Hello

[JohnConnor 0]

Was suggested I say hello, so, hi.

 

I have been looking at this forum for inspiration and insight for a while.   Seems to be the prominent one online.

 

Main reason I'm here is because over the last year I've been developing a piece of legislation that would allow specific military personnel and veterans, that is serving/have served in Special Operations, the ability to carry a handgun in New Jersey for their own and their families protection.

 

I've recently finished it and now have a sponser lined up in the Assembly.

 

I believe discussing it on the forum will provide good, solid feedback, to let you know there are new and different angles to work from, and of course to promote this cause.

 

Just to make clear, I believe practically all citizens should be able to carry.  On the other hand, I know how New Jersey works, and its current state of affairs.  I know my proposed legislation entitles and sets up a special group, however, I also believe if successfull it will be taking another chip away from the system.

 

I know "Introduction" is not the place to discuss it, so let me know where you'd like me to set up camp on the forum and I'll explain it in further detail.

 

I look forward to discussing it further with you guys, and thank you for the inspiration and insight you've provided me so far.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Welcome to the forum.

 

You have identified the flaw in your proposal. While I greatly respect the contribution and the sacrifice our armed services personnel make, I would be opposed to any firearm legislation that creates a "special class" of people. I don't look upon it as "chipping away" at NJ law, but rather being divisive within the firearm community.

 

JMHO

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[diamondd817 826]

I agree, we already have enough special/entitled classes of people in NJ. I would be opposed.

[JohnConnor 0]

Pizza Bob, I understand there are those with your viewpoint.  And I respect that.  As I tried to indicate I am also against having a special group of people.  At the same time, I'm trying to work under what I think is a realistic interpretation of what New Jersey is. To me, there is a game to be played..either play it or sit watching.  Maybe someday it will change, but I don't see it at the moment.  And that is based what I've read on this forum.

 

So, with that in my mind I've come to grips with it this way:

 

Would I rather have a special group of people I can trust carry, or none at all?

Would I play the game as all or none?

Since New Jersey already has established they prefer a special group of people, should I attempt to add more people to that group or leave it as it stands?

 

I for one would rather have some, even if a few, of the most highly trained and dedicated guys who dont act like the elite special class then those who believe they are.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

I for one would rather have some, even if a few, of the most highly trained and dedicated guys who dont act like the elite special class then those who believe they are.

 

You are doing the same thing there, as a lot of people do with LE personnel - you are deifying them. Bestowing abilities on them that, in reality, few have.

 

How many service personnel are "highly trained" with handguns and are conversant with civilian law as to when they can and should be used?

 

In a body of people, whether they be military or law enforcement, you will get a demographic slice similar to what you find in the general population. You will have those to whom firearms hold a special meaning and responsibility and you will have a much larger segment to whom the gun is a tool that they were required to use and may have put no more effort into its mastery than the bare minimum needed to be declared competent.

 

I postulate that those of us in the firearm community, hold firearms in a higher regard than any group of people defined by their membership in a particular vocation. Those that revere the firearm as more than a requirement of their job will expend greater time at its mastery.

 

When hit percentages were studied and compared between the NYPD and civilian involved shootings (legal carriers) - the PD came up at 23% while the civilians were almost three times that at 68%.

 

I know that you are not saying that we would require military personnel to carry, only allow them to do so if they choose. That segment of the military population then becomes no different than civilians, so why create a special privileged class that is no more highly trained or motivated than their civilian counterpart that seeks to legally be able to defend themselves? I see it as being counterproductive as the politicians will view it as throwing the firearm community a "bone" which diminishes other efforts that benefit the community as a whole.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[A-Tech 8]

I agree with Bob here. Special classes further decrease the odds of civilians obtaining ccw.

[tattooo 220]

I agree with Bob .... I would be opposed as well as in my opinion I dont feel any special classes lives are more worth defending than another and will decrease average citizens chances of obtaining ccws....

[JohnConnor 0]

Well I couldn't figure out how to do a multiquote of specific sections, sorry.  I hope you can follow.

 

Defining people comes naturally, everyone does it.  If some have more abilities then others have, well thats just again natural and a course of life.  You yourself have more abilites then non shooters.  Maybe other shooters have more or less.

