I looked for a state that’s taking gun violence seriously. I found Massachusetts.

[Boyle5150]

4 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

GOTTEM 

[Bacon]

12 hours ago, SFLUFAN said:

According to many philosophical systems, we are all of the same universal substance.  Ergo, inflicting harm to oneself is inflicting harm to all.

DAMN! Hitler was smart. 

[Anathema-]

It's pretty normal and uncontroversial otherwise to regulate items that allow for easy suicides. There's a reason you can't kill yourself by sticking your head in the oven anymore. 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

1 hour ago, Anathema- said:

It's pretty normal and uncontroversial otherwise to regulate items that allow for easy suicides. There's a reason you can't kill yourself by sticking your head in the oven anymore. 

I say it's high time we fixed that. Put a trigger and a grip on that bad boy and Make Maytag Great Again

[Jason]

1 hour ago, Anathema- said:

It's pretty normal and uncontroversial otherwise to regulate items that allow for easy suicides. There's a reason you can't kill yourself by sticking your head in the oven anymore. 

 

Because millennials are too fucking lazy to see it through? 

[LazyPiranha]

On ‎2‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 8:46 PM, Slug said:

In Mass the process is pretty streamlined.  Strict, but efficient from everything I've been told.  NJ has a very similar system in theory; FID -> permit to purchase -> purchase check.  The difference is that in NJ it's deliberately cumbersome.  The process just to get the initial FID with the local and state background checks, the mental health histories, requiring local fingerprinting and third party corporate biometrics, and fees at every step of the way.  And weeks or often months of waiting.  That's just to get the ID card and your initial purchase permit. It's even worse if you're in a township without a standing police department because then every step requires making appointments with the nearest state police rep which can be a long time out and will almost always require you to take off of work.  After passing all that you go pick out and purchase your gun, but can't take possession of it.  You now have to wait weeks for another round of background checks (in case you became a felon after going through all the previous steps and decided to still try to get away with buying a gun at a store after that).  When that finally comes back clean you can take your new gun home where it stays, because even after all that validation leading up to this you aren't allowed to leave your house with your gun in NJ.

 

NJ would ban firearms outright if they could.  But they can't.  So they make the process as difficult, inconvenient, and unwieldy as possible in order to suppress ownership to as great a degree as possible.  They want you to pay, and to wait, and travel, and to have to take time off of work, and so on.  It feels very much like tactical voter suppression.

 

I guess I just don't see the problem here?  Something is a pain in the ass once, and then you have something that with decent maintenance will last until you die.  Also traveling with a firearm in NJ is once again inconvenient, but also not that big of a deal.  Box it up, in the trunk, unloaded, in a separate container from the ammo.  Annoying?  Yes.  Less than a minute's worth of effort?  Also yes.

[Slug]

8 hours ago, LazyPiranha said:

 

I guess I just don't see the problem here?  Something is a pain in the ass once, and then you have something that with decent maintenance will last until you die.  Also traveling with a firearm in NJ is once again inconvenient, but also not that big of a deal.  Box it up, in the trunk, unloaded, in a separate container from the ammo.  Annoying?  Yes.  Less than a minute's worth of effort?  Also yes.

• This is only true if you never move, never get married/name change, etc.  Any change to any information on the card requires starting mostly from scratch.  It's not like a driver's license where you can submit a change of address form.  One time I moved from one apartment to another in the same building so my unit # changed (e.g. 123 Main Apt. 213 to 123 Main Street Apt. 215) and it required a whole new round of background checks, time off work, fees, etc.
• For transporting in a vehicle, yeah.  Relatively minor inconvenience.  It's the location restriction that is the problem.  You can't get a carry permit in NJ.  That vehicle transport is restricted only to transport a firearm between your home and the range, gunsmith, etc. where it is to be used.  That's it.  Sure, it's locked in your trunk, but stop to drive-thru Taco Bell for lunch on the way home?  Felony.  Stop for gas?  Felony.  If you believe that even after all the vetting and hoops you have to jump through in NJ that someone who qualifies still shouldn't be allowed to carry then cool.  But if you think carry should be allowed for supremely qualified individuals then it is a big deal.

[PaladinSolo]

35 minutes ago, Slug said:

• This is only true if you never move, never get married/name change, etc.  Any change to any information on the card requires starting mostly from scratch.  It's not like a driver's license where you can submit a change of address form.  One time I moved from one apartment to another in the same building so my unit # changed (e.g. 123 Main Apt. 213 to 123 Main Street Apt. 215) and it required a whole new round of background checks, time off work, fees, etc.
• For transporting in a vehicle, yeah.  Relatively minor inconvenience.  It's the location restriction that is the problem.  You can't get a carry permit in NJ.  That vehicle transport is restricted only to transport a firearm between your home and the range, gunsmith, etc. where it is to be used.  That's it.  Sure, it's locked in your trunk, but stop to drive-thru Taco Bell for lunch on the way home?  Felony.  Stop for gas?  Felony.  If you believe that even after all the vetting and hoops you have to jump through in NJ that someone who qualifies still shouldn't be allowed to carry then cool.  But if you think carry should be allowed for supremely qualified individuals then it is a big deal.

[Slug]

He asked!

