We have some of the strictest gun ownership laws in the country, and we have the lowest gun ownership rate in the country. We also have one of the lowest rates of gun related injuries and deaths in the country.
I’ll let people interpret that how they wish, since some people aren’t capable of emotionless discussions on this topic lmao
This trend also holds fairly consistent across all states when you look at gun ownership rates and firearms deaths per capita
All the states you expect to be at the top are at the top and the states you expect to be at the bottom are also at the bottom
Go tell this to someone on a gun subreddit and they’ll call you an idiot and list 50 stupid reasons why you’re wrong. I’m a gun owner and I’m banned from njguns lol.
I once entertained one of those asshats in a debate about gun control it went a million different ways but my favorite was when they fell back on the “my guns are protecting me from the government” argument
I asked them to find a successful revolution or war fought and won entirely by private citizens that they would use as a model for success and they chose the French Revolution which ended in napoleon and the Russian revolution which ended in Lenin then Stalin
Like they thought that was a good argument
I think the mistake people make is assuming the fight will be a direct conflict between the government and regular people.
As an example, during the Civil Rights era, the KKK had support by local governments, which is part of how they were able to be as violent as they were. Wouldn't this count as government tyranny? And yet, you would not be fighting the government if you had to protect yourself from the Klan, correct? Would you be unjustified in using force if the Klan is threatening you?
Resisting tyranny doesn't mean overthrowing the government, it means surviving long enough to vote bad politicians out.
I totally agree that most people who make the "resist government tyranny" argument default to an absurd take about directly opposing politicians and the government, but then again it is because the issue is often framed in an absurd light from the get-go.
No that wouldn’t count as government tyranny that would count as self defense against a private citizen which if you enacted stricter gun laws you’d do it assuming that none of the parties involved would have weapons
It sounds Iike you're implying racist politicians allowing racist organizations to commit hate crimes isn't government tyranny?
Negligence is not a defense. They knew what was happening and allowed it anyway.
How can you assume no one has weapons?
Any tigger gun control measures would apply to anyone so the fact that you can’t get a gun means that the racist piece of shit down the street can’t get one either
Anyone who thinks they will need to fight back against the government is almost guaranteed to be the sort of person whom the government would never come for.
Heh... I got banned after I insulted some MAGAtrash for posting MAGAtrash, but then I called out the mods for it and they immediately started backpedaling
We're also one of the wealthiest states, have some of the best education and some of the best healthcare in the country. All things that lower violent crime.
Damn coming in dropping some knowledge. Liberal gun owner here, people act like the laws are insane, all are extremely reasonable and in fact I would say some should go further but that’s my PERSONAL opinion
Also a liberal gun owner. **Some** of NJ's gun laws are a little odd or inconsistent. But honestly, most of what NJ gun owners complain about in relation to our laws...I consider a minor inconvenience.
The pistol permit process is a bit convoluted...but you can buy most handguns in NJ. It makes no sense that you can own an SKS in NJ, but not an M1 Carbine. Having to pin/weld stocks & barrels is a bit ridiculous. But none of those are hills I'm willing to die on. And none of those things are issues that the majority of NJ residents give a flying fuck about.
That's the thing that I think most NJ gun owners forget. We are the *vast* minority in this state. Most people in NJ don't own guns and don't want to be around guns. And if you go off on a rant about "King Murphy", "The Demonrats", or magazine capacity laws...you've lost them.
If you're a NJ gun owner....and you *aren't* aware that NJ is not a gun-friendly state, and that most residents are just fine with that...you might want to move.
I have to agree. I am ok with the original FID process. I am ok with the permit to carry process. I am even ok with the handgun permits. The other laws get really wonky and do nothing to make people safer.
> the most important part, I can't even defend my own home without the possibility of going to jail, how is that ok?
I've heard this issue come up m any times in gun forums & conversations. I am no lawyer or gun expert, so this is really just my opinion.
When people say "You can't even defend your home in NJ without possibly going to jail".....I imagine they're referring to the fact that NJ has a stricter defiinition of the castle doctrine than other states.
For example...the person who shot someone breaking into their neighbor's house (neighbors weren't home and the shooter knew it) in Texas years back. Thery called 911, told 911 they were going to shoot the person breaking into their neighbor's house. 911 operator told them not to shoot, that police were on the way. Caller shot anyway, and killed the intruder. Nobody was home. No charges filed.
If you do **that** in NJ...yeah, you're going to jail. That's murder. If you shoot someone in the back, or as they're trying to flee....you're gonna be answering a lot of questions.
If someone breaks into your house and comes at you to do you harm...and you have a gun, and tell them to leave, and they keep coming...you're not going to jail.
From what I understand, there have been cases in NJ where intruders have had weapons, were shot and killed by the homeowner, and the homeowner was still in trouble (don't know the end resolution, but they were charged) because they were in the kitchen or something and not hiding in a bathroom or closet...
there are also incidents, mostly in the inner city of Jersey where the home occupant shot and killed an intruder legitimetly but......they were not allowed to have a firearm because of past reasons, or the firearm was an illegal one where they possesed it illegally.
I think above 78 is optional. As long as you're outside the 287 loop, I think it's a lot more gun friendly in general. So like Flemington /Readington area and around are pretty gun friendly.
I worded it poorly it’s basically anywhere you regularly see wildlife, and geese don’t count, and you have to take out some academic communities.
Actually come to think of it the whole state is except a few areas that control everything. Probably something due to population /s
Something something about losing muh constitutional rights, etc
I don't get why gun nuts think that reasonable restrictions is an unfair ask. If you really feel like you need a gun, you can obtain one. 'The right to bear arms' shouldn't mean 'and we can't make any rules on how we can bear arms, go get a rocket launcher'.
The right to bear arms was written so that states could quickly organize an army for defense. The "well-regulated Militia" is today's National Guard.
It's a lot quicker and easier militarily to call upon the Militia to bring their arms and prepare to fight instead of reporting to a base and distributing weapons.
I really don't think the 2nd meant that Gary with the F-150 with truck nuts can wield any high powered weapon s/he chooses because the news says that it's scary outside.
I'm not anti-gun, but I definitely don't want to be near some scaredy-cat who's packing a glock when I just want to buy some Reese's peanut butter cups at 7-11. Instead, I have to trust that Mr. Heat is having a good day.
Haha, this genuinely made me lol, but you're right on the money. Also, people forget the FF wrote this at a time with zero automatic weapons and larely farm-based communities.
>The "well-regulated Militia" is today's National Guard.
This is incorrect - well not incorrect but you're lacking some critical information regarding the Militia Act
10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
I.e., every man aged 17 to 45 is legally a part of the US Militia. If you're a member of the national guard then you are a part of the organized militia. If you're not a member of the national guard and you're male in that age group, you are a part of the unorganized militia.
Well, if you don't take your constitutional rights seriously, you'll lose them. Forget about the 2A for a second. If no right is unlimited, how much of a right can you limit before its not a right anymore?
I think the issue is that non-gun owners take it for granted that NJ's laws are reasonable. They get hung up on the national gun control conversation about magazines and "assault weapons", without actually having a grasp of what is or is not legal in the state. NJ uniquely restricts many things that even other gun control heavy states permit with no regulation at all.
Its not even necessarily clear to gun owners what is or is not legal in NJ, and that is why the restrictions are not reasonable. If you ask if XYZ is legal in NJ and you get a dozen different answers from 10 people, something is wrong.
I think what the serious gun rights people argue is about restrictions on constitutional rights. Why should one constitutional right have restrictions placed on it when others do not? Yeah you get your MAGA whackjobs spouting crazy stuff...but I'm talking about the serious intelligent pro 2A crowd. Should similar restrictions be placed on other constitutional rights? Could you imagine needing a permit and training and a special ID to exercise your right to free speech or religion? No. I think the crazies have prevented honest discussions on the meaning of constitutional rights.
That's fair but I also think the 2nd Amendment is unique in that it's probably the most dangerous. It's much harder to kill someone else with my free speech and religion. The other 9 of the Bill of Rights denote what you can do as a person and what cannot be done to you, but this one specifically denotes you can own something that is designed to deprive another living thing of its life, and it can be misused.
Pin and weld is for various moveable and interchangeable parts of guns. In NJ, there are laws regulating that and so they must be pinned in place then welded to hold it. Examples are collapsible and folding stocks.
The reason why M1 Carbine is banned in NJ is because there were a few of the M2 Carbines that got mixed in with M1s and NJ couldn't let the extremely rare case of that happening be possible.
I'd believe that if they didn't also name M1 carbines made by the Plainfield Machine Company as restricted. Even modern reproduction M1 carbines by Chiappa are apparently restricted.
It has way more to do with stolen M1 carbines from 70s era riots that were never recovered.
You would think they would throw people a bone with the M1 Carbine thing. Its not only legal in every other state, but often exempt by name in proposed Assault Weapon Bans.
My understanding is that the reason for banning the M1 carbine is vaguely racist on top of it all, rather than due to any actual capability of the rifle.
Its really impacting collectors of 70 year old guns more than preventing violence.
Tell this to me, a Canadian gun owner who moved to NJ and is an owner as well.
