• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The nanny state is about to put another gun wielding maniac behind bars

akugami

akugami

Diamond Member
I salute you New Jersey. Thank you for keeping us safe from gun wielding maniacs like this crazy woman in the link.

Seriously, NJ gun laws are screwed up. I support gun restrictions on assault weapons and making it a little tougher to just walk in and buy a gun but when someone is a law abiding citizen unknowingly breaks your draconian gun laws, is that a reason to potentially put a mother with young children into jail?

And this is not the first time this has happened. Take the case of Brian Aitkins who almost got put away for 7 years.

NJ gun laws are completely nuts.

Edit: Link to a different article
 
Last edited:
master_shake_ said:
she broke the law.

you can't just pick and choose the laws you want to obey...
Click to expand...

I would agree with that except there is absolutely no way to know all of the laws. Hell even the lawmakers don't know the laws they are signing. I know that not knowing the law is supposed to be no excuse, but realistically how is that possible? Not just in this instance, but in general if we were to all be held accountable every time we broke a law every single one of us would be in jail and society would bring to a halt.
 
UglyCasanova said:
I would agree with that except there is absolutely no way to know all of the laws. Hell even the lawmakers don't know the laws they are signing. I know that not knowing the law is supposed to be no excuse, but realistically how is that possible? Not just in this instance, but in general if we were to all be held accountable every time we broke a law every single one of us would be in jail and society would bring to a halt.
Click to expand...

If you're crossing state lines with a firearm, you damn well better know how you should be carrying it. To say otherwise goes against everything it means to be a responsible gun owner.
 
AyashiKaibutsu said:
If you're crossing state lines with a firearm, you damn well better know how you should be carrying it. To say otherwise goes against everything it means to be a responsible gun owner.
Click to expand...

I get that, and I guess my post is just a rebuke of the "ignorance is no excuse" argument.
 
UglyCasanova said:
I get that, and I guess my post is just a rebuke of the "ignorance is no excuse" argument.
Click to expand...

I get that too. The article sounds like it's trying really hard to paint the lady in a good light so I'm not sure what to think of her in particular. It sounds like she's being treated harshly, but I don't know if that's just how the article is painting it.
 
AyashiKaibutsu said:
If you're crossing state lines with a firearm, you damn well better know how you should be carrying it. To say otherwise goes against everything it means to be a responsible gun owner.
Click to expand...
Easier said....Went to NC in June, I have a CCW. Called 2 different county sheriff's depts and was told I could carry in an unlocked console/glove box because I have the CCW. Turns out that was a big no.
 
AyashiKaibutsu said:
If you're crossing state lines with a firearm, you damn well better know how you should be carrying it. To say otherwise goes against everything it means to be a responsible gun owner.
Click to expand...


This.

If you want to own a gun then do so safely and responsibly. If not all you do is give more power to those that want to take them away.
 
highland145 said:
Easier said....Went to NC in June, I have a CCW. Called 2 different county sheriff's depts and was told I could carry in an unlocked console/glove box because I have the CCW. Turns out that was a big no.
Click to expand...

Ha, yeah. I guess others would paint me in the "gun grabber" group, but the degree to which local cops don't know their own laws is legion! You'd think otherwise, but all too often, you'd be wrong.
 
AyashiKaibutsu said:
If you're crossing state lines with a firearm, you damn well better know how you should be carrying it. To say otherwise goes against everything it means to be a responsible gun owner.
Click to expand...

Ideally, you shouldn't have to though. If the second amendment were respected there would not be a single law regarding guns.
 
Perknose said:
Ha, yeah. I guess others would paint me in the "gun grabber" group, but the degree to which local cops don't know their own laws is legion! You'd think otherwise, but all too often, you'd be wrong.
Click to expand...
And the interpretation of them. In SC, console/glove box(unlocked) or trunk with no permit. At last year's grand jury, had a guy that was charged with improper weapon. He had a pistol in the original hard case on the front floorboard.....felony. He had other charges that went through magistrate court that we didn't see. The impression that we got from the detective was that he was being an ass and the officer charged him with everything available.

Of course, it cold have been the officer that was being the ass.
 
Jumpem said:
Ideally, you shouldn't have to though. If the second amendment were respected there would not be a single law regarding guns.
Click to expand...


A right is not an open book to allow you to do anything. There are even limits on speech and those have been upheld.
 
master_shake_ said:
she broke the law.

you can't just pick and choose the laws you want to obey...
Click to expand...

Why not? DC decided to pick and choose which laws to enforce, when they decided not to prosecute David Gregory for having a 30 round AR-15 magazine as a prop on NBC News, recorded in Washington. It's illegal to have the magazine in the district, it doesn't matter if Gregory was just using it as a prop. He knew it was illegal to have and he had it anyway.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...ory-wont-be-charged-for-showing-ammo-magazine
 
Triumph said:
Why not? DC decided to pick and choose which laws to enforce, when they decided not to prosecute David Gregory for having a 30 round AR-15 magazine as a prop on NBC News, recorded in Washington. It's illegal to have the magazine in the district, it doesn't matter if Gregory was just using it as a prop. He knew it was illegal to have and he had it anyway.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...ory-wont-be-charged-for-showing-ammo-magazine
Click to expand...
She doesn't have $$ or connections.
 
Triumph said:
Why not? DC decided to pick and choose which laws to enforce, when they decided not to prosecute David Gregory for having a 30 round AR-15 magazine as a prop on NBC News, recorded in Washington. It's illegal to have the magazine in the district, it doesn't matter if Gregory was just using it as a prop. He knew it was illegal to have and he had it anyway.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...ory-wont-be-charged-for-showing-ammo-magazine
Click to expand...

Are you trying to compare the two situations? If the article in the op was trying to not be biased, they would focus on the situation. Instead they gloss over it and focus entirely on everything besides the things revolving around her breaking the law.
 
AyashiKaibutsu said:
Are you trying to compare the two situations? If the article in the op was trying to not be biased, they would focus on the situation. Instead they gloss over it and focus entirely on everything besides the things revolving around her breaking the law.
Click to expand...

In one instance, a citizen unknowingly broke the law and was charged. In another, a citizen knowingly broke the law and was not charged. Laws for thee but not for me!
 
Triumph said:
In one instance, a citizen unknowingly broke the law and was charged. In another, a citizen knowingly broke the law and was not charged. Laws for thee but not for me!
Click to expand...

In one instance, we have all the details that it's absolutely clear the person wasn't attempting to arm themselves with illegal weapons. They could have been sticklers about the law, but at the end of the day he didn't have everything needed to use a gun.

In the other, it's pretty clear they were although we're being denied any sort of detailed description, but we do have a long article talking about how unfair it is for them to be prosecuted for it because they were supposedly forgetful about it...

Either one can have the nuances argued, but one is clearly different from the other.
 
AyashiKaibutsu said:
If you're crossing state lines with a firearm, you damn well better know how you should be carrying it. To say otherwise goes against everything it means to be a responsible gun owner.
Click to expand...

Without a doubt. I traveled by car from Texas to Virginia last year and before I left I checked the guns laws to make sure there would be no issues. I have a Texas CHL and all the states (Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee) I traveled through as well as Virginia have reciprocal agreements with Texas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top