awa

Nothing from AWA today

We’ve been without power here for almost 24 hours when you read this, unless power is restored over night.  Not a problem fur is.

The wood stove is doing a fine job of keeping the house warm. Wife is unhappy because she’s cold but everybody else is in short sleeves.

Last night we had homemade pasta that I made with some fancy chicken dish. Only requirement was it had to cook on top of the stove. My lady solved lack of oven by using a Dutch oven.

Hopefully I’ll have power and post later today.

Koons v. Reynolds: NJ Kill Carry challenge

B.L.U.F. This case covers the challenge to the knee jerk response of NJ to the Bruen opinion. The NJ “Kill Carry” bill follows the lead of NY’s CCIA.


On 2022-12-22 a suite was filed in the district court of New Jersey challenging the bills put into effect after Bruen and after New York’s CCIA. It uses almost the same methods to make it almost impossible for the public to legally carry a firearm.

Using the standard places at random are “sensitive places” where a legal gun owner could be charged and found guilty just for walking on the wrong side of the road with a firearm. To understand just how bad New Jersey firearms law is consider this New Jersey law:

Dum-dum or body armor penetrating bullets. (1) Any person, other than a law enforcement officer or persons engaged in activities pursuant to subsection f. of N.J.S.2C:39-6, who knowingly has in his possession any hollow nose or dum-dum bullet, or (2) any person, other than a collector of firearms or ammunition as curios or relics as defined in Title 18, United States Code, section 921 (a) (13) and has in his possession a valid Collector of Curios and Relics License issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, who knowingly has in his possession any body armor breaching or penetrating ammunition, which means: (a) ammunition primarily designed for use in a handgun, and (b) which is comprised of a bullet whose core or jacket, if the jacket is thicker than.025 of an inch, is made of tungsten carbide, or hard bronze, or other material which is harder than a rating of 72 or greater on the Rockwell B. Hardness Scale, and (c) is therefore capable of breaching or penetrating body armor, is guilty of a crime of the fourth degree. For purposes of this section, a collector may possess not more than three examples of each distinctive variation of the ammunition described above. A distinctive variation includes a different head stamp, composition, design, or color.
https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2009/title-2c/2c-39/2c-39-3

If you read through the court cases it means that you are not allowed to use JHP rounds in your carry weapon. Yep, you aren’t allowed to use personal defense rounds but the cops are. Those rounds are designed for multiple purposes, one of which is to stop over penetration.

The question

Do subparts 12, 15, 17 and 24 of section 7(a) and subpart 1 of section 7(b) of A4769/S3214 violates the right to bear arms secured by the Second and Fourteenth Amendments?

  1. a publicly owned or leased library or museum; …
  2. a bar or restaurant where alcohol is served, and any other site or facility where alcohol is sold for consumption on the premises; …
  3. a privately or publicly owned and operated entertainment facility within this State, including but not limited to a theater, stadium, museum, arena, racetrack or other place where performances, concerts, exhibits, games or contests are held; … [and]
  4. private property, including but not limited to residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, institutional or undeveloped property, unless the owner has provided express consent or has posted a sign indicating that it is permissible to carry on the premises a concealed handgun with a valid and lawfully issued permit under N.J.S.2C:58-4, provided that nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to affect the authority to keep or carry a firearm established under subsection e. of N.J.S.2C:39-6[.]

KOONS v. REYNOLDS — Complaint

and;

  1. A person, other than a person lawfully carrying a firearm within the authorized scope of an exemption set forth in subsection a., c., or l. of N.J.S.2C:39-6, who is otherwise authorized under the law to carry or transport a firearm shall not do so while in a vehicle in New Jersey, unless the handgun is unloaded and contained in a closed and securely fastened case, gunbox, or locked unloaded in the trunk of the vehicle…

Id.

In short they are asking if the sensitive places limits and carry in a vehicle are constitutional. Unfortunately this is limiting and the law was likely written with severability in mind so that if one part is ruled unconstitutional the rest of the law will stand.