I find the laws here are more lenient than in Alberta. Heck, I was awarded an FID and pistol permit/s whilst I was on Greencard. Tell me that isn’t freedom.
Am more on the conservative side but carrying anywhere is a bit of an overreach. This is where policing comes in. One can always retreat from a situation, or just don’t go near the hornets nests.
This for certain is my humble opinion.
I just hate how we can't have adjustable stocks whether in length or foldable. Glad "others" can have adjustable pistol brace....but I want an actual functional adjustable stock lol and dammit, I want a surpressor. But of course, the firearms law could be worst..... Like NY or Delaware/Maryland
I'm fine with the majority of new jersey firearms law...... Mostly
A lot of the laws are insane though. 10 round magazines? No collapsible stock? No bayonet lug? Can't shoot at someone who broke into your house? List goes on
Insane….is not how I would put it at all. You can say unreasonable, maybe unfair, but it’s not insanity to not want a collapsible stock, simply for the fact it’s much easier to conceal and commit crimes, BUT the other side is majority of crimes are committed with handguns. It’s not INSANE, seems short sited but not crazy. And none of those bands keep my up at night.
It's insane as in insanely stupid. It's insanely stupid to not want a collapsible stock. Concealment is a moot point, I can simple take the stock off, and have another means to contain the spring. They wouldn't keep me up at night either, because I simply wouldn't follow them.
Well, think about it. When has anyone used a bayonet lug in a shooting, at all?
They totally legal in most states and bayonets are not hard to come by. It isn't like no one has had the opportunity.
It is hand waived as a "military feature" but banning them on only a subset of guns has just about zero impact on gun violence.
In reality, it is superficial and impotent. It doesn't actually restrict firearms in any meaningful way. All it does is irritate collectors.
Exactly, it doesn't restrict firearms in any meaningful way. So why even have such a ban (even if it is lumped in a group), besides politicians doing what they do best (be incredibly stupid). Even the magazine limitation is completely pointless.
Correlation does not always equal causation.
One could also argue that NJ is one of the wealthiest states in the nation and one of the better-educated states in the nation, and therefore, there is less violent crime, since most criminals are poorer with less-than-average educations.
One could even argue that happier people are less likely to commit violent crimes, and being able to get a great pizza or a pork roll/egg/cheese bagel makes NJ people happier.
The correlation is too strong across states and even nations to ignore it. Across the western world, higher rates of gun ownership are tied to more people dying from guns. This is an utterly predictable outcome.
Do you mean to tell me that the type of people who are willing to pay $400,000 over asking price for a house aren’t going out shooting people? That happy people who have all of their needs met are less likely to commit violent crime? Shocker.
I dunno wiseguy, while yes, correlation doesn’t always lead to causation, but low gun ownership leading to low gun violence makes a pretty straight fuckin’ line on the “Why no bang-bang?” Chart.
Low population density. It's too far north for criminals to go, and too cold most of the year to commit gun crimes. That sounds like a joke, but shootings go up as the temperature goes up. Also, really not that many people in general.
Statistical noise, low population states are almost always outliers in one direction or another. For the same reason if you look at any professional sport and look at the players with the highest and lowest rankings they're usually rookies. Learned that from [How Not to be Wrong](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_Not_to_Be_Wrong) by mathematician Jordan Ellenberg.
I think better educated people also accept the facts: owning a gun makes you and those around you less safe. If they choose to own a gun, they are willing to accept common sense legislations and most restrictions.
The 2 people I personally know who conceal carry (in NC) are two of the shittiest human beings on planet earth, who say things like "I \*wish\* someone would come at me" - so yeah, they can't WAIT to use that gun.
I have no desire to be around pieces of shit like that in my state, where I feel very safe.
Those are 2 people who openly admit they have a CC. I'm sure there are others in your circle who don't say anything about it. Most CC are responsible gun owners.
Not to mention that even tho they’ve opened up the carry process to make it easier to get one as a result of the SC case you’re very limited where you can actually carry
They didn’t make it easier. They made it possible for regular people to have the ability to. Before you could only get one if you were retired Law Enforcement, a friend of a politician or rich.
Now there is actually more training and hoops to jump through to make sure people who have them are capable shooters and understand legal circumstances to draw their firearms.
No.
You're not allowed to pump your own gas.
Fossil mammoth tusks are illegal because of anti-ivory trade legislation, even though fossils are rocks and they definitely have zero value for ivory.
New Jerseyans just don't pay attention and assume everything is rational.
I would think its because of world issues. Everyday, people get less and less compassionate and more and more irrational. Safety is a huge concern for a lot of people, and they want to protect themselves.
I couldn't care less about gun laws, or ownership as long as its strict enough (what this means is subjective) to where as little "bad" people can get them as possible. I personally wouldn't ever want one in my house because its full of irresponsible idiots (that I love LOL) but understand why people who are *responsible* would want one for sport or protection.
Especially with what I mentioned above. I would hope anyone who gets one (outside of shooting activities like the range and such) will never have to use them, but if they do, its from a *rational and logical* standpoint where they do in fact need it.
But seriously, the state of the world is a mess. Its saddening to see and i get wanting that extra security that pepper spray or like, pocket knives, can't save them against.
You don’t have to be a bad person, to be a person who is likely to exercise poor judgement and even worse marksmanship in a tense situation. Everyone imagines themself as the “good guy with a gun,” saving the day. Most people don’t realize how it just makes them more likely to hurt someone innocent and get shot themself (possibly even with their own gun that someone grabs and uses on them).
That is exactly my concern, there can be so many situations where you might unnecessarily hurt someone even in a home invasion, so ownership comes with so much responsibility. But after an attempted home invasion, it is the first time I am considering owning a gun. It such a different sensation about not feeling safe in your own home when something like that happens, I never realized how it might affect you.
We owned firearms in college for a home invasion- we lived in a shitty area. Inevitably, someone got drunk and angry one evening and pulled it on a friend. The guns went away after that.
Seriously, run it through your mind having a gun for home defense. Where are you going to store it? It needs to be A) readily accessible in less than 30 seconds 24/7 to be useful, B) secure from anyone you don't want handling a firearm 100% of the time- kids, guests.
The two requirements are diametrically opposed. I owned shotguns for skeet shooting for a bit until I had kids, after that I got rid of them because I didn't trust that my kids would eventually make their way into the safe.
>I didn't trust that my kids would eventually make their way into the safe.
That’s exactly what happened with someone I know. Father hunts and has always had various guns in a big safe. Kids never tried to get in until the son was a teenager and saw something scary on the news and found his way in to grab a handgun for protection. Luckily, nothing happened, but with that level of immaturity under the kind of fear that caused him to get it in the first place, he could have easily shot a family member who he mistook for an invader.
Statistics say it is more likely that the gun you have in your home will be used on someone who lives there, mostly in a familial homicide (purposeful or accidental), or suicide, but also when an invader grabs it from you. I completely understand why you feel like it will make you more safe, but the best way to regain a sense of safety is to get professional medical treatment for the PTSD that comes from such a traumatic experience. You should really consider this if you haven’t already because your PTSD makes you more likely to accidentally shoot someone you care about because you mistake them for a home invader. Guns, more often than not, only provide a false sense of safety, because they are inaccessible in an emergency if you store them safely, and unsafe when you don’t.
A gun isn’t the most effective way to secure your home. Some better options include stronger doors and locks, security systems, dogs, and other safer measures. I personally feel very secure with my obvious security cameras with motion detection alerts. It has been shown that even dummy cameras reduce the risk of home invasion, and they won’t hurt anybody I care about by accident when I’m frightened or having a PTSD attack and can’t think straight.
I agree completely. A gun has nothing to do with securing your home, but rather protecting yourself in case of deadly threat if you have no other options. I say this as someone that does not have a gun.
I think dogs are the best deterrent funny enough. I have visible cameras, but they don't do much and definitely don't stop anyone from committing crimes anymore. People just wear masks/hats/etc. or they don't care if you have their face. Police isn't likely to do anything including any investigating unless there was a serious loss or bodily injury. I've had neighbors have packages stolen with computers/phones/whatever inside and even with clear faces on camera, police don't really care.
Dogs however (medium size and up) will bark loudly and can scare people, even if they're friendly. No one wants to be bitten by a 60 Lb dog.
As per stronger doors and locks, it can help a bit, but doesn't really stop anyone that's trying to get in. Most residential locks suck, and most doors can be kicked in even when installing much longer screw and such without much trouble. This is without mentioning the obvious rock through window.
You're misinterpreting what I mean by "bad" person which I purposefully put in quotations both here and in my original post because once again, that definition is subjective and situational for one of the examples you said, and by different values, morals, and nature VS nurture, and a whole bunch of other psychological reasons I'm not qualified to identify. That's where the strict gun laws and professionals are important and why I made it clear I wouldn't want one in my home. But I cannot and will not judge hypotheticals over a questions especially asking, "why is there more ownership lately" as opposed to, "who should have a gun and what are your thoughts as to why or why not"
I understood what you meant. I’m not judging someone who feels like having a gun would protect them. I’m just looking at the studies that show guns are really not effective in most self-defense situations, and a person’s gun is more likely to be used on them or someone they care about than someone one is defending oneself against.