[LazyPiranha]

1 hour ago, Slug said:

• This is only true if you never move, never get married/name change, etc.  Any change to any information on the card requires starting mostly from scratch.  It's not like a driver's license where you can submit a change of address form.  One time I moved from one apartment to another in the same building so my unit # changed (e.g. 123 Main Apt. 213 to 123 Main Street Apt. 215) and it required a whole new round of background checks, time off work, fees, etc.
• For transporting in a vehicle, yeah.  Relatively minor inconvenience.  It's the location restriction that is the problem.  You can't get a carry permit in NJ.  That vehicle transport is restricted only to transport a firearm between your home and the range, gunsmith, etc. where it is to be used.  That's it.  Sure, it's locked in your trunk, but stop to drive-thru Taco Bell for lunch on the way home?  Felony.  Stop for gas?  Felony.  If you believe that even after all the vetting and hoops you have to jump through in NJ that someone who qualifies still shouldn't be allowed to carry then cool.  But if you think carry should be allowed for supremely qualified individuals then it is a big deal.

 

That would be bad, except for the fact that the two things you've mentioned are in fact permissible deviations and would not be considered felonies.

 

Now yeah, if Taco Bell requires a 35 minute detour, then you might be in trouble, but if you're driving over a half an hour out of your way to eat Taco Bell, you deserve to be in jail regardless of firearms.

 

 

[Slug]

56 minutes ago, LazyPiranha said:

 

That would be bad, except for the fact that the two things you've mentioned are in fact permissible deviations and would not be considered felonies.

 

Now yeah, if Taco Bell requires a 35 minute detour, then you might be in trouble, but if you're driving over a half an hour out of your way to eat Taco Bell, you deserve to be in jail regardless of firearms.

 

You're right that there are supposed to be exemptions for reasonable deviations, but I've never heard of the deviation rules being applied in favor of a gun owner.  It may have happened, but I've never seen it.  In NJ you err on the side of caution.  If a cop sees a gun case in the back while you're getting your gas tank filled, your vehicle is getting searched and you're getting arrested.  No question.  Maybe you'll be successful fighting it?  But the costs to you will have already been incurred at that point (jail time, lost job, time, money, lawyers, etc.).  You're ruined.

 

And hey.  Taco Bell is the best.  

[SilentWorld]

In Canada the laws for restricted firearms (basically handguns and certain semi auto rifles) are the same as what you’re describing. Perhaps worse because AFAIK there is no similar concept as “permissible deviations” under the Canadian law. I think it’s great.

[LazyPiranha]

2 hours ago, Slug said:

You're right that there are supposed to be exemptions for reasonable deviations, but I've never heard of the deviation rules being applied in favor of a gun owner.  It may have happened, but I've never seen it.  In NJ you err on the side of caution.  If a cop sees a gun case in the back while you're getting your gas tank filled, your vehicle is getting searched and you're getting arrested.  No question.  Maybe you'll be successful fighting it?  But the costs to you will have already been incurred at that point (jail time, lost job, time, money, lawyers, etc.).  You're ruined.

 

And hey.  Taco Bell is the best.  

 

On the other side of the coin, you don't hear about unremarkable things because they are unremarkable.  A person who was arrested is far more likely to bitch about it after the fact compared to someone who the cop let go on with their day.  

[mclumber1]

2 hours ago, SilentWorld said:

In Canada the laws for restricted firearms (basically handguns and certain semi auto rifles) are the same as what you’re describing. Perhaps worse because AFAIK there is no similar concept as “permissible deviations” under the Canadian law. I think it’s great.

 

In Canada, you also don't undergo a background check every time you buy/transfer a firearm.  When you get your PAL card, you do undergo a background check though.  So Canada's system is actually easier from the firearm owner's perspective in respects.

[Slug]

52 minutes ago, LazyPiranha said:

 

On the other side of the coin, you don't hear about unremarkable things because they are unremarkable.  A person who was arrested is far more likely to bitch about it after the fact compared to someone who the cop let go on with their day.  

Very true.

[Guest]

Every time I hear complaints about how hard it is to get a gun or keep a gun in certain places I just shrug. It should be difficult.

[Jason]

SHALL

 

NOT

 

INFRINGE

[Slug]

12 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

Every time I hear complaints about how hard it is to get a gun or keep a gun in certain places I just shrug. It should be difficult.

My problem isn't necessarily how hard it is to obtain, but how restricted you are compared to most states even after you jump through all the extra hoops.  You'd think someone who can pass all those bars would be qualified by any reasonable measure.

[CastlevaniaNut18]

Even as a gun owner, I don't feel sympathy for gun owners who live in restrictive states. Gun ownership just doesn't seem that important and I'm all in favor of making it harder. 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Slug said:

My problem isn't necessarily how hard it is to obtain, but how restricted you are compared to most states even after you jump through all the extra hoops.  You'd think someone who can pass all those bars would be qualified by any reasonable measure.

I’m cool with those near constant reminders to not be irresponsible and the burden being on the individual to show they are still acting responsibly.

[Slug]

17 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I’m cool with those near constant reminders to not be irresponsible and the burden being on the individual to show they are still acting responsibly.

OK.

[skillzdadirecta]

39 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I’m cool with those near constant reminders to not be irresponsible and the burden being on the individual to show they are still acting responsibly.

You would think it would be a small price to pay given that it allows you to own a deadly weapon. My problem is that a lot of pro gun folks view guns as toys and not as deadly weapons.