The Arguments

Read More

Tuesday Tunes

Back at the dawn of time, when I was at University, it was a very long walk from my dorm to central campus and a still longer walk back at the end of the day. Over a mile. At the time, a standard day was about five miles of walking. It got better once I got a bicycle but that didn’t happen till my Sophomore year.

This was back before Walkmen. There were transistor radios but I didn’t have one.

So I sang songs in my head as I walked the paths of campus.

I had to sing it a little faster but it was still good for a fair distence.

Recently I discovered this song. It explains why the poor dude was betrayed by his lover.

Arguments: Still not an “arm”

B.L.U.F. The last article was suppose to include this but turned into taxes aren’t infringements. I’m going to try and stay on topic with the state’s arguments about why certain things are not arms.


Bullets are not arms

This has been debunked so many times it isn’t even worth addressing. The Supreme Court has ruled that ammunition is considered “arms” under the meaning of the Second Amendment. Any ban of ammunition is an infringement and under Bruen triggers “history and tradition”.

Magazines are not arms

Read More

“Likes” and “Likey/Not Likey” on Post and Comments – UPDATED

Update

There are three methods for people that are not members of GunFreeZone to give feedback on normal articles.

  1. They can create a WordPress.org account and click the “like” button on a post. This attaches their wordpress avatar and name to the like.
  2. They can click the thumbs up button on a comment. This is completely anonymous.
  3. They can click the thumbs down button on a comment. This is completely anonymous.

I hope this clears up any confusion I created.

Original

I have noticed and a couple of readers have noticed that there are more thumbs down on the blog than theirthere use to be. This leads me and some of our readers to wonder Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

I’ll start with Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity You can replace “stupidity” with all sorts of other words but the gist stays the same.

First, when you use the like button at the bottom of a post you need to have a WordPress.org account and your handle and avatar are attached to that. So for example I notice when “OldNFO” likes my post. He made a decision not to become a paying member at the blog but continues to read and continues to give feedback whichwhat he can.

Thank you for still being a read OldNFO. Makes me feel good. There are a couple of other regular “Likers” of the same sort. Thank you to all of our readers.

So next we look at those thumbs up and thumbs down buttons. In the past people used them as an acknowledgement tool. You post a comment and I post a reply and instead of posting a reply to my reply you just click the “Likey” thumbs up button.

If you don’t agree but not enough you just leave it be. No thumbs up, no thumbs down.

If you disagree you will likely reply and a conversation takes place.

We almost never used the thumbs down button. As was observed.

Today there are many more people that read but don’t comment. So when they disagree with you they can’t reply, instead they give it a thumbs down.

So at first flush, I think that the increase in thumbs down is a direct result in us trying to monetize the blog.

Unfortunately, the thumbs up/thumbs down buttons are completely anonymous. There is code to make sure that they can’t be mass mashed but that is it.

So for the time being let’s just see where it takes us. Maybe we figure out something to let people do a one time comment or something like that. All it takes is a small bit of code… (That’s an inside joke for developers/coders)

Arguments: It isn’t within the scope of the Second Amendment

B.L.U.F. In the last post I described the leftist argument that Nuclear Weapons are outside of the scope of the Second Amendment. I submit that they are within the scope of the Second Amendment but that the Supreme Court’s current opinions put them outside the Scope.

This article covers the state attempting to claim that certain arms are not within the scope of the Second Amendment.


Let’s tax guns out of circulation!

Read More

Argument: It is not an “arm” under the Second Amendment?

B.L.U.F. An analysis/opinion of the State’s attempt to move certain arms out from the protection of the Second Amendment.


This is a long running argument from the anti-gun rights people. The gist is always of the “this modern thing didn’t exist in 1791 so it isn’t covered by the second amendment.” These same people are saying this on phones, computers, The Internet, which the firmly believe are covered under the first Amendment, even though those things would not have been known at the time of the founding.

The question is legitimate, so lets take it to an extreme.

Are Nuclear Weapons Protected Arms Under the Second Amendment?

Read More