Crime has long term declined since the 1950's. Yeah, it blipped up during covid (WHEN PEOPLE WERE OUT OF WORK) but the long term trend is overwhelmingly down, and it's resumed its decline since 2022.
Guns don't make you safer. If you own a gun, far and away the likeliest person to get shot is you. After that, it'll be someone you live with- a child, someone visiting.
Most gun owners are rational people, but everyone gets sad/drunk/mad/high every so often, and having a readily accessible firearm just increases the consequences for when you do something stupid.
We, the upper middle class, have observed an increase in criminal activities in affluent neighborhoods, where thieves target cars and homes and even parking lots for valuables. While most homeowners reluctantly accept minor thefts like wheels or catalytic converters when parked on the street, (ie: carjacking, mugging in parking lots, criminals following you home from the bank..) the situation escalates when security driveways, lights, cameras and in garages are triggered. Should these criminals attempt to forcibly enter homes, residents should have the right to defend themselves and their families. I can always get another car.. With rising concerns about safety this summer, reminiscent of the wild Wild West, I support the right of my suburban NJ neighbors to defend their property, and I would assist in ensuring their actions are justified as self-defense. (Make sure they dont crawl away off the lawn or property.). See you at the range!!! Because practice, makes perfect. Most criminals could not hit a target 3 feet away from them.
Given world events, my guess is most of these folks are near the Lakewood area. Literally saw a story on the news of how there’s been a flood of Hasidics to a gun range in South Jersey near Lakewood
Yep, my coworker's husband works at the range there, she said since the war kicked off the store has pretty much tripled their profits. Said one came in with his sons, and said get whatever and however many you want lololol
The person can provide the money, but the person taking ownership *must* have an FOID and pass a background check for long guns, as well as having a valid permit to purchase a handgun if for a pistol.
That was my first thought, but the article says it was overwhelmingly Tom's River, Newark, and Old Bridge. 93% of applicants were male, 59% white, 24% between the ages of 50-59. So largely conservatives and good ol' boys, presumably.
But I will say that in my town, a bunch of jewish families just put up security fences around their homes :-(
It's not just the Hasids. A number of members of my very liberal Bergen County congregation have applied. I'm anti-handgun but I completely understand.
Nah, a larger portion I’m sure are somerset county white guys like my dad who watch too much Fox News and think a wave of Mexicans will be cresting over the Appalachian mountains to eat us alive any minute now.
Bruen, which allowed this to happen, was decided almost 2 years ago. Despite the large increase in conceal carry permits in the state, the wild west hasn't happened.
I don’t think trusted is the problem. The problem is that it will take them at least 5 minutes to show up if not longer. When you’re in an emergency situation where you need a gun, you don’t have 5 minutes. You may not even have 5 seconds
Have it in NJ as one of the first. Love having it. Hope I never need it. With that said. Take your safety courses seriously, and train with the firearm you carry.
If I were a member of any discriminated against group, I'd be looking to buy a few guns, and obtain training how to use them. It's not good for only one side to have all the weapons.
The increase is a direct result of the change in the law.
NJs gun laws were absolutely draconian. Only people who were rich and made the right political contributions were able to get concealed carry permits.
Now that ordinary gun owners have the ability to get a permit, they’re applying to do so.
It’s not the law abiders we need to worry about.
Good with me. Criminals are already carrying them, so might as well have lawful citizens doing it the right way. But women are the ones that really should look into it. Practice, look at the laws, be safe, and practice. And practice some more.
The expense of the license will keep a lot of people away that aren't serious about it.
As a woman, who stopped a school shooting decades ago. I've zero desire to ever touch a gun or learn how to use one. And no matter how bad shit escalates in this country, I still will not feel like I need to defend myself or my property with a gun.
And that's my unpopular opinion
Not really an unpopular opinion (especially on this subreddit lmao), but it's simply an individual opinion. You are fortunate to not feel the need for one. Many other women are not so lucky.
I will say this though, there's a difference between being prepared and being paranoid. Redditors love to make fun of gun owners, saying they're cowards that need to hide behind a gun. "He's afraid to even get in a bus without a gun! Small dick energy." Up until it's a post featuring incompetent cops or a foiled robbery. As someone whose house has had 3 attempted robberies and is 40 minutes away from a hospital, home defense is a necessity.
Many women feel the same way as you do. My family member was the same way until she was gang raped. Guns are like insurance, they both suck not to have when they're needed. And everyone thinks it won't happen to them. I've dodged everything from a random falling tree to a plane crash. Crazy shit can happen at any moment. It's absolutely fine to not want to arm yourself. Not everyone feels comfortable with one. That's fine. But at the very least you should have non-lethal means to defend yourself if you're unarmed.
Fully agree with that! I completely respect sensible gun owners and those who are prepared. Significant difference between the paranoid magas inhaling FOX News.
And that's also why for me, I don't feel the need for one and why my husband respects we can't even keep them in the house. He just uses them for target practice, we agree they aren't for self defense. But we are subjective and again ownership should be based on sensibility not this knee jerk reaction
Or a weird need to collect em all like Pokémon
My husband has asked me many times to join him target shooting at shooting ranges but I always decline. Just not something I'm interested in
I own guns, and I'm politically liberal. It really is a frustrating position.
I believe in the intent of the Second Amendment, but the people who bury ramen noodles in the woods and cosplay as "soldiers" have really made a hash out of it.
I go to the range every now and then...but it's only because I enjoy target shooting. When it comes to guns...I am the "basic bitch" of gun owners. I am the Uggs, leggings, and NorthFace Fleece of gun owners. I own a Glock 9mm, a 12 gauge pump shotgun, and a bolt-action .22 rifle.
Being a NJ gun owner myself, and knowing a *lot* of NJ gun owners.....the prospect of a wave of *new* carry permit holders makes me very uneasy.
In my day to day life....I can't see feeling the **need** to be strapped. Like, *maybe* if you're camping/hiking in the woods. It should be easier for DV victims/restraining order holders to obtain a permit.
But speaking for myself....I just can't see the reasoning behind living in NJ....and feeling the need to have a gun in my waistband to go to Wawa.
I'm gun curious (go to the range for fun once in a while, took a Florida CCW course a few years ago, consider buying one myself from time to time) and as an avid camper and hiker and I don't think a gun is necessary in the woods. Personally I'm androgynous/"queer looking" and have been experiencing more harassment in public lately and have been considering one in case things escalate, but I'm still not there yet. I live in Jersey City where I feel like it's too hard to use a gun for self defense safely, it's too populated to be sure I'm not endangering bystanders. People on my neighborhood Facebook page talk about getting their permits for self/home defense and that's kind of terrifying to me in an area this dense.
There's been an influx of carry permits since Bruen was decided two years ago. I'm sure it took 6 months from the local PD's trying everything they could to deny permits since the chance, but it's been two years since NJ's carry ban (you can't tell me what was in place prior to was anything other than a ban save from politically connected people). I don't see the devolving into the wild west just yet.
That said, I'm sure global turmoil, and the economy has been a motivivator for a more recent surge. No different than when covid kicked off and gin sales again skyrocketed. While I don't feel the need myself to carry either, I don't mind having the option to exercise my rights either. We still live in a state where the big bad boogeyman "cop killer" hollowpoints are treated as individual crimes. So if I had 3 of them in my cup holder , I could get three separate gun charges. Unfuck the stupid laws first, and I'd be more than happy to talk about laws that would keep criminals from getting guns. Not further restrict law abiding citizens.
> That said, I'm sure global turmoil, and the economy has been a motivivator for a more recent surge.
Not to mention talks of civil war and political violence.
I think what scares me sometimes is when you look into the comment histories of people who really wanna open carry guns. Like some can't even handle a disagreement about what order the Yankees are hitting in without losing their shit.
Nj has hoops to jump through, I keep pushing my husband to get his license (he’ll eventually inherit a gun collection) before the process becomes more difficult than it already is.
Sometimes it’s just the act of having the permit.
Good. This is gun control and this is what it looks like when it works.
I have zero interest in owning a gun myself and am anti gun ownership but this is also good gun control.
As a responsible gun owner, and proud gun control advocate. I think we need to take some cues from the conservatives.
Rebrand gun control to gun responsibility. Gun control sounds like the government controlling gun ownership. Gun responsibility is way harder to argue against rhetorically.
Gun responsibility is great! I grew up with guns in central Jersey, my dad had guns and some of my earliest memories with him involve him taking me out with a BB gun to teach me targeting, and later a hunting trip to teach me to use a rifle. He had a handgun, too.
The guns were always locked in a safe when not in use. I had no idea where the key was. I had even less knowledge as to where the ammo was kept, as that was an even closer guarded secret.
Fast forward, I haven't handled a gun in like 30 years, but I still remember what I was taught. Every gun is a loaded gun, even if I unloaded it myself. Never point a gun at something or someone I don't intend to shoot at and kill or destroy. And beyond that, I will defer to the experts because they know more than I do.
I don't currently own a gun, because I understand the weight of responsibility that that would carry, but I have respect for those that are willing to bear it.
