In the People's Republic of New Jersey, you can spend 3 years in prison for having a pellet gun and not having a firearms license. In the definition noted in a comment:
It shall also include, without limitation, any firearm which is in the nature of an air gun, spring gun or pistol or other weapon of a similar nature in which the propelling force is a spring, elastic band, carbon dioxide, compressed or other gas, or vapor, air or compressed air, or is ignited by compressed air, and ejecting a bullet or missile smaller than three-eighths of an inch in diameter, with sufficient force to injure a person.
So if you get your kid a BB rifle, and don't have a FIREARMS LICENSE, you go to prison. Just effin' wonderful.
Arrested for DUI with a blood alcohol content of 0. Which there is no damn excuse for.
Nancy Pelosi might be giving aid and comfort to terrorists? At this point, wouldn't surprise me at all. Reports on Rep. Jim McGovern(Commie-Who cares) assisting FARC have come out before, after that bigshot's laptop was grabbed; Pelosi being involved- especially after her actions to crap on Colombia- is no surprise(she's a 'Progressive', after all).
Also on Pelosi, seems her promised 'Democrat plan to cut oil prices' still doesn't amount to squat. It seems to be "Prevent any drilling, blame Bush, and screw with the markets, since the latter worked so well in the 70's.
Saw this at Theo's the other day; it seems that Britain is not just circling the drain, you can hear a gurgle now:
The National Children's Bureau, which receives £12 million a year, mainly from Government funded organisations, has issued guidance to play leaders and nursery teachers advising them to be alert for racist incidents among youngsters in their care.
This could include a child of as young as three who says "yuk" in response to being served unfamiliar foreign food.
The guidance by the NCB is designed to draw attention to potentially-racist attitudes in youngsters from a young age.
...
Warning that failing to pick children up on their racist attitudes could instil prejudice, the NCB adds that if children "reveal negative attitudes, the lack of censure may indicate to the child that there is nothing unacceptable about such attitudes".
Yeah, nothing indicates racism than a little kid looking at an unusual food and saying 'Eeeew'. Friggin' morons.
Once again, self-defense is referred to as 'taking the law into your own hands'. Absolute crap. And no, I don't care that she 'lost' her grandson. Take special note of this line:
When they tried to force John Lovell into the bathroom, he pulled out a gun and shot both men, police said.
Generally speaking, there are two things you never, never do: One is if a robber/kidnapper wants you to get into a vehicle, you don't go. Because the reason he wants to take you away is to have more time to rape/torture/murder you. The second is, in a robbery like this, if someone tries to force you into another room it's not because they want you to use a mirror: it's because they want to do something out of sight of witnesses.
When her grandson decided to pull an armed robbery, he put himself on the wrong side of the law and put his own life at risk, whether from a cop or from one of his victims; when he tried to force the man into the bathroom, the man had reason to think he was about to be murdered and should act accordingly. 'Law into his own hands' my ass.
And last, DC is still trying to weasel around the Constitution and make things as difficult as possible, and keep a ban on the (more)politically-incorrect firearms. Statist morons.
Now, to borrow Kim's line, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to the range.
7 comments:
It shall also include, without limitation, any firearm which is in the nature of an air gun, spring gun or pistol or other weapon of a similar nature in which the propelling force is a spring, elastic band, carbon dioxide, compressed or other gas, or vapor, air or compressed air, or is ignited by compressed air, and ejecting a bullet or missile smaller than three-eighths of an inch in diameter, with sufficient force to injure a person.
It seems to me that that would also cover sling shots and possibly even rubber band guns.
Sure sounds like it.
Sailor: Rubber band guns don't fire a "missile smaller than 3/8" with sufficient force to injure a person" - at least not any RBG I've ever seen.
Sling-shots do, and are probably meant to be included... though I suppose if you're launching 7/16" BBs, you're exempt, since that's larger than 3/8", even though it does far more damage than .177 or .22".
A company in NJ tried to recruit me for an engineering job. They would have paid well, but I turned down moving there without a second thought because of crap like this. Jail for a BB gun? As far as I am concerned, BBs ought to be school supplies for PE class starting in the third grade.
There's also taxes. I can rent here in OK for half what property taxes would cost to own a house in NJ.
What a screwed up place.
It's a matter of interpretation.
Is a rubber band a "missile?"
Could a rubber band to the eye "injure a person?" What about a welt, is that an "injury"? A sharp stinging sensation?
The "3/8" diameter" could be problematic...which is whay I said "possibly"...but a properly inventive lawyer could probably find a way to twist the commonly accepted meaning of that to fit a rubber band.
"In its resting state, your honor, it's true that the diameter of the missile in question is greater than 3/8", however when loaded into this heinous and dangerous weapon, and, therefore, in its operational state, it is stretched to the point that it's cross-sectional diameter is significantly smaller than the maximum established by law and, therefore, clearly fits the legal definition as set out in this statute."
Firehand,
Would forcing the children of favored gropus to eat brussels sprouts be "racist" to?
"Injury" is not defined exactly for that reason.
If you had two clothespins and made a match gun, that would be a violation.
New Jersey, the "Garden State", indeed! Dr. Cook's Garden is what it is!
Wasn't it Justice Oliver Wendel Holmes Junior who said, "The power to tax is the power to destroy?"
It is possible to regulate something out of existence, and the cases that will come up now post-Heller will deal with incorporation and also what is the extent of what is "reasonable" regulation, considering that the right is one that preexists the Constitution.
Post a Comment