New Jersey: Marlin model 60s and Rem Nylon 66s about to be banned & confiscated....

U

Unlicensed Dremel

Moderator
if this passes:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/28/new-jersey-bill-is-outright-gun-ban-on-22-caliber-/

It applies to all rifles with magazines which can hold more than 10 rounds, and no exception for rimfire.

No registration; no grace period. Just instant felon if you don't immediately turn them in for confiscation - at least according to this article.

And it's NJ, which means it will probably pass the legislature. Christie will probably veto it, of course, thankfully, but it goes to show what could happen if they had a different governor.
 
Last edited:
IMHO, it's up in the air if Christie will veto it. There are a few bills that he just hasn't signed and this may be one of them.

The Philadelphia Inquirer caried a similar story the other day on the same proposed bill. The legislator who sponsored the bill (I forget his name but can't forget what he said) was quoted saying "We don't need those high magazine capacity clips. The range isn't shooting back".
 
I think that the headlines for the rest of us (not in NJ) would be that we can use this sort of legislation in NJ and California and the SAFE act as a one sentence rebuttal to anyone who claims "no one's trying to take your guns!"
Well all available evidence says that they are: everywhere that anti-gunners have had the legislative upper hand, they keep tightening the availability and rules of legality at every opportunity regardless of whether the new rules would be any more effective than previous rules in keeping citizens safe.

And if our goal is to keep citizens safe, why do we want to make it more difficult for the citizens to acquire tools to make them safe in the most dangerous of circumstances?

Sorry NJ, hopefully your governor does the right thing.
 
Does anyone have a bill number for it? If so, we can find a list of cosponsors and see if it's got a chance of passage.

That said, it's pretty extreme. Without a grandfather clause or amnesty, I don't see Christie signing it.
 
Oh cripy cream Christie will sign it if he has something that he wants passed and they wont pass it..... They make deals on our behave all the time. They dont care about us and yes he is just like the rest of them... NO BETTER...
 
Christie no doubt has 2016 on his mind. I doubt he'd sign the bill, it wouldn't look good on the resume. But what do I know, he's a politician.
 
Christie will do what is best for him, not you.

if he was running for governor again he'd sign it, but since he's looking at prez, he wont.
 
I don't see him signing it because it would end his 2016 chances Period. That being said, if there was a Democrat Gov, it would be signed. There is no doubt that it will pass both the NJ assembly and senate.
 
Let's leave the Democrat/Republican stuff out of it. There are Democrats who support the 2nd Amendment and Republicans who don't.
 
It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the real point of the bill is not gun control. It could be a double edged sword, aimed at the Governor.

If he signs it, they get a win in gun control, and a win by putting the Gov in bad light in the eyes of gun owners, threatening his chances in the upcoming presidential race.

If he doesn't sign it, they get to shout to their followers what a bad guy the Gov is, for not "dealing with this important public safety issue". AND, by not signing it, the Gov essentially gets no added support from gun owners, and possibly added opposition from fence sitters on this issue.

Few people, other than gun owners will take a look at the details of the bill, and fewer still will realize that its really not about public safety.
 
It's funny, really. Just a couple weeks ago my neighbor got his FOID and was talking about getting a S&W 15-22 as his first gun.
I told him to consider a Marlin Model 60 or Ruger 10/22 instead because NJ is always looking to increase restrictions on AR-type rifles.
 
?

Why was this "PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2014 SESSION" and based on an event that happened over three years ago?

" According to the sponsor, this legislation is in response to the recent horrific tragedy in Arizona where the assailant utilized a large capacity ammunition magazine in a shooting that resulted in the deaths of six people and injuries to 13 others, including Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords."

Is that odd or is that SOP?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top