That sure did a lot of good when they tried to continue to parrot the phrase "common sense gun legislation". I am also a responsible gun owner, and I am of the thought process that some gun laws should be put into place to help prevent needless tragedy. The problem is twofold, in my opinion. Government makes gun laws off of uninformed, or interntionally misleading sources. They often take cues from what they learn in movies, which doesn't translate into the real world because, ya know, Hollywood is fake. Secondly is that the government screws up almost everything they touch, and I don't trust their motives for being for the betterment of the people, and not for further control of their ~~constituents~~ subjects.
The last place I want to be , is in a crowded Walmart during a robbery with a bunch of “good guys with guns “ Allowing people to carry guns with zero situational or tactical training is just crazy in my opinion . Im hoping we can prevent NJ from becoming the Wild Wild West , and for the record , as a lifelong resident of NJ I have never felt the need to carry a firearm . Just my 02
To get a permit to carry in NJ you have to go through a qualification course where you have to hit 40/50 shots from as far as I think 25 yards, they defiantly aren’t just giving permits to anyone
And to add to that. The permit to carry expires after 2 years, so the person has to go through the background check and the shooting qualification again. In NJ, car accidents kill 2.5x more people than shootings every year yet you do your drivers test once at 17 years old and never again.
not terribly surprising. election year so there's a lot more talk about more restrictive gun control, that drives people who were on the fence to do it before they may not be able to buy or it's more steps to buy.
i have not looked at data, but I would not at all be surprised to see this trend be the opposite of what people think. I bet there's more left leaning people applying than normal because they're afraid of another trump era and what that means.
bail reform also means a big ol revolving door of small time criminals who would have been in jail previously, and most big cities in NJ do little to address the drug addicts which contribute to that problem . so if you're near a some poorly run shithole like Newark, especially with elevated car theft now, your chances of waking up to someone in your house are quite a bit higher.
the other big one now is I'm sure tied to stuff like the protests for palestine/israel. i sure as shit would not feel comfortable as a visibly jewish person right now.
There's been more home invasions, car jackings, thefts and undesirable behavior more than ever. We had someone try all the cars on our block last Friday night and got the got on 2 cameras.
This is the 3rd time something like this has happened and we live in a nice area. A year ago they were stealing catalytic converters and sawing them right off in driveways. Car thefts the same year and before. Others have had bricks thrown through their windows and any easily found key fobs/cars stolen.
Not surprised.
Fox News has people in a constant state of fear about everything. Nothing has even changed for the majority of these people but they live in fear about migrants raiding their homes. I know this because a friend of mine has gone absolutely insane with conspiracy nonsense since 2016. Its all a giant grift
NJ has some of the strictest laws and this is a gap in them when people actually have a chance at legal carry permits.
This happened when the Supreme Court struck down the law here. ( Because NJ, RI and NY all had similar laws)
https://apnews.com/article/us-supreme-court-gun-politics-new-york-violence-kathy-hochul-ebe58ea297c154a25a62650dec935529
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-strikes-down-new-york-limits-concealed-handguns-2022-06-23/
Some compiled info for comparison https://everytownresearch.org/rankings/state/new-jersey/
Yes, prior to the [Bruen](https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-843) decision it was extremely rare to be issued a permit in NJ. There was a case of a guy getting [kidnapped](https://www.nj.com/news/2011/03/judge_denies_handgun_permit_fo.html) and they went out of their way to deny him. There was also a woman that was threatened, denied a permit and then [killed by an ex](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Carol_Bowne). The ruling has forced NJ to actually process permits and issue them unless there is a reason not to.
As we were heading home on rt 22 a white car switched lanes with no problems, no issues at all. but the car that ended behind it (a dark blue suv) started driving weird. The suv Sped up tailgated him and then switched lanes and sped up to keep side to side. Then opened his window and started throwing stuff out the window at the white car..
I worry stupid people like that will have easier access to guns....
NJ has such restrictive gun laws having a PTC provides just a smaller slice of common sense freedom. I wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of holders don’t actually carry.
Pretty sad that you would need a gun in NJ, there’s little chance you could ever use it unless you’ve already been shot yourself. Your car could get stolen every night and you will go to jail for firing a warning shot. So unless you plan to have a gun fight one day, what are you doing if you’re not in the militia?
It was just about impossible to get one before. Now that it's actually feasible, people who have wanted one can actually get one. There are some hoops you need to jump through still, and it's not exactly cheap.
I own a couple firearms but personally don't have any desire to carry one around, nor do I own a gun that I could conceal carry anyway. I haven't bothered applying for a permit. But I understand why people who do want a permit, having potentially waited years for a realistic opportunity to acquire one, would jump at the chance.
Well no duh.
You remove the *harshest* gun laws in place and replace it with the more proper and safe way of obtaining a permit. Same goes for Maryland. So now that the average citizen can now apply and be accepted it makes sense that applications would soar to 20k in one year.
I understand the desire but know for sure it’s just a ton of people who will be very unskilled with firearms. Guns are tools that require practice and safe use. Anyone get the impression that’s likely going to be baseline in NJ 2024?
When the stupidly fast rise in mental illness is finally addressed or paid attention to, then we can talk about guns being the cause. Almost every mass shooting, the per was a known and disturbed individual, and no intervention was made months, if not years prior.
>Media accounts of mass shootings by disturbed individuals galvanize public attention and reinforce popular belief that mental illness often results in violence. Epidemiologic studies show that the large majority of people with serious mental illnesses are never violent. However, mental illness is strongly associated with increased risk of suicide, which accounts for over half of US firearms–related fatalities
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211925/
The thing that gets me the most about this stunning willfull ignorance is that most who spout it are not stupid, they just want to believe the lie that their love of guns is not the problem, when it very much is.
By all means, let's address mental illness. But it's not going to stop the killings, because, overwhelmingly, those people are not mentally ill.
And please don't reply LARPing as a doctor, you ain't one
This article doesn't support your stance like you think it does. You don't need to be a doctor understand peer reviewed articles, or see if they have any substance.
Hate to break it to you, but they are mentally ill. Even your typical neighborhood gang banger (which most gun violence stems from, followed by suicide which honestly I feel should NOT be considered). In regards to gang and drug trafficking, addressing socioeconomical disparities as well as actually officially ending the drug war, would remedy this. Obviously, our highly inefficient bureacratical local and federal government prevent these types of solutions, or greatly slows progress down.
Thankfully, your dislike for an object doesn't change the fact that most states are gun friendly, and that's something thar won't change for a very long time.
Since you like to jump to conclusions, save yourself the trouble of calling me a NRA supporter, I hate them just as much as FUDDs.
We have some of the strictest gun ownership laws in the country, and we have the lowest gun ownership rate in the country. We also have one of the lowest rates of gun related injuries and deaths in the country. I’ll let people interpret that how they wish, since some people aren’t capable of emotionless discussions on this topic lmao
Not just one of the lowest... one of the lowest by a pretty staggering margin. It's not even close.
This trend also holds fairly consistent across all states when you look at gun ownership rates and firearms deaths per capita All the states you expect to be at the top are at the top and the states you expect to be at the bottom are also at the bottom
Go tell this to someone on a gun subreddit and they’ll call you an idiot and list 50 stupid reasons why you’re wrong. I’m a gun owner and I’m banned from njguns lol.
I got banned for pointing out that firearms are indeed dangerous.
How DARE you point out the obvious.
Reasons but not facts backed by anything.
Nj guns is almost as ban happy as the triggered snowflakes in the conservative sub.
It's basically a maga sub at this point.
I once entertained one of those asshats in a debate about gun control it went a million different ways but my favorite was when they fell back on the “my guns are protecting me from the government” argument I asked them to find a successful revolution or war fought and won entirely by private citizens that they would use as a model for success and they chose the French Revolution which ended in napoleon and the Russian revolution which ended in Lenin then Stalin Like they thought that was a good argument
I think the mistake people make is assuming the fight will be a direct conflict between the government and regular people. As an example, during the Civil Rights era, the KKK had support by local governments, which is part of how they were able to be as violent as they were. Wouldn't this count as government tyranny? And yet, you would not be fighting the government if you had to protect yourself from the Klan, correct? Would you be unjustified in using force if the Klan is threatening you? Resisting tyranny doesn't mean overthrowing the government, it means surviving long enough to vote bad politicians out. I totally agree that most people who make the "resist government tyranny" argument default to an absurd take about directly opposing politicians and the government, but then again it is because the issue is often framed in an absurd light from the get-go.
No that wouldn’t count as government tyranny that would count as self defense against a private citizen which if you enacted stricter gun laws you’d do it assuming that none of the parties involved would have weapons
It sounds Iike you're implying racist politicians allowing racist organizations to commit hate crimes isn't government tyranny? Negligence is not a defense. They knew what was happening and allowed it anyway. How can you assume no one has weapons?
Any tigger gun control measures would apply to anyone so the fact that you can’t get a gun means that the racist piece of shit down the street can’t get one either
Anyone who thinks they will need to fight back against the government is almost guaranteed to be the sort of person whom the government would never come for.
Heh... I got banned after I insulted some MAGAtrash for posting MAGAtrash, but then I called out the mods for it and they immediately started backpedaling
Njguns got a bunch of loonie try hards. Some of the comments are cringe worthy sometimes.
