Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Among other things, the bills adopted "would bar firearms of .50 caliber or greater". Gun bills clear N.J. Senate panel
New Jersey hosts a good many Revolutionary War reenactments (Battle of Monmouth is a great one, as is the Battle of Red Bank) . Our muskets (.75 Cal Brown Bess and .69 Charlevilles) are over the proposed .50 caliber size and hence would be banned?? Conceivably, the entire Continental Line and Brigade of the American Revolution could be arrested en masse on battlefield!!??
Last edited by Jerseykids2011; 05-10-2013 at 10:25 AM..
Among other things, the bills adopted "would bar firearms of .50 caliber or greater". Gun bills clear N.J. Senate panel
New Jersey hosts a good many Revolutionary War reenactments (Battle of Monmouth is a great one, as is the Battle of Red Bank) . Our muskets (.75 Cal Brown Bess and .69 Charlevilles) are over the proposed .50 caliber size and hence would be banned?? Conceivably, the entire Continental Line and Brigade of the American Revolution could be arrested en masse on battlefield!!??
The Senate bill bans the Barrett .50 caliber M82 rifle and a few others specifically. Not that I agree with that, but the bill carves out exceptions for slug guns, muskets, and other large bore firearms:
Senate bill S2630
Synopsis:
Reduces the maximum lawful capacity of ammunition magazines; prohibits possession of certain firearms having a caliber of .50 or greater.
Furthermore, if you read any of the political blogs (PolitickerNJ, etc...) which delve a little deeper than "Bill Passes Senate Panel." You'll realize how little of a chance some of these bill have of coming to Christie's desk, simply because South Jersey Democrats are not going along so willingly with their North Jersey counterparts.
Thank you, Badfish740. It seems that things are going crazy with legislators going full-throttle to pile more laws on top of current laws... however ineffective they would be to control social elements who don't obey the laws in the first place...
For a minute I thought I was going to have to surrender my blunderbuss, the known, preferred weapon of drug dealers everywhere. That makes as much sense as banning the Barrett which is almost 5 feet long and weighs 33 pounds. Sometimes I think the political hacks and the residents of New Jersey have reached the bottom of the stupid pond, yet they dig down just a bit further to come up with the current level of nonsense.
For a minute I thought I was going to have to surrender my blunderbuss, the known, preferred weapon of drug dealers everywhere. That makes as much sense as banning the Barrett which is almost 5 feet long and weighs 33 pounds. Sometimes I think the political hacks and the residents of New Jersey have reached the bottom of the stupid pond, yet they dig down just a bit further to come up with the current level of nonsense.
Nothing says gangsta like drive by sawed off blunderbuss using aids infected drug needles as projectile.
This is one of those countless number of bills that make it out of committee and then die a rapid death on the floor. Don't worry though, even if it had a glimmer of hope of passing and they hadn't exlcuded muskets, the Revolutionary War Reenactors lobby would be all over that one, lol.
Overall, not very shocking and the decreases are mirrored in the overall crime. So, it's not as if "gun violence" is down while everything else is similar, it's all crime that has decreased by similar amounts.
thats good news. im not sure if the fact that it mirrors all other crime eliminates the validity of pro-gun folks using it.
Like I said in the other thread, people have a perception that crime and gun violence is higher now than it has been in the past, when the opposite is true. That false perception is twisted by both the pro and anti gun camps to support their stance. Pro gun folks will often list "defense against criminals" as a primary reason they need a gun. Anti gun folks will often point to "violent crime caused by guns" as a primary reason for stricter control. Neither position is really right.
Quote:
gun ownership has increased drastically since 1993; so at least it shows more guns doesnt cause an increase in gun crime.
Actually it hasn't. The number of guns owned has increased, but the share of the people and households owning them has drastically decreased. Back in the 1950's the gun ownership rate was at a high of over 70% of households Today it is around 42% of households owning a gun, with only 30% of people personally owning a firearm. The ownership rate has been pretty steady since the 1990's with minor changes in the composition of households with a gun vs. individual owners. There are more households without a gun today than any other time we have information on.
What has happened is that those who own guns, tend to own multiple guns. So, while the total number of privately owned firearms is quite high, those firearms are concentrated in a small portion of the population. If you think about it, it makes since. There are, according to the FBI, around 270 million privately owned firearms in the US. If they are owned by 30% of the population, that means around 95 million people are actually gun owners. That works out to 2.84 guns per gun owner which is very reasonable to me considering that many of the gun owners I know own multiple firearms.
thats why i deleted that post minutes ago! i googled it after and was surprised to find out that gun ownership was down. i wonder if it has gone up in the past 5 years since im not sure that was reflected in the charts i saw.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It seems that things are going crazy with legislators going full-throttle to pile more laws on top of current laws... however ineffective they would be to control social elements who don't obey the laws in the first place...
That makes as much sense as banning the Barrett which is almost 5 feet long and weighs 33 pounds. Sometimes I think the political hacks and the residents of New Jersey have reached the bottom of the stupid pond, yet they dig down just a bit further to come up with the current level of nonsense.
