Notices
The Team Speed Shooting Range The Guns, Ammunition, and General Personal Protection Discussion Forum.

NJ passes Bill that limits Purchase of Handguns to One per Month

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #11  
Old 06-26-2009 | 04:38 PM
Dave S's Avatar
Teamspeed Pro
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,002
From: Voiding the warranty
Dave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by chokeu2
Why is that "common sense"?
Why should you be able to go out and buy a high performance car? Surely the availability should be restricted to save lives, besides you don't need it anyways.

So many people have an irrational fear of firearms, and this is an example.

The bigger point is that we are supposed to be a free society, made up of laws. A free, law abiding man should be able to buy as many firearms in a month as he wants. These are laws that are set up to criminalize law abiding people in an attempt to limit freedom and provide more control to the government. Meaning, this is nothing more than an attempt to limit freedom.
You know you guys have waaay harder traffic laws and enforce them way harder than the European ones right?

Sure you are limiting freedom, but will it in reality affect people's life?
And if it does, is it really a deep impact? Will Gary suffer from not getting two Sig Sauers in January?

I'd say that the possible benefits surpasses the drawbacks.
 
  #12  
Old 06-26-2009 | 04:39 PM
sean's Avatar
Teamspeed Pro
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,592
From: Mulholland Drive
sean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Dave S
But is this law really affecting anybody?
If its not affecting anyone then it's just an extra layer of government that costs money to maintain and frustrates otherwise law-abiding citizens. There is absolutely zero point in that.

There are already 300 million guns in the US, this restriction is not going to limit the number on the streets by any noticeable percentage.
 
  #13  
Old 06-26-2009 | 04:51 PM
Hossfly's Avatar
Coming Soon
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,255
From: Texas
Hossfly has a reputation beyond reputeHossfly has a reputation beyond reputeHossfly has a reputation beyond reputeHossfly has a reputation beyond reputeHossfly has a reputation beyond reputeHossfly has a reputation beyond reputeHossfly has a reputation beyond reputeHossfly has a reputation beyond reputeHossfly has a reputation beyond reputeHossfly has a reputation beyond reputeHossfly has a reputation beyond repute
Dave's thoughts in this thread are a fine example of just how clueless most of the world is in regard to freedom and liberty. The USA is the last frontier and we are losing more of it, every single day, to this mentality.
 
  #14  
Old 06-26-2009 | 04:53 PM
chokeu2's Avatar
TeH Ears
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 8,188
From: Atlanta
chokeu2 has a reputation beyond reputechokeu2 has a reputation beyond reputechokeu2 has a reputation beyond reputechokeu2 has a reputation beyond reputechokeu2 has a reputation beyond reputechokeu2 has a reputation beyond reputechokeu2 has a reputation beyond reputechokeu2 has a reputation beyond reputechokeu2 has a reputation beyond reputechokeu2 has a reputation beyond reputechokeu2 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Dave S
You know you guys have waaay harder traffic laws and enforce them way harder than the European ones right?

Sure you are limiting freedom, but will it in reality affect people's life?
And if it does, is it really a deep impact? Will Gary suffer from not getting two Sig Sauers in January?

I'd say that the possible benefits surpasses the drawbacks.
Sean is correct.

And bro, we have more than enough laws on the books already!!! The bigger point is that it is a straight up move to limit freedom. I "get it" that such a principle isn't a "thing" in Europe so much, but to some of us over here; it is a HUGE issue.

"Limiting freedom" DOES "in reality affect people's life" my friend! Especially when you have the cowardly politicians who are trying to limit our freedoms via incrementalism. So yes, it does have a "deep" impact.

Thing is, you should have absolutely no ability to have an effect on how many firearms I can purchase at any time, period. I am a well trained, law abiding citizen who is also a veteran. If I have the means, it is my purview to purchase a firearm. The only reason you should concern yourself with the issue is if you would have any ill intent towards me. If you don't, then you'll never have any need to be concerned about my firearms. Firearms do not kill people or commit crimes. The person who picks it up, loads it, aims it and puts it to use is the problem; not the firearm.
 
