Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Shaneen Allen to Avoid Prison--Atlantic County Prosecutor reverses his own decision
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RugersGR8" data-source="post: 2623006" data-attributes="member: 56"><p><strong>A leopard can never change it's spots and a JACKWAGON IS ALWAYS A JACKWAGON! I bet the N.J. Star and Obama are green with envy of Venezuelas United Socialist Party President Nicolas Maduro---read the last paragraph.</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2014/9/the-nj-star-ledger-advocates-mandatory-gun-turn-ins.aspx" target="_blank">http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2014/9/the-nj-star-ledger-advocates-mandatory-gun-turn-ins.aspx</a></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px">The N.J. Star-Ledger Advocates Mandatory Gun Turn-Ins</span></p><p>Posted on September 26, 2014</p><p></p><p>Echoing a desire repeatedly mentioned by President Obama, last week the New Jersey Star-Ledgers editorial board declared its support for Australian-style gun controls, most notably mandatory gun turn-ins. The comments come following the passage of A2895 in the New Jersey State Assembly, which would require the state to have a minimum number of voluntary gun turn-ins each year, using forfeiture funds and private donations. While conceding that their wish is unlikely to come true, the board insists that unless the voluntary turn-ins are made mandatory, dont expect it to make much of a difference.</p><p></p><p>The editorial board goes on to tout Australias other severe gun controls, such as the countrys registration and licensing laws. Specifically, the Star-Ledger approvingly cites Australias lack of respect for the right to self-defense, stating, Gun owners have to present a genuine reason to buy a weapon. A claim of self-defense isnt enough unless you have an occupational need to carry a gun. This view is at odds with the Supreme Courts Heller decision, which found that the Second Amendment protects firearm ownership for the core lawful purpose of self-defense. Further, it ignores data showing that the majority of American gun owners own firearms for personal safety reasons. </p><p></p><p>Credit the boards frankness, at least. Few gun control advocates in todays increasingly-media conscious age are willing to be so explicit about their views and goals.</p><p></p><p>The accuracy of the boards research, however, is another matter. The paper contends that Australias strict gun controls have led to a massive drop in violence. However, this isnt the conclusion reached by the Department of Justices National Institute of Justice in the run-up to the Obama administrations 2013 gun control push. In a memo that surveyed a variety of gun control measures, including the Australian regime, the author noted:</p><p></p><p>The Australia buyback appears to have had no effect on crime otherwise. One study (Leigh & Neill 2010) has proven confusing in that its abstract suggests that Australias gun buyback reduced firearm homicide rates by 80%, but the body of the report finds no effect. Others (Reuter & Mouzas 2003) have used the same data and also found no effect on crime although they also noted that mass shootings appear to have disappeared in Australia. A third study (Chapman et al 2006) using Australian data from 1979 to 2003 shows that the firearm homicide rate was already declining prior to the firearm reforms and that there is no evidence that the new legislation accelerated the declines. This remains true when data through 2007 are added to the analysis (conducted by G. Ridgeway on 1/3/2013 at NIJ).</p><p></p><p>Regardless of the misinformation in the editorial, the piece is useful as an unfiltered glimpse into the minds of gun control supporters. Gun control advocates will not be satisfied until Americans are forced to turn their firearms into the government. This viewpoint, shared so vividly by the Star-Ledger editorial board, also illustrates why gun owners must fight firearms registration and restrictions on private transfers. Such measures facilitate gun control activists ultimate goal of involuntary turn-ins/confiscation.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps coincidentally, the news this week suggests the Star-Ledger editorial board have a comrade in gun control, literally. On September 22, BBC reported that Venezuelas United Socialist Party President Nicolas Maduro will be spending $47 million on a gun turn-in initiative to help enforce the countrys stringent gun laws. Maduro is the decidedly undemocratic hand-picked successor to the notorious Hugo Chavez.</p><p></p><p></p><p>© 2014 National Rifle Association of America. Institute for Legislative Action. This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.