy Barrett .50cal with 8 round magazine, that would be legal ...but a .22 with 12 rounds....oooo...deadly...Not a freaking clue...

I said it in another post...death by 1000 cuts
 
The chances of this being signed into law are less than the possibility of a snowball surviving in hell (assuming that this theory is true and that it's not yet frozen over):

http://www.quantumlounge.com/data/hell.htm

First of all, passing comittee is just one step towards getting a law passed. There are lots more steps, and it all in the end will not go into effect unless it's voted on by the NJ state legislature (not a certain thing), and then signed into law (a very doubtful thing). So don't get your knickers in a knot just yet.

Here's the skinny:

This is pure political theatre, orchestrated by the DNC, to force Christie into a lose/lose position for later talking points at the national level.

1: If he vetos it (which he will), the Dems will have something to try to hammer him on <yawn> .... as if anyone would be swayed by it.

2: If he signs it into law (see aformentioned thermodynamics of hell) he can kiss any national office aspirations into the selfsame fire.


The Dems know that it isn't going to become law, it's all just a play from the playbook on how to generate debate points for the future conversation.


The above based on being a patron of NJ RKBA Advocacy for decades and having a casual connection to Christie. He's basically a good guy, has been great for NJ, and is neither a right wing nut nor the RINO that his (mainly Republican) competitors try to paint him to be. With full confidence, he's not going to sign this.



Willie

.
 
Last edited:
Oh, I would make a video with the caption that that Democrats want to outlaw as assault weapons common sporting rifles owned by millions of Americans with pictures of "Marlin Model 60, Remington Nylon 66, and Winchester 190" and lists of production figures ("Hey, uncle Fred owns one of those! That's not a gangster weapon! That's just a .22!"). And also point out the criminal laws make owners outlaws without doing an act malum in se (list the criminal penalties too).

If the Democrat party wants to brand itself as the party of unreasonable gun control that criminalizes the law abiding, they can go for it. Doing the same thing that failed iin the past expecting different results today is called something.*

For purposes of disclosure, I have never voted a straight party ticket, and always find candidates from major parties I can support, and I don't put trust in parties.

* Stuck on stupid.
 
The bad thing is as soon as Cristi leaves office this will go through, its unlikely NJ next governor will be anything other than a rabid anti.
 
The bad thing is as soon as Cristi leaves office this will go through, its unlikely NJ next governor will be anything other than a rabid anti.
Precisely my thoughts. To them no big deal if Christie doesn't sign it, the next governor will sign it when they reintroduce it again (with even more restrictions).

.
 
"To them no big deal if Christie doesn't sign it, the next governor will sign it when they reintroduce it again"

You miss the strategic political point entirely: It's not about getting any law passed, it's about putting the current governer in a position where he can't win.


"its unlikely NJ next governor will be anything other than a rabid anti."

With all due respect, I think you folks from far away from the state don't "get" that with Christie's remarkably popular leadership, a very good Lt. Governer, and an all time low popularity of the DNC line, that it's likely that NJ will retain a Republican governor for a while. No politics in NJ will ever be "pro RKBA" by western definitions, but the atmosphere there is not nearly as bad as some folks think. The atmosphere for any change just isn't as popular as people who are not living there think it might be.


Willie

.
 
You do understand this is just a step, not the final step, to go to the NJ Senate where is isn't likely to be passed?

Perhaps another perspective would be valuable -
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/05/gun_control_nj_bill_to_reduce_allowed_size_of_ammunition_magazines_advances.html said:
a bill to reduce the permitted size of ammunition magazines in New Jersey took an important step today.

The state Senate’s Law and Public Safety Committee today voted 3-2 along party lines to approve the legislation (A2006), which lowers the allowed size from 15 rounds to 10. The bill has been kicking around the Legislature since 2012 as one of several dozen pushed in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook school shooting in Newtown, Ct. But while it has already passed the Assembly twice, this is the first time it has advanced in the state Senate.

“Large capacity magazines are not needed for hunting or for self defense. They are used to claim as many victims as possible, as fast as possible,” said state Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen), the bill’s sponsor. “If a gunman has to stop and reload, it offers a critical window of time to take down the shooter.”

Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester), who faced re-election last year in a relatively conservative district, refused to put the bill up for a vote last year. But Sweeney said he changed his mind after parents of 6- to 7-year-olds killed in the Newtown school shooting personally lobbied him.

To become law, the bill – which the Assembly passed 46-31 in March – must pass the full Senate and be signed by Gov. Chris Christie. Although Christie has not taken a position on the bill, he noted at a March town hall meeting that he had vetoed more bills than any governor since at least 1947.

Gun rights advocates vastly outnumbered gun control supporters at the committee hearing, with about 100 packing the room.

