testtest

Appeals court declares New Jersey assault weapons ban unconstitutional

Recusant

Recusant

Hellcat
Last edited:
This is a legit question. Does this mean that right now, can a New Jersey resident go out and purchase an AR-15 and 30 round magazines? Asking for a friend, for real. I have a buddy that lives in New Jersey. For years he has been waiting on his wife's OK to move to a gun friendly southern state. It was always one excuse or another for not allowing a move. First excuse was the kids were settled in school. They are now all grown and living on their own (and not in New Jersey). Then it was the mother-in-law, being old and needing medical care. Too hard for her to move. She died 6 months ago. Now the real truth comes out. The wife just does not want to move. Me, I'd give her the ultimatum. Move, or I divorce you. But he has this weird feeling for her called love. So anyway, back to the original question. What is his chance of purchasing an AR-15 with what has happened with this court case?
 
PAGunGuy said:
It wont, but SCOTUS's upcoming decision will
Click to expand...
my "best guess" would be that if the SCOTUS decision comes in favor, i'd surmise (not assume) LEO will NOT do anything as in arresting those that have them.

or start buying them again.

i can't want for my LGS to start getting them back by the truckloads.......
 
OldGrunt said:
This is a legit question. Does this mean that right now, can a New Jersey resident go out and purchase an AR-15 and 30 round magazines? Asking for a friend, for real. I have a buddy that lives in New Jersey. For years he has been waiting on his wife's OK to move to a gun friendly southern state. It was always one excuse or another for not allowing a move. First excuse was the kids were settled in school. They are now all grown and living on their own (and not in New Jersey). Then it was the mother-in-law, being old and needing medical care. Too hard for her to move. She died 6 months ago. Now the real truth comes out. The wife just does not want to move. Me, I'd give her the ultimatum. Move, or I divorce you. But he has this weird feeling for her called love. So anyway, back to the original question. What is his chance of purchasing an AR-15 with what has happened with this court case?
Click to expand...
i cannot answer for Joisey, but here, if we got'em, we can keep'em......for now

otherwise, we can no longer buy them, transfer them, or give them away to anyone in OUR state...even upon death......they must all be shipped out of state.

here too....10 round mag limits for ALL guns that use magazines.


no semi-automatic shotguns either.

its to keep RI'ers safe............. :unsure:

and the criminals SAFER
 
OldGrunt said:
For years he has been waiting on his wife's OK to move to a gun friendly southern state. It was always one excuse or another for not allowing a move.
Click to expand...
Yep I had one of them. I finally ended up giving her the house in the divorse....ahhh the mistakes we make for 4" of real estate south of the waste
 
OldGrunt said:
This is a legit question. Does this mean that right now, can a New Jersey resident go out and purchase an AR-15 and 30 round magazines? Asking for a friend, for real. I have a buddy that lives in New Jersey. For years he has been waiting on his wife's OK to move to a gun friendly southern state. It was always one excuse or another for not allowing a move. First excuse was the kids were settled in school. They are now all grown and living on their own (and not in New Jersey). Then it was the mother-in-law, being old and needing medical care. Too hard for her to move. She died 6 months ago. Now the real truth comes out. The wife just does not want to move. Me, I'd give her the ultimatum. Move, or I divorce you. But he has this weird feeling for her called love. So anyway, back to the original question. What is his chance of purchasing an AR-15 with what has happened with this court case?
Click to expand...
@OldGrunt I live in NJ. You can legally buy/build an AR. I have two, AR556 (ruger) and one i built (psa parts). They just can't have more than one evil feature. If it has a pistol grip that's your evil feature. After that, you can't have an adjustable stock, flash hider (but pinned comps/brakes are okay... go figure), bayonet lug (because we all know the number of bayonet charges that have occurred), and threaded barrels (if you have one it has to pinned or be occupied by a comp/brake that is pinned). HOWEVER, mags are limited to 10rds.
So your friend could have had an AR all this time as long as it was NJ compliant.

PS- his wife will change her tune if they try to retire in this godforesaken state. NJ taxes retirement income (401k, pensions, etc...) as if it were regular income. That is why all the retirees leave the moment they retire.
 
Last edited:
mikep said:
@OldGrunt I live in NJ. You can legally buy/build an AR. I have two, AR556 (ruger) and one i built (psa parts). They just can't have more than one evil feature. If it has a pistol grip that's your evil feature. After that, you can't have an adjustable stock, flash hider (but pinned comps/brakes are okay... go figure), bayonet lug (because we all know the number of bayonet charges that have occurred), and threaded barrels (if you have one it has to pinned or be occupied by a comp/brake that is pinned). HOWEVER, mags are limited to 10rds.
So your friend could have had an AR all this time as long as it was NJ compliant.
Click to expand...
This was sold in the 90s during the Clinton years. The receiver and barrel were made by FEG and distributed by KBI (Harrisburg, PA). All the furniture was made by Tapco as well as the trigger to be compliant. Only so many foreign made parts were allowed. I’m not sure if the vertical grip came with it at the time or was added later. I keep this in my collection as a testament to anti-gun stupidity. After all, it still works like an AK should, just more plastic.
1784395725178.jpeg

1784396271915.jpeg
 
Evidently, I'm more pessimistic than you all or have greater faith in the Anti's. They'll just move a few comas, restructure some paragraphs, pass "new legislation that is in line with the ruling :rolleyes: " and keep on keeping on. Or, like Hawaii and the "aloha spirit" just tell SCOTUS to go pee up a rope.
Nothing will change until the DOJ starts holding legislators, PERSONALY responsible for civil right violations. (Fines and Prison. The Laws are there). Sadly, there are not enough people willing to change the status quo and most of those that are, are only interested in the change because they see that as a way to money and power.
Just My Embittered, Grumpy, Anit-social, Old Man, Opinion.
 
bc22wm said:
Evidently, I'm more pessimistic than you all or have greater faith in the Anti's. They'll just move a few comas, restructure some paragraphs, pass "new legislation that is in line with the ruling :rolleyes: " and keep on keeping on. Or, like Hawaii and the "aloha spirit" just tell SCOTUS to go pee up a rope.
Nothing will change until the DOJ starts holding legislators, PERSONALY responsible for civil right violations. (Fines and Prison. The Laws are there). Sadly, there are not enough people willing to change the status quo and most of those that are, are only interested in the change because they see that as a way to money and power.
Just My Embittered, Grumpy, Anit-social, Old Man, Opinion.
Click to expand...
Well, I do agree.
I think SOCTUS will make the right decision
And within months, if not weeks, some states will tweak their laws in response, but still be unConstitutional
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top