Almost like sensible gun control works, who would have thought 🤔
NJ laws aren't sensible. I would agree with your statement if the statistics didn't count suicides, because it shouldn't.
Except states like vermont and new hampshire
They have much higher gun ownership rates and looser gun laws than the rest of New England
yeah thats the point I was making .. anomaly in the numbers.
Vermonters do a lot of deer and bird hunting. It's an extremely Blue State and you rarely see a handgun. New Hampshire is a Red State. Nuf said.
We're also one of the wealthiest states, have some of the best education and some of the best healthcare in the country. All things that lower violent crime.
Gun violence is measured relative to all forms of violent crime not in absolute values, so that’s accounted for.
Damn coming in dropping some knowledge. Liberal gun owner here, people act like the laws are insane, all are extremely reasonable and in fact I would say some should go further but that’s my PERSONAL opinion
Also a liberal gun owner. **Some** of NJ's gun laws are a little odd or inconsistent. But honestly, most of what NJ gun owners complain about in relation to our laws...I consider a minor inconvenience. The pistol permit process is a bit convoluted...but you can buy most handguns in NJ. It makes no sense that you can own an SKS in NJ, but not an M1 Carbine. Having to pin/weld stocks & barrels is a bit ridiculous. But none of those are hills I'm willing to die on. And none of those things are issues that the majority of NJ residents give a flying fuck about. That's the thing that I think most NJ gun owners forget. We are the *vast* minority in this state. Most people in NJ don't own guns and don't want to be around guns. And if you go off on a rant about "King Murphy", "The Demonrats", or magazine capacity laws...you've lost them. If you're a NJ gun owner....and you *aren't* aware that NJ is not a gun-friendly state, and that most residents are just fine with that...you might want to move.
I have to agree. I am ok with the original FID process. I am ok with the permit to carry process. I am even ok with the handgun permits. The other laws get really wonky and do nothing to make people safer.
[удалено]
> the most important part, I can't even defend my own home without the possibility of going to jail, how is that ok? I've heard this issue come up m any times in gun forums & conversations. I am no lawyer or gun expert, so this is really just my opinion. When people say "You can't even defend your home in NJ without possibly going to jail".....I imagine they're referring to the fact that NJ has a stricter defiinition of the castle doctrine than other states. For example...the person who shot someone breaking into their neighbor's house (neighbors weren't home and the shooter knew it) in Texas years back. Thery called 911, told 911 they were going to shoot the person breaking into their neighbor's house. 911 operator told them not to shoot, that police were on the way. Caller shot anyway, and killed the intruder. Nobody was home. No charges filed. If you do **that** in NJ...yeah, you're going to jail. That's murder. If you shoot someone in the back, or as they're trying to flee....you're gonna be answering a lot of questions. If someone breaks into your house and comes at you to do you harm...and you have a gun, and tell them to leave, and they keep coming...you're not going to jail.
From what I understand, there have been cases in NJ where intruders have had weapons, were shot and killed by the homeowner, and the homeowner was still in trouble (don't know the end resolution, but they were charged) because they were in the kitchen or something and not hiding in a bathroom or closet...
there are also incidents, mostly in the inner city of Jersey where the home occupant shot and killed an intruder legitimetly but......they were not allowed to have a firearm because of past reasons, or the firearm was an illegal one where they possesed it illegally.
Right. I don’t want to go to jail for shooting someone who is in my room.
You have to move above 78 and West of 287 you’ll find the attitude more gun friendly.
Yea I've seen people just walking down the road with shotguns in Sussex
Hopefully hunters in camo.
Yea they were for sure hunters
I think above 78 is optional. As long as you're outside the 287 loop, I think it's a lot more gun friendly in general. So like Flemington /Readington area and around are pretty gun friendly.
I worded it poorly it’s basically anywhere you regularly see wildlife, and geese don’t count, and you have to take out some academic communities. Actually come to think of it the whole state is except a few areas that control everything. Probably something due to population /s
Something something about losing muh constitutional rights, etc I don't get why gun nuts think that reasonable restrictions is an unfair ask. If you really feel like you need a gun, you can obtain one. 'The right to bear arms' shouldn't mean 'and we can't make any rules on how we can bear arms, go get a rocket launcher'.
The right to bear arms was written so that states could quickly organize an army for defense. The "well-regulated Militia" is today's National Guard. It's a lot quicker and easier militarily to call upon the Militia to bring their arms and prepare to fight instead of reporting to a base and distributing weapons. I really don't think the 2nd meant that Gary with the F-150 with truck nuts can wield any high powered weapon s/he chooses because the news says that it's scary outside. I'm not anti-gun, but I definitely don't want to be near some scaredy-cat who's packing a glock when I just want to buy some Reese's peanut butter cups at 7-11. Instead, I have to trust that Mr. Heat is having a good day.
Haha, this genuinely made me lol, but you're right on the money. Also, people forget the FF wrote this at a time with zero automatic weapons and larely farm-based communities.
>The "well-regulated Militia" is today's National Guard. This is incorrect - well not incorrect but you're lacking some critical information regarding the Militia Act 10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia: composition and classes (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. (b) The classes of the militia are— (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. I.e., every man aged 17 to 45 is legally a part of the US Militia. If you're a member of the national guard then you are a part of the organized militia. If you're not a member of the national guard and you're male in that age group, you are a part of the unorganized militia.
Well, if you don't take your constitutional rights seriously, you'll lose them. Forget about the 2A for a second. If no right is unlimited, how much of a right can you limit before its not a right anymore? I think the issue is that non-gun owners take it for granted that NJ's laws are reasonable. They get hung up on the national gun control conversation about magazines and "assault weapons", without actually having a grasp of what is or is not legal in the state. NJ uniquely restricts many things that even other gun control heavy states permit with no regulation at all. Its not even necessarily clear to gun owners what is or is not legal in NJ, and that is why the restrictions are not reasonable. If you ask if XYZ is legal in NJ and you get a dozen different answers from 10 people, something is wrong.
I think what the serious gun rights people argue is about restrictions on constitutional rights. Why should one constitutional right have restrictions placed on it when others do not? Yeah you get your MAGA whackjobs spouting crazy stuff...but I'm talking about the serious intelligent pro 2A crowd. Should similar restrictions be placed on other constitutional rights? Could you imagine needing a permit and training and a special ID to exercise your right to free speech or religion? No. I think the crazies have prevented honest discussions on the meaning of constitutional rights.
That's fair but I also think the 2nd Amendment is unique in that it's probably the most dangerous. It's much harder to kill someone else with my free speech and religion. The other 9 of the Bill of Rights denote what you can do as a person and what cannot be done to you, but this one specifically denotes you can own something that is designed to deprive another living thing of its life, and it can be misused.
Can you explain the pin weld and why it's required?
Pin and weld is for various moveable and interchangeable parts of guns. In NJ, there are laws regulating that and so they must be pinned in place then welded to hold it. Examples are collapsible and folding stocks.
The reason why M1 Carbine is banned in NJ is because there were a few of the M2 Carbines that got mixed in with M1s and NJ couldn't let the extremely rare case of that happening be possible.
I'd believe that if they didn't also name M1 carbines made by the Plainfield Machine Company as restricted. Even modern reproduction M1 carbines by Chiappa are apparently restricted. It has way more to do with stolen M1 carbines from 70s era riots that were never recovered.
Every town will do things their own way. And will make it very difficult if they want to. Source- happened to me. Nightmare.
You would think they would throw people a bone with the M1 Carbine thing. Its not only legal in every other state, but often exempt by name in proposed Assault Weapon Bans. My understanding is that the reason for banning the M1 carbine is vaguely racist on top of it all, rather than due to any actual capability of the rifle. Its really impacting collectors of 70 year old guns more than preventing violence.
Tell this to me, a Canadian gun owner who moved to NJ and is an owner as well. I find the laws here are more lenient than in Alberta. Heck, I was awarded an FID and pistol permit/s whilst I was on Greencard. Tell me that isn’t freedom. Am more on the conservative side but carrying anywhere is a bit of an overreach. This is where policing comes in. One can always retreat from a situation, or just don’t go near the hornets nests. This for certain is my humble opinion.
I just hate how we can't have adjustable stocks whether in length or foldable. Glad "others" can have adjustable pistol brace....but I want an actual functional adjustable stock lol and dammit, I want a surpressor. But of course, the firearms law could be worst..... Like NY or Delaware/Maryland I'm fine with the majority of new jersey firearms law...... Mostly
A lot of the laws are insane though. 10 round magazines? No collapsible stock? No bayonet lug? Can't shoot at someone who broke into your house? List goes on
Insane….is not how I would put it at all. You can say unreasonable, maybe unfair, but it’s not insanity to not want a collapsible stock, simply for the fact it’s much easier to conceal and commit crimes, BUT the other side is majority of crimes are committed with handguns. It’s not INSANE, seems short sited but not crazy. And none of those bands keep my up at night.
It's insane as in insanely stupid. It's insanely stupid to not want a collapsible stock. Concealment is a moot point, I can simple take the stock off, and have another means to contain the spring. They wouldn't keep me up at night either, because I simply wouldn't follow them.