  #15  
Old 06-26-2009 | 04:54 PM
Barrister's Avatar
Teamspeed Pro
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,875
From: Orange County
Barrister has a reputation beyond reputeBarrister has a reputation beyond reputeBarrister has a reputation beyond reputeBarrister has a reputation beyond reputeBarrister has a reputation beyond reputeBarrister has a reputation beyond reputeBarrister has a reputation beyond reputeBarrister has a reputation beyond reputeBarrister has a reputation beyond reputeBarrister has a reputation beyond reputeBarrister has a reputation beyond repute
The Second Amendment IS my concealed weapons permit - PERIOD!

YouTube - Texas Monthly Talks TED NUGENT
 
  #16  
Old 06-26-2009 | 05:10 PM
Dave S's Avatar
Teamspeed Pro
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,002
From: Voiding the warranty
Dave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond reputeDave S has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by chokeu2

Thing is, you should have absolutely no ability to have an effect on how many firearms I can purchase at any time, period. I am a well trained, law abiding citizen who is also a veteran. If I have the means, it is my purview to purchase a firearm. The only reason you should concern yourself with the issue is if you would have any ill intent towards me. If you don't, then you'll never have any need to be concerned about my firearms. Firearms do not kill people or commit crimes. The person who picks it up, loads it, aims it and puts it to use is the problem; not the firearm.
I think it's safe to say that it's not the Choke type of person ANYBODY is worried about when it comes to guns
But think about it, how clever is the Average Joe...then remember that half the population is dumber than that

The guns don't kill people is true, but the facts are that whether it's the availability of guns or whatnot, there are a lot of gun related deaths.

If there's 300 million guns, would it hurt to reduce that number by a bit? It's sacrifice you have to do, to benefit the general population.
Off course, this argument only holds for true if you believe that the number of guns available in the society is somehow related to gun related deaths. I kind of have a hard time ignoring the causality.

Guns do not breed crime. Often, poverty, the sense of injustice and segregation and off course the good old fashioned greed causes crime. But the availability of guns will surely help when committing crimes.

So if there aren't any guns to steal from private homes, the illegal import of guns are absent, the number of guns available to criminals would be low, right? Then you wouldn't need a gun to defend yourself etc.

I'm not saying that you should ban guns, but I do believe that without any guns, there would be kind of hard to shoot anyone (try to argue that!)

I guess it all comes down to how sensitive you are to reductions of your freedom vs. a potential general gain.
 
  #17  
Old 06-26-2009 | 05:13 PM
stuka's Avatar
Teamspeed's Mr. Spock
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,947
From: Los Angeles
stuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond repute
NJ, another fine state ruined by Democrats.

CA and NJ, two sates with the most criminal friendly gun laws.

That sure makes a lot of sense, restrict law abiding people's rights to buy guns, because the crinimals will also obey the gun purchase limit too, right?
 
  #18  
Old 06-26-2009 | 05:15 PM
strebo's Avatar
Nutcrusher
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 10,272
From: Sweden
strebo has a reputation beyond reputestrebo has a reputation beyond reputestrebo has a reputation beyond reputestrebo has a reputation beyond reputestrebo has a reputation beyond reputestrebo has a reputation beyond reputestrebo has a reputation beyond reputestrebo has a reputation beyond reputestrebo has a reputation beyond reputestrebo has a reputation beyond reputestrebo has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Dave S
Why do you want to buy more than 12 hand guns per year Honestly, 1 a month is pretty damn much.
+1.
 
  #19  
Old 06-26-2009 | 05:20 PM
sean's Avatar
Teamspeed Pro
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,592
From: Mulholland Drive
sean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond reputesean has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Dave S
If there's 300 million guns, would it hurt to reduce that number by a bit?
The only people this law is taking guns out of the hands of are the law-abiding people who are protecting themselves. Criminals aren't buying guns through legal channels anyways.

Doing this will INCREASE crime. We saw that in the UK after they banned guns. Property crime rates went from around the same as the US to far above it. I've never had a car stolen or had my home broken into and I like it that way.
 
  #20  
Old 06-26-2009 | 05:23 PM
stuka's Avatar
Teamspeed's Mr. Spock
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,947
From: Los Angeles
stuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond reputestuka has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by strebo
+1.
I know you guys need a permit for a squirt gun in the people's republic of Sweden.

Your country is not built on giving people the ability to defend themselves as well as keeping the govt in check with a well armed population.

The point is not about what is enough, but the fact that the govt is telling you what IS enough.

Here's one of my recent post election purchase that many American TS'ers here also got.
 
Attached Images  


Quick Reply: NJ passes Bill that limits Purchase of Handguns to One per Month



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:13 AM.