NJ Governor To Sign Gun Control Bills

It's plain to see that many of you have little to no idea of how the mental health system works. Merely having depression is not sufficient for one to be declared a threat to others or themselves. Neither is simply having marital diffculty. I've worked in mental health and know that there are long established guidlines for making such determinations, but go ahead and believe whatever nonsense you want that affirms your fears of the boogy man coming to take your guns.
 
SonOfScubaDiver said:
It's plain to see that many of you have little to no idea of how the mental health system works. Merely having depression is not sufficient for one to be declared a threat to others or themselves. Neither is simply having marital diffculty. I've worked in mental health and know that there are long established guidlines for making such determinations, but go ahead and believe whatever nonsense you want that affirms your fears of the boogy man coming to take your guns.
Click to expand...
It is equally plain to see that you must not live in a state that has enacted legislation allowing for ex parte restraining orders, and/or enacted legislation broadening both the criteria for which someone can be involuntarily admitted for evaluation, and at the same time broadening the scope of who is allowed to initiate that process.

It's also plain to see that you don't work for the Veterans Administration.
 
Indiana allows for ex parte protective orders, but they're temporary--usually issued in domestic violence situations. Every state has standards on who can initiate an involuntatry commitment. And no, I don't work for the VA and never will.

None of this has a thing to do with the point I'm making--which is that there are established guidelines for determining when someone is a threat to themselves or others. This nonsense about not seeing a marriage counselor or getting help for depression because the person seeing you can arbitrarily decide to take away your guns because of it, is ridiculous. Not only would certain criteria have to be met, but a judge would have to agree that the criteria had been met. And contrary to the "they're coming to take our guns any way they can" paranoia that runs rampant on internet sites such as this one, proving that someone is a danger to themselves or others enough to warrant the suspension of 2A rights isn't easy.
 
proving that someone is a danger to themselves or others enough to warrant the suspension of 2A rights isn't easy.
Click to expand...

permanently?? possibly...

Temporarily? seems pretty easy to me, after all that's something restraining orders do, isn't it? They seem to be pretty easy to get.
 
Yep, the VA has been accused of all kinds of stuff. Some stories are true and some are not.

i've gone to the VA for healthcare often since my retirement from the US Army in late 1979. Never have i ever been asked about guns orally or in writing. i'm also a veterans advocate and know dozens of veterans with PTSD. None have ever lost their Second Amendment rights.

1. If a veteran calls the VA hotline and says he is considering suicide, that's another matter.

2. When it comes to gun rights, PTSD does not matter. If, in addition to PTSD, the veteran is crazier than a loon, that's another matter.

3. If a veteran asks for a fiduciary to manage his VA funds he will be reported to NICS, 100 percent of the time. The VA is very clear about that:

https://www.benefits.va.gov/fiduciary/beneficiary.asp

So called "conservative" political hacks have made a lot of noise about veterans with fiduciaries being reported to NICS: But like former OK senator Coburn, they all lied. Coburn made a lot of noise about protecting veterans gun rights but later made an unholy deal with Chuckie Schumer. Schumer voted for something senate Republicans wanted very badly.
 
NJ guns

Yet another reason we left NJ for a free state.

NJ Governor proudly stated he will make NJ the California of the east. Run my friends, run while you can.

ty
 
NJ Governor proudly stated he will make NJ the California of the east.
Click to expand...

If that means spending the state into virtual bankruptcy, and a corrupt intrusive government run amok about gun control and nearly every other aspect of its citizen's lives, then the Governor should retire, as that goal was met over 40 years ago....

:eek::rolleyes:
 
Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...thout-a-warrant-he-refused-to-turn-them-over/

OK, so the cops were called because a mother got scared.

They went to this guys home to confiscate his firearms and hold them until the investigation was complete.

after a few hours of talks the cops, "Allowed" him to move the firearms to another location.

If law enforcement must have PC or RS to stop and detain, must they also have the same, to knock on someones door and demand they turn over their firearms, or can they knock on your door at any time for any reason or no reason?
 
steve4102 said:
Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...thout-a-warrant-he-refused-to-turn-them-over/

OK, so the cops were called because a mother got scared.

They went to this guys home to confiscate his firearms and hold them until the investigation was complete.

after a few hours of talks the cops, "Allowed" him to move the firearms to another location.

If law enforcement must have PC or RS to stop and detain, must they also have the same, to knock on someones door and demand they turn over their firearms, or can they knock on your door at any time for any reason or no reason?
Click to expand...
Seems as if more and more police departments and officers themselves are becoming ok with taking firearms away from innocent people.
 
Seems as if more and more police departments and officers themselves are becoming ok with taking firearms away from innocent people.
Click to expand...

Except in the eyes of many, if you have guns, you are guilty until proven innocent.

They are ALLOWED to get away with "temporary" warrantless seizures of your property, in order to ensure "public safety".

Trampling on the Constitutional rights of people who have NOT been charged with ANY crime is ok in America today, as long as it is done to make us safe...

while the police figure out if there has actually BEEN any crime committed, and by whom...
and "temporary" can mean MONTHS or even over a YEAR!!!!

It would be poetic justice if some of the people who passed the recent spate of "red flag" laws had their car taken because they MIGHT drive drunk, or had their bank account frozen because they MIGHT do something illegal with their own money....but you won't see that, that would actually upset someone who matters, not some gun owner they don't give a snit about.

Seizing personal property without the Constitutionally required warrant, whether its guns or anything else should not happen. It's not like the police don't have access to judges who will issue warrants "upon oath or affirmation of probable cause..." But they don't appear to even bother to do that, much, anymore.

All it seems to take (or took, in this case) was a frightened mother worried about something her child overheard in school....
Welcome to the 21st century, I guess....:rolleyes:
 
Except in the eyes of many, if you have guns, you are guilty until proven innocent.

They are ALLOWED to get away with "temporary" warrantless seizures of your property, in order to ensure "public safety".

Trampling on the Constitutional rights of people who have NOT been charged with ANY crime is ok in America today, as long as it is done to make us safe...
Click to expand...

Sounding like a certain compound in Waco, TX.
 
FITASC said:
Sounding like a certain compound in Waco, TX.
Click to expand...
Does not sound like anything about Waco. The ATF had search and arrest warrants for the compound and people in it, we are talking warrantless searches and confiscation here without due process. Government over reach has been happening for quite some time, what is wrong with bringing awareness to the issue so we can vote the people out who are for such over reach programs?
 
Last edited:
The ATF had search and arrest warrants for the compound and people in it,
Click to expand...

Which does not excuse the fact that they bungled horridly, and created a situation that need not have happened.

At least in the reported NJ incident, a compromise without bloodshed was reached. Maybe somebody did learn something from the past....it's possible, ..isn't it?
 
Once in a great while reason does prevail. Several years ago, I walked in the door of the indoor range where I shoot to find a fairly large (as in "huge") gun safe sitting on the stair landing right inside the door. I asked the owner if he had just bought out an estate or something. Turned out a customer had had a restraining order placed against him that prevented him from having access to his firearms. The customer lived in the same municipality that the range is located in, and the local PD uses that range for training so they knew the owner. They agreed to allow the entire safe to be stored at the range rather than move all the guns into the police evidence room.

In reality, the PD was probably very happy NOT to have to accept responsibility for storing a large number of probably expensive firearms.

About eight months later I went to the range one day and the safe was gone.
 
JERRYS.]long live NJ and the states right to govern themselves
by the officials elected by its own citizens.
Click to expand...
What Jerry meant to say was "... those who choose to live in such 'democratic' systems get the Gov't they deserve...."
;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top