Direct Attack On Gun Owners, Hunters and Sportsmen Would Ban Popular American .22 Rifles! Would Turn Current Owners Into Felons - Up to TEN YEARS in Prison!
MAG BAN IS REALLY A GUN BAN!
Direct Attack On Gun Owners, Hunters and Sportsmen
Would Ban Popular American .22 Rifles!
Would Turn Current Owners Into Felons -
Up to TEN YEARS in Prison
No Grandfathering, No Amnesty
"Confiscate, Confiscate, Confiscate"
A2006 = GUN BAN
Anti-gun legislators' attempt to ban ammunition magazines over 10 rounds (A2006) is a lot more than "just" a magazine ban. It's also a gun ban that would outlaw some of the most popular .22 rifles in the United States, turn their owners into felons, and force them to abandon their property or go to jail for as long as ten years - essentially a confiscation.
Whether by stealth or stupidity, A2006 (scheduled to be heard in Assembly committee on Monday, March 3), would make the following change to existing law: "'Assault Firearm' means...A semi-automatic rifle with a fixed magazine capacity exceeding 15 10 rounds."
This change would flat-out ban many common and popular tube-fed .22 rifles, including the partial list of guns that would be banned at the bottom of this alert.
Those in possession of these popular guns would be turned into felons overnight for possession of so-called "assault" firearms - a second degree crime in New Jersey carrying up to ten years in prison, with a minimum mandatory sentence of 3-5 years, with no chance of parole.
A2006 contains no grandfathering to protect current owners, and no amnesty period or procedure for current owners who wish to comply (in ironic contradiction to the legislature's creation of a limited "assault" firearms amnesty period in 2013, which has since expired). Existing owners would be thrown to the wolves - forced to abandon their property or go to prison - a form of confiscation.
Although NJ's anti-gun legislators have long denied any intention to confiscate firearms, their true intentions were exposed last year in shocking "hot mic" comments between legislators after a gun control hearing, in which they stated their wish to "confiscate, confiscate, confiscate" firearms.
A2006 MAGAZINE BAN
Less hidden in A2006 than the gun ban, is its stated purpose: to ban magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. This is based on the naïve and false assumption that removing a particular type of tool from society will somehow make everyone safer.
Those bent on doing evil will not be stopped or deterred just because a particular tool becomes less available or unavailable. If box cutters could bring down the World Trade Center, does anyone really believe that banning box cutters will stop the next terrorist attack? The same is true of firearms - banning a particular tool will not deter someone who is determined to do evil.
Also, criminals and madmen don't follow magazine bans, or any other type of ban for that matter. Criminals laugh at laws that target hardware. Only law-abiding citizens are affected by hardware bans, because they're the only ones that follow them. The net effect is that the law-abiding are put at a disadvantage against the lawless. The only thing that criminals understand is severe punishment.
Even if a magic wand could be waved in the land of anti-gun fantasy and remove all 10+ round magazines from the planet, no one would be made any safer, because magazines can be changed very quickly. The theory that a magazine change provides an opportunity to "tackle" an assailant is unsound and unsupported by the weight of the evidence.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that police owe no duty to protect individual citizens from harm, which means that citizens are on their own in an emergency and cannot rely on 911. Yet rather than enhance the ability of citizens to defend themselves when an emergency or home invasion strikes, A2006 would instead tie their hands and put them at a disadvantage against criminals who will ignore the magazine ban.
Magazine bans are also completely arbitrary and their logic, if followed, have the potential to lead to a complete ban on all rounds. The idea that an eleventh round is somehow more lethal than the tenth is absurd, and the exact same logic could be applied to a second round in relation to the first, or even the first round itself.
The Constitutional right of self-defense is sacrosanct, and a magazine ban directly and significantly interferes with that right.
NOTE: A2777 (reasonable deviations in firearms transportation) has still not been posted online. We will have comment on that legislation when it becomes available.
PLEASE IMMEDIATELY TELL MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE TO DEFEAT THE A2006 GUN BAN AND MAGAZINE BAN!
Charles Mainor (Chair) (D31)
Gilbert L. Wilson (Vice Chair) (D5)
Joseph Cryan (D20)
Gregory P. McGuckin (R10)
Erik Peterson (R23)
Nancy J. Pinkin (D18)
David P. Rible (R30)
Shavonda E. Sumter (D35)
Feb 28, 2014