The meeting also attracted three out of the four Republicans running for U.S. Senate in the June primary, and former Philadelphia Eagle Garry Cobb – who hopes to challenge state Sen. Donald Norcross (D-Camden) in the U.S. House race in South Jersey’s 1st District. Some of the candidates wore National Rifle Association stickers.

“I’ve never been afraid to stand up and defend the rights of people who are having them taken away by the government,” said Republican U.S. Senate candidate Rich Pezzullo.

Opponents of the bill said it would do nothing to improve public safety, but it would penalize law-abiding gun owners.

“Criminals travel in packs, and home invasions happen,” said Scott Bach, executive director of the New Jersey Association of Rifle and Pistol Clubs. “And when a gang of armed thugs kicks in your door at 3 in the morning, they won’t be using 10-round magazines.”

Bach also said the bill would inadvertently ban several popular models of .22-caliber rifles with “fixed” magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. Even though lawmakers amended the bill to exempt the gun popularly known as the “Boy Scout rifle,” Bach said it would still ban other weapons because lawmakers have “no depth of understanding of New Jersey’s tangled web of gun laws.”

Some gun rights supporters said they would not turn over their 15-round magazines. The bill would give them 180 days to do so.

“And I can tell you all here today, I will not comply,” said Anthony Colandro, who owns a firing range in Woodland Park and hosts an internet radio show. “Who’s with me?” he added to applause.

The committee also voted 3-2 to pass a bill (A2777) that says those transporting firearms in cars can make stops for “collecting and discharging certain passengers, purchasing fuel, using a restroom, and contending with an emergency situation.” Under current law, drivers can make stops "reasonably necessary under the circumstance," but those are not defined.

Although the bill was intended as an olive branch for gun rights supporters, they claim that it would make the law worse for them by giving judges less discretion.
 
but the atmosphere there is not nearly as bad as some folks think. The atmosphere for any change just isn't as popular as people who are not living there think it might be.

I think you are wrong.

Last year the legislature passed all sorts of anti-gun laws, including one that would have made the Firearms Identification Card laws very onerous.

Christie vetoed that law, but the legislature is chomping at the bit to pass whatever anti gun laws they can.
 
^^

The take-away is that Christie vetoed it.....

There's going to be a bit if reshuffling in the next election there, mark my words.


Willie

(50+ years in NJ, 30 spent in the RKBA Fight there, and still sending money)

.
 
Does that particular legislation make existing owned .22 rifles contraband, or does it allow registration as "assault weapons" and continued possession for current owners (but preventing passing down old .22 semiauto's as family heirlooms)?
Does it matter?!
 
I didn't think that the Newtown Shooter used a .22 caliber rifle in his actions. Even the State of Connecticut didn't ban .22 rifles in the PLACE where it occurred.

Oh, well, for those who think that they will eventually have to live under that law, the Marlin/Glenfield Model 75 is for you. Or the Marlin 989M1.
 
Willie Sutton is correct. This is all political theater. The 22, 10 round proposal will never pass.
Being a raised Jersey Boy like Willie, I know how their minds work in Trenton.

New Jersey has been corrupt since it was a colony. But that does not mean that all the pols there are crazy. Just that more are on the take there than any other state. Or Territory! :D
 
Guys, seriously, please stop repeating fallacies about this bill.

It is a BAD BILL. It is a BAD BILL I DISAGREE WITH.

But the people in NJ on the gun owner facebook groups need to STOP REPEATING the lie and fallacy that this includes 22 Rifles. If we are shown as LIARS in our opposition to this bill, we will lose all credibility.

Please read the statements below:

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2014/Bills/S1000/993_S1.PDF


he committee amended the bill
to exempt from the 10 round
limitation those semi-automatic rifles
which have an attached tubular
magazine and which are capable of
operating only with .22 caliber
rimfire ammunition
. This exem
ption would permit the sale and
possession of a popular beginner gun,
the Marlin Model 60, often
referred to as the “Boy Scout gun.”
These firearms are low caliber and
the attached tubular magazine
cannot be quickly reloaded.
 
"Christie vetoed that law, but the legislature is chomping at the bit to pass whatever anti gun laws they can."

Not really. Think out of the box, and read Machiavelli a bit. Peel off another layer of the onion and look under it:

The thing to remember is this:

It will *never* be submitted to a Democratic governer for signature, even in the *very* unlikely event it's passed in the legislature. Reason? The Dems don't want a law, they want to score political points by putting a Republican into the position of either signing it and losing popularity with his/her own party or vetoing it, which gives the Dems more campaign talking points to use to scare Soccer-Mom with.

If they are not able to get it thru to Christie to sign or veto (which he will veto), they will hold it "in the can" until another Republican governer "needs a controversy" so the Dems can gain points. It has *zero* to do with getting a law passed. They only want to tally up points for debate. Divide and conquer. Welcome to politics.



Willie

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top