 

With the state, thats how they play. If one has special abilites or experience, well you qualifiy for certain rights/privilages/however you would define it.  Is it correct? NO.  It is reality? YES.

 

How many service members are highly trained with firearms in general? Very few.  However, that notion is pointless as what I propose is not for "service members."  Sure Operators are/where in the military but they are nothing like, or trained like the rest of the military.

 

You point to the hit rates between NYPD and a civilian.  Makes sense and I agree.  Why though? I believe its because normally civilian shooters spend more range time compaired to police, where I believe its qualification twice a year?  Where do you think an Operator would fall compaired to them?  Speaking of mastery with firearms, Id doubt you find anyone else with more rounds fired.

 

At the end you compaire military members with civilian counterparts. I'll have to again say thats a missed point as you can't compaire Operators either to the rest of the military, its civilan counterparts, or to civilians who train "alot."

 

I also have not seen any proof that New Jersey allowing other "special classes" to carry has negated the efforts for civilians ccw'ing.  If there is, I'd love to read it over, please send it to me.

 

And with special groups already in play, the strongest being RLEO, what are the current chances in % of civilians getting ccw?  Has it lessened, strenghtened? Neutral?

 

If an Operator from SEAL Team 6 who took out bin Laden came home to NJ and couldnt get a permit I guess the response would be tough luck, youre no more special then the rest of us.

 

And let me just say that there are very few people who know me in person who even know I was in the military at all, let alone what I did.  But sometimes people have special circumstance and special experiences in their life that warrant a little bit of special consideration.  It's just how it is and in New Jersey, its how the game is and been played for many years now.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Cite some examples of NJ "special classes" other than retired LEO's - and that's actually a federal thing (LEOSA), and protected classes (civil rights).

 

SpecOps is a whole different ball game as far as ability goes, but that ability is not focused on a domestic urban environment. They are warriors and while they shoot/shot a lot in the military, it was training that was more focused on true assault weapons - MP5's, M4's etc. Offense, not defense. While very competent, the handgun for them was pretty much a weapon of last resort.

 

That is all beside the point as it is still about creating a special, privileged class. That sends the message that their lives are worth more than John Q. Citizen. If you are restricting your proposal to SpecOps personnel, you are talking about a very small subset, whereas general CCW reform would benefit a much larger population.

 

Sorry, no matter how you spin it, it's a bad idea and just dilutes the efforts for real reform by the shooting community.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[JohnConnor 0]

Well correct me if I'm wrong, but there is the LEOSA (federal) and then New Jersey has its own permitting for RLEO.  If a Federal LEOSA permit was all you needed, they why a state permit to do the same thing?  All the NJ RLEO's I know dont carry in NJ under the Federal regulations, they carry under the NJ RLEO permit.

 

There are those citizens who are able to obtain the civilan permit.  If they are able to obtain it, for whatever reason, apparently they are special.

 

You are sadly mistaken if there is no aspect of Special Operatons that have nothing to do with a "domestic urban enviroment."  Or that it is all offensive in the area of weapons, experience, or training. We dont simply shoot everyone one.  And there is plenty occasions where it is all defensive, handgun or not.  A good part of the training is actually when not to shoot.

 

And "a weapon of last resort" is clearly used in a defensive posture.

 

If it creates this"special class" is one thing.  Perhaps instead of what you think, it doesnt portray my life is worth more then yours.  Perhaps instead, and what my fellow guys and I believe, that our lives are in more danger then yours.  And that list is long.  And this is the same perception I've gotten from other military members/veterans, LEO, and citizens.  Not that we are worth more, but are at a greater danger then the typical Mr. and Mrs. Citizen.

 

Its again said that what I am trying to accomplish is going to take away from real reform.  Yet again I'm asking for proof on this.  Anything will do.  I'm open minded but I need something in hand.

Since we are going to proceed with this legislation anyways, if this is what everyone thinks by all means, and I strongly reccommend, that everyone here of that mindset write to their legislators opposing the my bill when it comes along.  I have no problem reccommending you do this because I honestly don't want to make things worse for people, I've spent my life trying to do the opposite.  On the other hand no proof is no proof and is just an opinion.  One I may add is starting to sound like selfishness of all or none hiding behind fear of special classes and tear down of general ccw which may never exist.

[GoNRA 12]

Welcome to the forum!