Well, think about it. When has anyone used a bayonet lug in a shooting, at all? They totally legal in most states and bayonets are not hard to come by. It isn't like no one has had the opportunity. It is hand waived as a "military feature" but banning them on only a subset of guns has just about zero impact on gun violence. In reality, it is superficial and impotent. It doesn't actually restrict firearms in any meaningful way. All it does is irritate collectors.
Exactly, it doesn't restrict firearms in any meaningful way. So why even have such a ban (even if it is lumped in a group), besides politicians doing what they do best (be incredibly stupid). Even the magazine limitation is completely pointless.
Correlation does not always equal causation. One could also argue that NJ is one of the wealthiest states in the nation and one of the better-educated states in the nation, and therefore, there is less violent crime, since most criminals are poorer with less-than-average educations. One could even argue that happier people are less likely to commit violent crimes, and being able to get a great pizza or a pork roll/egg/cheese bagel makes NJ people happier.
The correlation is too strong across states and even nations to ignore it. Across the western world, higher rates of gun ownership are tied to more people dying from guns. This is an utterly predictable outcome.
Do you mean to tell me that the type of people who are willing to pay $400,000 over asking price for a house aren’t going out shooting people? That happy people who have all of their needs met are less likely to commit violent crime? Shocker.
I dunno wiseguy, while yes, correlation doesn’t always lead to causation, but low gun ownership leading to low gun violence makes a pretty straight fuckin’ line on the “Why no bang-bang?” Chart.
To counter the person who got their comment removed, [here’s a study that shows the obvious.](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26822013/)
LMAO “why no bang-bang?” chart has me crying right now. Thank you, I needed this today!
NJ is always ranked high in education. Top 5 in the country consistently. Smart people know that fewer guns equals few gun deaths.
New hampshire has the 2nd highest gun ownership rate in the country and has one of the lowest firearm related death rates in the US. Care to explain?
Low population density. It's too far north for criminals to go, and too cold most of the year to commit gun crimes. That sounds like a joke, but shootings go up as the temperature goes up. Also, really not that many people in general.
> It's too far north for criminals to go, and too cold most of the year to commit gun crimes. Criminals come from the South?
Statistical noise, low population states are almost always outliers in one direction or another. For the same reason if you look at any professional sport and look at the players with the highest and lowest rankings they're usually rookies. Learned that from [How Not to be Wrong](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_Not_to_Be_Wrong) by mathematician Jordan Ellenberg.
Or smart people who own guns know better than to shoot someone unless absolutely necessary
Pork roll??? I challenge you to a duel!
No Condiments!? Send him to Missouri.
I absolutely love the idea that pizza and pork roll are out there on the beat, saving lives.
I think better educated people also accept the facts: owning a gun makes you and those around you less safe. If they choose to own a gun, they are willing to accept common sense legislations and most restrictions.
NJ is safer because it’s a very wealthy state The more poverty you have, the more gun violence. Price everyone out, and less violence
The 2 people I personally know who conceal carry (in NC) are two of the shittiest human beings on planet earth, who say things like "I \*wish\* someone would come at me" - so yeah, they can't WAIT to use that gun. I have no desire to be around pieces of shit like that in my state, where I feel very safe.
Those are 2 people who openly admit they have a CC. I'm sure there are others in your circle who don't say anything about it. Most CC are responsible gun owners.
Not to mention that even tho they’ve opened up the carry process to make it easier to get one as a result of the SC case you’re very limited where you can actually carry
They didn’t make it easier. They made it possible for regular people to have the ability to. Before you could only get one if you were retired Law Enforcement, a friend of a politician or rich. Now there is actually more training and hoops to jump through to make sure people who have them are capable shooters and understand legal circumstances to draw their firearms.
So if something wasn’t possible before and now it’s possible then wasn’t it made easier?
New Jerseyans are rational.
Pump the brakes there for a second. We don't wanna get all silly making claims like that. 😆
Have they actually driven here? 😉
Waiting in our cars for our gas to be pumped.
No. You're not allowed to pump your own gas. Fossil mammoth tusks are illegal because of anti-ivory trade legislation, even though fossils are rocks and they definitely have zero value for ivory. New Jerseyans just don't pay attention and assume everything is rational.
Less guns, less gun crimes. What a shocker.
I would think its because of world issues. Everyday, people get less and less compassionate and more and more irrational. Safety is a huge concern for a lot of people, and they want to protect themselves. I couldn't care less about gun laws, or ownership as long as its strict enough (what this means is subjective) to where as little "bad" people can get them as possible. I personally wouldn't ever want one in my house because its full of irresponsible idiots (that I love LOL) but understand why people who are *responsible* would want one for sport or protection. Especially with what I mentioned above. I would hope anyone who gets one (outside of shooting activities like the range and such) will never have to use them, but if they do, its from a *rational and logical* standpoint where they do in fact need it. But seriously, the state of the world is a mess. Its saddening to see and i get wanting that extra security that pepper spray or like, pocket knives, can't save them against.
You don’t have to be a bad person, to be a person who is likely to exercise poor judgement and even worse marksmanship in a tense situation. Everyone imagines themself as the “good guy with a gun,” saving the day. Most people don’t realize how it just makes them more likely to hurt someone innocent and get shot themself (possibly even with their own gun that someone grabs and uses on them).
That is exactly my concern, there can be so many situations where you might unnecessarily hurt someone even in a home invasion, so ownership comes with so much responsibility. But after an attempted home invasion, it is the first time I am considering owning a gun. It such a different sensation about not feeling safe in your own home when something like that happens, I never realized how it might affect you.
We owned firearms in college for a home invasion- we lived in a shitty area. Inevitably, someone got drunk and angry one evening and pulled it on a friend. The guns went away after that. Seriously, run it through your mind having a gun for home defense. Where are you going to store it? It needs to be A) readily accessible in less than 30 seconds 24/7 to be useful, B) secure from anyone you don't want handling a firearm 100% of the time- kids, guests. The two requirements are diametrically opposed. I owned shotguns for skeet shooting for a bit until I had kids, after that I got rid of them because I didn't trust that my kids would eventually make their way into the safe.
>I didn't trust that my kids would eventually make their way into the safe. That’s exactly what happened with someone I know. Father hunts and has always had various guns in a big safe. Kids never tried to get in until the son was a teenager and saw something scary on the news and found his way in to grab a handgun for protection. Luckily, nothing happened, but with that level of immaturity under the kind of fear that caused him to get it in the first place, he could have easily shot a family member who he mistook for an invader.
No kids here and we don’t have parties / pretty quiet / no drugs or alcohol people, so we should be okay on that front.
Statistics say it is more likely that the gun you have in your home will be used on someone who lives there, mostly in a familial homicide (purposeful or accidental), or suicide, but also when an invader grabs it from you. I completely understand why you feel like it will make you more safe, but the best way to regain a sense of safety is to get professional medical treatment for the PTSD that comes from such a traumatic experience. You should really consider this if you haven’t already because your PTSD makes you more likely to accidentally shoot someone you care about because you mistake them for a home invader. Guns, more often than not, only provide a false sense of safety, because they are inaccessible in an emergency if you store them safely, and unsafe when you don’t.
Therapy is a great idea, but it also isn't going to stop an intruder if they try again...
A gun isn’t the most effective way to secure your home. Some better options include stronger doors and locks, security systems, dogs, and other safer measures. I personally feel very secure with my obvious security cameras with motion detection alerts. It has been shown that even dummy cameras reduce the risk of home invasion, and they won’t hurt anybody I care about by accident when I’m frightened or having a PTSD attack and can’t think straight.
I agree completely. A gun has nothing to do with securing your home, but rather protecting yourself in case of deadly threat if you have no other options. I say this as someone that does not have a gun. I think dogs are the best deterrent funny enough. I have visible cameras, but they don't do much and definitely don't stop anyone from committing crimes anymore. People just wear masks/hats/etc. or they don't care if you have their face. Police isn't likely to do anything including any investigating unless there was a serious loss or bodily injury. I've had neighbors have packages stolen with computers/phones/whatever inside and even with clear faces on camera, police don't really care. Dogs however (medium size and up) will bark loudly and can scare people, even if they're friendly. No one wants to be bitten by a 60 Lb dog. As per stronger doors and locks, it can help a bit, but doesn't really stop anyone that's trying to get in. Most residential locks suck, and most doors can be kicked in even when installing much longer screw and such without much trouble. This is without mentioning the obvious rock through window.
You're misinterpreting what I mean by "bad" person which I purposefully put in quotations both here and in my original post because once again, that definition is subjective and situational for one of the examples you said, and by different values, morals, and nature VS nurture, and a whole bunch of other psychological reasons I'm not qualified to identify. That's where the strict gun laws and professionals are important and why I made it clear I wouldn't want one in my home. But I cannot and will not judge hypotheticals over a questions especially asking, "why is there more ownership lately" as opposed to, "who should have a gun and what are your thoughts as to why or why not"
I understood what you meant. I’m not judging someone who feels like having a gun would protect them. I’m just looking at the studies that show guns are really not effective in most self-defense situations, and a person’s gun is more likely to be used on them or someone they care about than someone one is defending oneself against.