</p><p>11250 Waples Mill Rd. Fairfax, VA 22030 1800-392-8683(VOTE)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RugersGR8, post: 2623006, member: 56"] [B]A leopard can never change it's spots and a JACKWAGON IS ALWAYS A JACKWAGON! I bet the N.J. Star and Obama are green with envy of Venezuelas United Socialist Party President Nicolas Maduro---read the last paragraph.[/B] [URL="http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2014/9/the-nj-star-ledger-advocates-mandatory-gun-turn-ins.aspx"]http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2014/9/the-nj-star-ledger-advocates-mandatory-gun-turn-ins.aspx[/URL] [SIZE=5]The N.J. Star-Ledger Advocates Mandatory Gun Turn-Ins[/SIZE] Posted on September 26, 2014 Echoing a desire repeatedly mentioned by President Obama, last week the New Jersey Star-Ledgers editorial board declared its support for Australian-style gun controls, most notably mandatory gun turn-ins. The comments come following the passage of A2895 in the New Jersey State Assembly, which would require the state to have a minimum number of voluntary gun turn-ins each year, using forfeiture funds and private donations. While conceding that their wish is unlikely to come true, the board insists that unless the voluntary turn-ins are made mandatory, dont expect it to make much of a difference. The editorial board goes on to tout Australias other severe gun controls, such as the countrys registration and licensing laws. Specifically, the Star-Ledger approvingly cites Australias lack of respect for the right to self-defense, stating, Gun owners have to present a genuine reason to buy a weapon. A claim of self-defense isnt enough unless you have an occupational need to carry a gun. This view is at odds with the Supreme Courts Heller decision, which found that the Second Amendment protects firearm ownership for the core lawful purpose of self-defense. Further, it ignores data showing that the majority of American gun owners own firearms for personal safety reasons. Credit the boards frankness, at least. Few gun control advocates in todays increasingly-media conscious age are willing to be so explicit about their views and goals. The accuracy of the boards research, however, is another matter. The paper contends that Australias strict gun controls have led to a massive drop in violence. However, this isnt the conclusion reached by the Department of Justices National Institute of Justice in the run-up to the Obama administrations 2013 gun control push. In a memo that surveyed a variety of gun control measures, including the Australian regime, the author noted: The Australia buyback appears to have had no effect on crime otherwise. One study (Leigh & Neill 2010) has proven confusing in that its abstract suggests that Australias gun buyback reduced firearm homicide rates by 80%, but the body of the report finds no effect. Others (Reuter & Mouzas 2003) have used the same data and also found no effect on crime although they also noted that mass shootings appear to have disappeared in Australia. A third study (Chapman et al 2006) using Australian data from 1979 to 2003 shows that the firearm homicide rate was already declining prior to the firearm reforms and that there is no evidence that the new legislation accelerated the declines. This remains true when data through 2007 are added to the analysis (conducted by G. Ridgeway on 1/3/2013 at NIJ). Regardless of the misinformation in the editorial, the piece is useful as an unfiltered glimpse into the minds of gun control supporters. Gun control advocates will not be satisfied until Americans are forced to turn their firearms into the government. This viewpoint, shared so vividly by the Star-Ledger editorial board, also illustrates why gun owners must fight firearms registration and restrictions on private transfers. Such measures facilitate gun control activists ultimate goal of involuntary turn-ins/confiscation. Perhaps coincidentally, the news this week suggests the Star-Ledger editorial board have a comrade in gun control, literally. On September 22, BBC reported that Venezuelas United Socialist Party President Nicolas Maduro will be spending $47 million on a gun turn-in initiative to help enforce the countrys stringent gun laws. Maduro is the decidedly undemocratic hand-picked successor to the notorious Hugo Chavez. © 2014 National Rifle Association of America. Institute for Legislative Action. This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes. 11250 Waples Mill Rd. Fairfax, VA 22030 1800-392-8683(VOTE) [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Shaneen Allen to Avoid Prison--Atlantic County Prosecutor reverses his own decision
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
