New Jersey Bill Bans Rifles, Shotguns and Pistols With One “Military Feature”

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Did we sit it out after Pearl Harbor because we were outgunned and out organized by Imperial Japan, and Nazi Germany?

The F4F Wildcat was under powered against the Japanese Zero. Our fathers and grand fathers went after them.

The Zero could out climb the Wildcat. The Wildcat would stall, and have to dive before the Zero, putting the Zero Right on its 6. Shot a lot of them down till we got the much more powerful F6F Hellcat into the fight.

Britain's Hawker Hurricanes and Typhoons against the German BF 109?

American M4 Sherman Tanks were a Death Trap against German Tigers. Only sure way to kill a Tiger was get behind it and shoot it in the back. Lot of good men died.

B-17 raids?

86% of the crews never made it back.

Bookmark this vid. I've run it before on the History Thread. 53 minutes.

The USS Samuel B. Roberts DE 413: The Destroyer Escort that Fought Like a Battleship.

! No longer available

If you don't believe the Constitution and all the blood that's Already been spent preserving it are worth fighting for, What the Hell are you doing Calling Yourself a Conservative?

The time and place for infighting is in the Primaries, then we go with what we've got, not what we'd Like to have.

Criticize the GOPE once they're in all you like. Wake them up. Organize a primary challenge or recall if you can.

But Virtue Signaling by sitting it out is despicable.

[Frank Cannon]

That's a fact.  Its been all downhill since that goddammed gun grabber Washington seized the Hessian arsenal in Trenton back in 1776.

Damn govt' overreach again.

[austingirl]

Your Brother must have imported her from outside of the good parts of Texas.

@Wingnut

She's an import from Michigan- auto worker union family.

[Fantom]

This is silly, feel-good legislation that isn't efficacious.   Probably legal under the Second Amendment, but stupid.

No, actually not legal under the Second.

First one must apply "Strick Scrutiny" for the Second as is applied to every other Constitutional right. Then there is Star Decisis to consider.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

No, actually not legal under the Second.

First one must apply "Strick Scrutiny" for the Second as is applied to every other Constitutional right. Then there is Star Decisis to consider.

Doesn't get any more unambiguous than Shall Not Be Infringed.

Ain't NO wiggle room in it.

Ain't NO except when Activist, Over Reaching Black Robes pull another Case Law Rabbit out of their hats, in it.

Give me Gorsuch.

Give me More and More Gorsuch. Screw Precedent. Just READ the GD Law!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/03/25/gorsuch-is-right-about-chevron-deference/?utm_term=.e52bfcf0e30c

[Fantom]

Doesn't get any more unambiguous than Shall Not Be Infringed.

Ain't NO wiggle room in it.

Ain't NO except when Activist, Over Reaching Black Robes pull another Case Law Rabbit out of their hats, in it.

Give me Gorsuch.

Give me More and More Gorsuch. Screw Precedent. Just READ the GD Law!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/03/25/gorsuch-is-right-about-chevron-deference/?utm_term=.e52bfcf0e30c

True, but there is a Constitutional way to apply. Strict scrutiny is the first. Stare Decicis the next. Stare Decicis is not "case law". Is is SCOTUS decisions.

They are few on the Second.

One of the biggest is US vrs Miller  https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/307us174

A bank robber was charged with having a sawed off shotgun. The nuts and bolts was that SCOTUS was unsure if a shotgun was "military" useful. As Miller did not show up...died...go figure, it was remanded back to the lower Court to determine if shotguns had military use.

A few points to be drawn. Even criminals had the right to military grade weapons. And second... under Strick Scrutiny standard...any lessor weapon would also be allowed.

P.S.  Wow, just read the link... they "cornell law" has certainly done an obama on this now. Sad, they used to be accurate.

[Smokin Joe]

Tula arsenal Simonov rifle, Russian issue military arm. Remove the bayonet.

The magazine is not detachable, the barrel not threaded, and no flash suppressor.   Legal?



Note: This is a surplus military weapon.

A number of current manufacture semi-auto .22 rifles would not pass muster because of threaded barrels or other features. Just another example of selectively abiding by the Constitution.

[RoosGirl]

I wonder if this one is acceptable?

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

As if a pistol grip and grenade launcher are equally menacing.

BTW, are grenades legal in NJ?

Probably not.

Pumping your own gas on the other hand..

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

I wonder if this one is acceptable?

Don't laugh. Been more than one kid shot and killed by trigger happy cops for playing with toy guns in low light conditions.

[Smokin Joe]

Don't laugh. Been more than one kid shot and killed by trigger happy cops for playing with toy guns in low light conditions.

True enough. I recall telling grandkids and their friends if they hear someone say 'drop the gun to freeze and drop their toy immediately and make no sudden moves. Hard to tell a 12 year old well fed local kid from a third world gangbanger in the dark, and the size is about the same. Another reason I am not a fan of 'hoodies', too.