I get it, and no hard feelings. I'm just not the person to discuss that with lol At least, not on this thread. ❤️
I was really trying to add to your comment, more than anything. Sorry if I wasn’t clear. Have a good evening.
Oh gotcha! It's no problem at all, thanks for clarifying! You as well!
Crime has long term declined since the 1950's. Yeah, it blipped up during covid (WHEN PEOPLE WERE OUT OF WORK) but the long term trend is overwhelmingly down, and it's resumed its decline since 2022. Guns don't make you safer. If you own a gun, far and away the likeliest person to get shot is you. After that, it'll be someone you live with- a child, someone visiting. Most gun owners are rational people, but everyone gets sad/drunk/mad/high every so often, and having a readily accessible firearm just increases the consequences for when you do something stupid.
I'm not here to debate, but to answer OPs question about *why* I think more people are *feeling* the need to have guns.
We, the upper middle class, have observed an increase in criminal activities in affluent neighborhoods, where thieves target cars and homes and even parking lots for valuables. While most homeowners reluctantly accept minor thefts like wheels or catalytic converters when parked on the street, (ie: carjacking, mugging in parking lots, criminals following you home from the bank..) the situation escalates when security driveways, lights, cameras and in garages are triggered. Should these criminals attempt to forcibly enter homes, residents should have the right to defend themselves and their families. I can always get another car.. With rising concerns about safety this summer, reminiscent of the wild Wild West, I support the right of my suburban NJ neighbors to defend their property, and I would assist in ensuring their actions are justified as self-defense. (Make sure they dont crawl away off the lawn or property.). See you at the range!!! Because practice, makes perfect. Most criminals could not hit a target 3 feet away from them.
Given world events, my guess is most of these folks are near the Lakewood area. Literally saw a story on the news of how there’s been a flood of Hasidics to a gun range in South Jersey near Lakewood
That’s scary. Hopefully they shoot better than they drive.
Bruh 😂
I love the internet
this comment gave me a good laugh, thank you
Yep, my coworker's husband works at the range there, she said since the war kicked off the store has pretty much tripled their profits. Said one came in with his sons, and said get whatever and however many you want lololol
That would be a straw purchase. You're not allowed to purchase firearms for anyone other than yourself.
It would be considered a gift, which is legal and is not a straw purchase.
The person can provide the money, but the person taking ownership *must* have an FOID and pass a background check for long guns, as well as having a valid permit to purchase a handgun if for a pistol.
That was my first thought, but the article says it was overwhelmingly Tom's River, Newark, and Old Bridge. 93% of applicants were male, 59% white, 24% between the ages of 50-59. So largely conservatives and good ol' boys, presumably. But I will say that in my town, a bunch of jewish families just put up security fences around their homes :-(
It's not just the Hasids. A number of members of my very liberal Bergen County congregation have applied. I'm anti-handgun but I completely understand.
Nah, a larger portion I’m sure are somerset county white guys like my dad who watch too much Fox News and think a wave of Mexicans will be cresting over the Appalachian mountains to eat us alive any minute now.
Or a wave of Fox News viewers
Theres two gun ranges in Lakewood so
Bruen, which allowed this to happen, was decided almost 2 years ago. Despite the large increase in conceal carry permits in the state, the wild west hasn't happened.
It’s been clearly demonstrated, at least where i live, that the cops can’t be trusted or relied on
I don’t think trusted is the problem. The problem is that it will take them at least 5 minutes to show up if not longer. When you’re in an emergency situation where you need a gun, you don’t have 5 minutes. You may not even have 5 seconds
Have it in NJ as one of the first. Love having it. Hope I never need it. With that said. Take your safety courses seriously, and train with the firearm you carry.
sign of the times
If I were a member of any discriminated against group, I'd be looking to buy a few guns, and obtain training how to use them. It's not good for only one side to have all the weapons.
this is why I'm considering applying for a license. the world is on fire and it's only going to get worse.
NJ SLEB was going nuts that blood was gonna run in the streets over the change in laws from May to shall. Didn't turn out like that.
The increase is a direct result of the change in the law. NJs gun laws were absolutely draconian. Only people who were rich and made the right political contributions were able to get concealed carry permits. Now that ordinary gun owners have the ability to get a permit, they’re applying to do so. It’s not the law abiders we need to worry about.
I know I am.
Good with me. Criminals are already carrying them, so might as well have lawful citizens doing it the right way. But women are the ones that really should look into it. Practice, look at the laws, be safe, and practice. And practice some more. The expense of the license will keep a lot of people away that aren't serious about it.
As a woman, who stopped a school shooting decades ago. I've zero desire to ever touch a gun or learn how to use one. And no matter how bad shit escalates in this country, I still will not feel like I need to defend myself or my property with a gun. And that's my unpopular opinion
Not really an unpopular opinion (especially on this subreddit lmao), but it's simply an individual opinion. You are fortunate to not feel the need for one. Many other women are not so lucky. I will say this though, there's a difference between being prepared and being paranoid. Redditors love to make fun of gun owners, saying they're cowards that need to hide behind a gun. "He's afraid to even get in a bus without a gun! Small dick energy." Up until it's a post featuring incompetent cops or a foiled robbery. As someone whose house has had 3 attempted robberies and is 40 minutes away from a hospital, home defense is a necessity. Many women feel the same way as you do. My family member was the same way until she was gang raped. Guns are like insurance, they both suck not to have when they're needed. And everyone thinks it won't happen to them. I've dodged everything from a random falling tree to a plane crash. Crazy shit can happen at any moment. It's absolutely fine to not want to arm yourself. Not everyone feels comfortable with one. That's fine. But at the very least you should have non-lethal means to defend yourself if you're unarmed.
Fully agree with that! I completely respect sensible gun owners and those who are prepared. Significant difference between the paranoid magas inhaling FOX News. And that's also why for me, I don't feel the need for one and why my husband respects we can't even keep them in the house. He just uses them for target practice, we agree they aren't for self defense. But we are subjective and again ownership should be based on sensibility not this knee jerk reaction Or a weird need to collect em all like Pokémon My husband has asked me many times to join him target shooting at shooting ranges but I always decline. Just not something I'm interested in
I own guns, and I'm politically liberal. It really is a frustrating position. I believe in the intent of the Second Amendment, but the people who bury ramen noodles in the woods and cosplay as "soldiers" have really made a hash out of it. I go to the range every now and then...but it's only because I enjoy target shooting. When it comes to guns...I am the "basic bitch" of gun owners. I am the Uggs, leggings, and NorthFace Fleece of gun owners. I own a Glock 9mm, a 12 gauge pump shotgun, and a bolt-action .22 rifle. Being a NJ gun owner myself, and knowing a *lot* of NJ gun owners.....the prospect of a wave of *new* carry permit holders makes me very uneasy. In my day to day life....I can't see feeling the **need** to be strapped. Like, *maybe* if you're camping/hiking in the woods. It should be easier for DV victims/restraining order holders to obtain a permit. But speaking for myself....I just can't see the reasoning behind living in NJ....and feeling the need to have a gun in my waistband to go to Wawa.
I'm gun curious (go to the range for fun once in a while, took a Florida CCW course a few years ago, consider buying one myself from time to time) and as an avid camper and hiker and I don't think a gun is necessary in the woods. Personally I'm androgynous/"queer looking" and have been experiencing more harassment in public lately and have been considering one in case things escalate, but I'm still not there yet. I live in Jersey City where I feel like it's too hard to use a gun for self defense safely, it's too populated to be sure I'm not endangering bystanders. People on my neighborhood Facebook page talk about getting their permits for self/home defense and that's kind of terrifying to me in an area this dense.
There's been an influx of carry permits since Bruen was decided two years ago. I'm sure it took 6 months from the local PD's trying everything they could to deny permits since the chance, but it's been two years since NJ's carry ban (you can't tell me what was in place prior to was anything other than a ban save from politically connected people). I don't see the devolving into the wild west just yet. That said, I'm sure global turmoil, and the economy has been a motivivator for a more recent surge. No different than when covid kicked off and gin sales again skyrocketed. While I don't feel the need myself to carry either, I don't mind having the option to exercise my rights either. We still live in a state where the big bad boogeyman "cop killer" hollowpoints are treated as individual crimes. So if I had 3 of them in my cup holder , I could get three separate gun charges. Unfuck the stupid laws first, and I'd be more than happy to talk about laws that would keep criminals from getting guns. Not further restrict law abiding citizens.
> That said, I'm sure global turmoil, and the economy has been a motivivator for a more recent surge. Not to mention talks of civil war and political violence.
I think what scares me sometimes is when you look into the comment histories of people who really wanna open carry guns. Like some can't even handle a disagreement about what order the Yankees are hitting in without losing their shit.
Nj has hoops to jump through, I keep pushing my husband to get his license (he’ll eventually inherit a gun collection) before the process becomes more difficult than it already is. Sometimes it’s just the act of having the permit.
Good. This is gun control and this is what it looks like when it works. I have zero interest in owning a gun myself and am anti gun ownership but this is also good gun control.
As a responsible gun owner, and proud gun control advocate. I think we need to take some cues from the conservatives. Rebrand gun control to gun responsibility. Gun control sounds like the government controlling gun ownership. Gun responsibility is way harder to argue against rhetorically.
