<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Legislative Analysis Of 24 Pending NJ Gun Control Bills For 02/13/13 Hearing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ammoland.com/2013/02/legislative-analysis-of-24-pending-nj-gun-control-bills-for-021313-hearing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ammoland.com/2013/02/legislative-analysis-of-24-pending-nj-gun-control-bills-for-021313-hearing/</link>
	<description>AmmoLand Shooting Sports News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 11:36:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: bill</title>
		<link>http://www.ammoland.com/2013/02/legislative-analysis-of-24-pending-nj-gun-control-bills-for-021313-hearing/#comment-81152</link>
		<dc:creator>bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2013 20:38:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ammoland.com/?p=108380#comment-81152</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm people in order to prevent future tyranny. They need the tools to do this. 

The term &quot;Well Regulated&quot; in the Second Amendment meant &quot;Well Manned and Equipped &quot; in 1791 as was determined in the 1939 United States v. Miller case after referencing the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. The concept of Government Regulation, as we understand it today, did not exist at the time. 

United States v. Miller also determined that the term &quot;Arms&quot; refers to &quot;Ordinary Military Weapons&quot; (not crew operated). American Citizens have the right to Keep and Bear, which means Own and Carry, any weapons that a soldier carries into battle. That includes past, present and future weapons. A Militia consisted of armed volunteers willing to fight with their personal arms and not under government control.

The 2008 Heller v. Washington DC decision reaffirmed that the Right to Bear Arms was an Individual right. The 2010 McDonald v. Chicago decision reaffirmed it yet again and made it clear that it applies to every state, every city and every town in the United States.

To limit the Second Amendment to muskets would be the equivalent of limiting the First Amendment to the 18th century Printing Press. 

Liberty is worth the risk of death!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm people in order to prevent future tyranny. They need the tools to do this. </p>
<p>The term &#8220;Well Regulated&#8221; in the Second Amendment meant &#8220;Well Manned and Equipped &#8221; in 1791 as was determined in the 1939 United States v. Miller case after referencing the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. The concept of Government Regulation, as we understand it today, did not exist at the time. </p>
<p>United States v. Miller also determined that the term &#8220;Arms&#8221; refers to &#8220;Ordinary Military Weapons&#8221; (not crew operated). American Citizens have the right to Keep and Bear, which means Own and Carry, any weapons that a soldier carries into battle. That includes past, present and future weapons. A Militia consisted of armed volunteers willing to fight with their personal arms and not under government control.</p>
<p>The 2008 Heller v. Washington DC decision reaffirmed that the Right to Bear Arms was an Individual right. The 2010 McDonald v. Chicago decision reaffirmed it yet again and made it clear that it applies to every state, every city and every town in the United States.</p>
<p>To limit the Second Amendment to muskets would be the equivalent of limiting the First Amendment to the 18th century Printing Press. </p>
<p>Liberty is worth the risk of death!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd</title>
		<link>http://www.ammoland.com/2013/02/legislative-analysis-of-24-pending-nj-gun-control-bills-for-021313-hearing/#comment-80333</link>
		<dc:creator>Todd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:12:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ammoland.com/?p=108380#comment-80333</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Camden, broke it&#039;s own record for most homicides in 2012, orignally set in 1995.  How many were firearm related?  Doesnt matter, if I were to end up there somehow, these liberal pussies are only preventing me from defending myself.  JHP can punch through some body armor, basically, if I were armed in JerKsey, I would be at a disadvantage, 10 rounds max vs. a full-auto black market AK-47, or worse.  Great, thanks Jersey, I hope your state burns with the criminals you call politicians.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Camden, broke it&#8217;s own record for most homicides in 2012, orignally set in 1995.  How many were firearm related?  Doesnt matter, if I were to end up there somehow, these liberal pussies are only preventing me from defending myself.  JHP can punch through some body armor, basically, if I were armed in JerKsey, I would be at a disadvantage, 10 rounds max vs. a full-auto black market AK-47, or worse.  Great, thanks Jersey, I hope your state burns with the criminals you call politicians.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Baker</title>
		<link>http://www.ammoland.com/2013/02/legislative-analysis-of-24-pending-nj-gun-control-bills-for-021313-hearing/#comment-80303</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Baker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2013 05:47:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ammoland.com/?p=108380#comment-80303</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Prohibits possession of ammunition capable of penetrating body armor: This terrible wording could in effect ban all ammo.  Body armor is usually rated for what caliber it is tested (proofed) too.  If a cop wears a t-shirt and calls it body armor, this would ban everything.  But it most certainly bans every rifle round, shotguns(due to close range penetration), and probably at least any pistol above 9mm.  Ridiculous this kind of thing needs to be fought everywhere.  I can see no way anyone can define anything like this as &#039;reasonable&#039;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Prohibits possession of ammunition capable of penetrating body armor: This terrible wording could in effect ban all ammo.  Body armor is usually rated for what caliber it is tested (proofed) too.  If a cop wears a t-shirt and calls it body armor, this would ban everything.  But it most certainly bans every rifle round, shotguns(due to close range penetration), and probably at least any pistol above 9mm.  Ridiculous this kind of thing needs to be fought everywhere.  I can see no way anyone can define anything like this as &#8216;reasonable&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Database Caching using memcached
Object Caching 408/410 objects using apc

 Served from: www.ammoland.com @ 2013-05-21 08:24:48 by W3 Total Cache -->