New Jersey judge sucks

[greg334]

Wrong wrong wrong.

Right Right Right, learn constitutional law and the relationship of the states from the perspective of the founding fathers. There is a lot more to it than the NRA/freedom for everyone crowd speaks of.

A Well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Keep and bear. Shall not be infringed.

Oh boy for some reason it has been beaten into the ground.

It is infringed on by Kelo v New London.

It is infringed on by the 17th amendment and by federal courts and every elected official.

Keep and bear meaning on or about your person, or contained within property or vehicle under your direct control.

Well I don't see that defined in the 2nd amendment, however I do see it defined in state law - not all states define it that way however. Michigan for example forbids a person to keep a loaded firearm out of the control of the person it is registered to, meaning no glove box 38 specials allowed - that is a felony.

Shall not be infringed doesn't mean "except if the people of new Jersey change their minds".

Yes that is exactly what it means. The people of the state, which is supposed to be an autonomous country on its very own has the right to regulate the people by the will of the people. The militia part, if you know history is a state run thing more than it is an individual thing and if goes back to what people felt when we were a colony, New York was a separate 'country' from Rhode Island and the militia that New York has to defend itself was made up of people of that state sanctioned by the state directly.

What you seem to be failing to grasp with your interpretation is that the founding fathers did not believe in mob rule and our constitution is not worded in such a way as to indicate otherwise.

Nope I think I grasped it pretty good back in the history class in the 9th grade.

The founding fathers felt that the state gained its rights directly from the people, the people are the ones who got their rights from God and they, the people are the ones who determined their path, not the feds or the state without representation. IF one state didn't allow something, than it was representative of that state through the right of the people to make a law, not the right of the federal government to force any rights onto the state or restrict that state's rights.

The thing that you seem to be missing, and others for that matter is that the use of the 2nd amendment wasn't about the state but the federal government and the protection of the people. They, the founding fathers could not address issues within the states directly and worried about the same thing happening with the US as it did with England, a tyrannical government overseeing all the states and dictating to all of them with unseasonable laws and restrictions. The main reason why the SC overturned the direct taxation of the individual until the 16th amendment was passed and ratified. The 2nd amendment was to address the importance of the people to be diligent against the federal government becoming too big and powerful but not the state government. For that matter, to understand what it is all about the 10th is the most important of all the amendments, not the first or 2nd or 4th.

So back to the OP, the state of New Jersey has the right to regulate its people if you believe in the constitution as it was written and intended to operate.

I'm not a convicted felon but I have been arrested for having a gun in my car. That was in 2006, all charges dropped and records purged from the California court system.

Tell that to the cops who occasionally pull me over and wait for backup to arrive before they approach my leisure vehicle every single time.

I am only eligible to apply for permission to enter Canada as of November 2011. There is a mountain of paperwork and crap to go through and it will cost me an arm and a leg.

Australia will never let me visit for any reason.

This is why my van is registered to my corporation. I just don't need the hassle any more.

Well I can't figure that out, if you have been arrested but not adjudicated and purged, then why are you worried?

 

[layoutshooter]

"Well I can't figure that out, if you have been arrested but not adjudicated and purged, then why are you worried?"


Now just why in the world would ANYONE be worried about losing rights these days?

 

[greg334]

The sky is falling? Lost me there.

I guess.

I totally believe in property rights, no matter how stupid the owners are. They have a right to their property and their stupidity. Too bad we all have to deal with the result of that.

That's the great thing about our country, you see something wrong, you can change it. If you don't like what someone is doing to their property - buy it.

It is everyones RIGHT to destroy nature to the point where it can no longer function. Not there yet to be sure but we are sure working on it. I mean, geez, there is ALMOST 1% of S.E. Michigan's wetlands left intact. No valid reason for a land owner to want to protect whats left.

Hate to rain on your parade Joe but nature isn't static and neither is man. What was wet lands was once a lake or an ocean, what is a desert was a forest. We, man can't destroy the earth as much as we can't control the environment, so things just don't stay the same and never will.

We should be good stewards of what we own, but again it is the same thing as I said - absolute property rights matter over the rights of others to "enjoy" that property ... if you are for any government intervention into property ownership, then you can't stand on the side of the constitution and complain about other rights going away - it all is intertwined together. This means that my right to hunt on my property any time, to grow what I want and to build what I want are above the rights of others.

 

[layoutshooter]

I never said you could not do what you want. Willy nilly is fine.

Agreed, nothing is static. Can't hurt a thing. Everything is hunky dory. Not going to argue this. No point.

Glad I won't be around to see the results.

 

[zero3nine]

The logic you're using is basically this:

"THEY did THAT over THERE, so that means I can do THIS over HERE."

In my experience, nobody using that rationale can be reasoned with. It is this type of mob mentality which landed us in this predicament.

Good luck to you.

fired at you from my Droideka

 

[greg334]

Who you talking about?

 

[Poorboy]

That goes right to the point of the keystone cops in this case... failing to see that this citizen was exercising his constitutional rights, and the cop knee-jerk reacting to the words of a hysterical female.

To recap, the cop takes heresay evidence and uses his personal discretion to incorrectly interpret constitutional law and arrest the innocent man.

No matter what happens, this man will now have a felony arrest record. You can have convictions purged or sealed, but your arrest record is permanent. Do not believe anyone who tells you otherwise. Any time a cop runs this guys license plate it will display information that he has been arrested for a felony involving firearms.

Go ahead. Ask me how I know.

This guy is literally screwed for life. He can't ever go to Canada or Australia or a few dozen other countries. Think about what that means. A citizen of the united states cannot drive to Alaska. He has to fly or take a boat.

This stinks. Our government is completely out of control.

fired at you from my Droideka

And after the mother told the cops about what she construed as a suicide threat from her son and the Cops Didn't take the guns and put him somewhere to be observed and the son then Blows his brains out what then? What would you and a few others complain about then? Maybe try and make a point that the cops should have done something, even taking his guns right?