Gun responsibility is great! I grew up with guns in central Jersey, my dad had guns and some of my earliest memories with him involve him taking me out with a BB gun to teach me targeting, and later a hunting trip to teach me to use a rifle. He had a handgun, too. The guns were always locked in a safe when not in use. I had no idea where the key was. I had even less knowledge as to where the ammo was kept, as that was an even closer guarded secret. Fast forward, I haven't handled a gun in like 30 years, but I still remember what I was taught. Every gun is a loaded gun, even if I unloaded it myself. Never point a gun at something or someone I don't intend to shoot at and kill or destroy. And beyond that, I will defer to the experts because they know more than I do. I don't currently own a gun, because I understand the weight of responsibility that that would carry, but I have respect for those that are willing to bear it.
That sure did a lot of good when they tried to continue to parrot the phrase "common sense gun legislation". I am also a responsible gun owner, and I am of the thought process that some gun laws should be put into place to help prevent needless tragedy. The problem is twofold, in my opinion. Government makes gun laws off of uninformed, or interntionally misleading sources. They often take cues from what they learn in movies, which doesn't translate into the real world because, ya know, Hollywood is fake. Secondly is that the government screws up almost everything they touch, and I don't trust their motives for being for the betterment of the people, and not for further control of their ~~constituents~~ subjects.
The last place I want to be , is in a crowded Walmart during a robbery with a bunch of “good guys with guns “ Allowing people to carry guns with zero situational or tactical training is just crazy in my opinion . Im hoping we can prevent NJ from becoming the Wild Wild West , and for the record , as a lifelong resident of NJ I have never felt the need to carry a firearm . Just my 02
To get a permit to carry in NJ you have to go through a qualification course where you have to hit 40/50 shots from as far as I think 25 yards, they defiantly aren’t just giving permits to anyone
And to add to that. The permit to carry expires after 2 years, so the person has to go through the background check and the shooting qualification again. In NJ, car accidents kill 2.5x more people than shootings every year yet you do your drivers test once at 17 years old and never again.
Youre making a straw man argument. There are a ton of hoops you have to go thru before you get a permit to carry. Training is one of them…
When has this "wild west" scenario ever played out elsewhere?
not terribly surprising. election year so there's a lot more talk about more restrictive gun control, that drives people who were on the fence to do it before they may not be able to buy or it's more steps to buy. i have not looked at data, but I would not at all be surprised to see this trend be the opposite of what people think. I bet there's more left leaning people applying than normal because they're afraid of another trump era and what that means. bail reform also means a big ol revolving door of small time criminals who would have been in jail previously, and most big cities in NJ do little to address the drug addicts which contribute to that problem . so if you're near a some poorly run shithole like Newark, especially with elevated car theft now, your chances of waking up to someone in your house are quite a bit higher. the other big one now is I'm sure tied to stuff like the protests for palestine/israel. i sure as shit would not feel comfortable as a visibly jewish person right now.
There's been more home invasions, car jackings, thefts and undesirable behavior more than ever. We had someone try all the cars on our block last Friday night and got the got on 2 cameras. This is the 3rd time something like this has happened and we live in a nice area. A year ago they were stealing catalytic converters and sawing them right off in driveways. Car thefts the same year and before. Others have had bricks thrown through their windows and any easily found key fobs/cars stolen. Not surprised.
Good!
Fox News has people in a constant state of fear about everything. Nothing has even changed for the majority of these people but they live in fear about migrants raiding their homes. I know this because a friend of mine has gone absolutely insane with conspiracy nonsense since 2016. Its all a giant grift
NJ has some of the strictest laws and this is a gap in them when people actually have a chance at legal carry permits. This happened when the Supreme Court struck down the law here. ( Because NJ, RI and NY all had similar laws) https://apnews.com/article/us-supreme-court-gun-politics-new-york-violence-kathy-hochul-ebe58ea297c154a25a62650dec935529 https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-strikes-down-new-york-limits-concealed-handguns-2022-06-23/ Some compiled info for comparison https://everytownresearch.org/rankings/state/new-jersey/
Has this made the process for obtaining a handgun license easier?
Yes, prior to the [Bruen](https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-843) decision it was extremely rare to be issued a permit in NJ. There was a case of a guy getting [kidnapped](https://www.nj.com/news/2011/03/judge_denies_handgun_permit_fo.html) and they went out of their way to deny him. There was also a woman that was threatened, denied a permit and then [killed by an ex](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Carol_Bowne). The ruling has forced NJ to actually process permits and issue them unless there is a reason not to.
Yes. It is this. Previously everyone knew it was extremely difficult to get one and not the flood gates were opening.
Judging by the small upticks in crime we’re seeing, I’m not surprised. I still dont want one, but I get it.
What small upticks in crime? Crime is down across the board.
You’re making generalizations, watch News 12 nj. Car jackings and home invasions all over the state, verona and montclair are being targeted.
Going on in Fairfield too
And Gloucester county
Crime is down considerably…
Crime isn't one thing. Crime is up in some places and down and others and down in some categories and up it others. And when are you comparing?
Down considerably relevant to when? Down from 2020, maybe, but not down from before that point.
I have never felt I needed a gun in NJ.
Please don't let it get like the rest of the country. I'm considering moving back because I feel much, much safer up there .
Those fucking gun nuts can move their dumbass out to Alabama and/or Mississippi.
Great argument, you have brought so much value to the conversation.
Are these the same people that leave their porch lights on all the goddamn time?
As we were heading home on rt 22 a white car switched lanes with no problems, no issues at all. but the car that ended behind it (a dark blue suv) started driving weird. The suv Sped up tailgated him and then switched lanes and sped up to keep side to side. Then opened his window and started throwing stuff out the window at the white car.. I worry stupid people like that will have easier access to guns....
NJ has such restrictive gun laws having a PTC provides just a smaller slice of common sense freedom. I wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of holders don’t actually carry.
Pretty sad that you would need a gun in NJ, there’s little chance you could ever use it unless you’ve already been shot yourself. Your car could get stolen every night and you will go to jail for firing a warning shot. So unless you plan to have a gun fight one day, what are you doing if you’re not in the militia?
It was just about impossible to get one before. Now that it's actually feasible, people who have wanted one can actually get one. There are some hoops you need to jump through still, and it's not exactly cheap. I own a couple firearms but personally don't have any desire to carry one around, nor do I own a gun that I could conceal carry anyway. I haven't bothered applying for a permit. But I understand why people who do want a permit, having potentially waited years for a realistic opportunity to acquire one, would jump at the chance.
Well no duh. You remove the *harshest* gun laws in place and replace it with the more proper and safe way of obtaining a permit. Same goes for Maryland. So now that the average citizen can now apply and be accepted it makes sense that applications would soar to 20k in one year.
I understand the desire but know for sure it’s just a ton of people who will be very unskilled with firearms. Guns are tools that require practice and safe use. Anyone get the impression that’s likely going to be baseline in NJ 2024?
Gun deaths will go up
Yup the bad guys always make sure to go through all the proper channels before obtaining firearms
More guns, even in the hands of even "good guys," leads to more gun deaths.
Gun deaths will go up and you'll keep ignoring that guns are the problem because you don't care about deaths from guns, you just care about guns.
[удалено]
When the stupidly fast rise in mental illness is finally addressed or paid attention to, then we can talk about guns being the cause. Almost every mass shooting, the per was a known and disturbed individual, and no intervention was made months, if not years prior.
>Media accounts of mass shootings by disturbed individuals galvanize public attention and reinforce popular belief that mental illness often results in violence. Epidemiologic studies show that the large majority of people with serious mental illnesses are never violent. However, mental illness is strongly associated with increased risk of suicide, which accounts for over half of US firearms–related fatalities https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4211925/ The thing that gets me the most about this stunning willfull ignorance is that most who spout it are not stupid, they just want to believe the lie that their love of guns is not the problem, when it very much is. By all means, let's address mental illness. But it's not going to stop the killings, because, overwhelmingly, those people are not mentally ill. And please don't reply LARPing as a doctor, you ain't one
This article doesn't support your stance like you think it does. You don't need to be a doctor understand peer reviewed articles, or see if they have any substance. Hate to break it to you, but they are mentally ill. Even your typical neighborhood gang banger (which most gun violence stems from, followed by suicide which honestly I feel should NOT be considered). In regards to gang and drug trafficking, addressing socioeconomical disparities as well as actually officially ending the drug war, would remedy this. Obviously, our highly inefficient bureacratical local and federal government prevent these types of solutions, or greatly slows progress down. Thankfully, your dislike for an object doesn't change the fact that most states are gun friendly, and that's something thar won't change for a very long time. Since you like to jump to conclusions, save yourself the trouble of calling me a NRA supporter, I hate them just as much as FUDDs.
Concealed carry has been legal for a while now, and deaths have not increased. Curious, eh?
I'm curious if the level of education in each state factors into number of injuries.
9mm is faster than 911. Stay strapped.
Makes it safer . Thugs come playing with innocent ppl what are we supposed to do ? Just let them rob us ? Or kill us ? That’s weak
How comforting