NJ: Proposal would prohibit battlefield muskets and popular deer muzzleloaders

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jerse...4960.xml&coll=1
Proposal would prohibit battlefield muskets and popular deer muzzleloaders
Thursday, May 10, 2007
BY BRIAN T. MURRAY
Star-Ledger Staff

The Continental Army and the Redcoats may have to go at each other with baseball bats in New Jersey.

Revolutionary War buffs who annually re-enact historic conflicts like the Battle of Monmouth with muskets contend they will be disarmed by a proposed gun ban aimed at modern .50-caliber rifles that gun-control advocates call potential terrorist "sniper" weapons.

A bill in the Assembly (A3998) states that antiques and replica guns will be excluded from the ban, but gun advocates say the measure caps that exclusionary rule at .60-caliber rifles -- which would ban muskets carried by many Civil War re-enactors, as well as the Continental Army. The proposed law also extends the ban to popular, one-shot "in-line" muzzleloaders used by thousands of deer hunters, angering many sporting organizations.

"Just about every rifle carried on the American continent prior to 1855 were larger than .60-caliber," said Peter Hefferan of Wantage, a re-enactor and owner of Reactive Technologies, a private firearms consulting operation that works with law enforcement.

"You'll wipe out re-enactors of the American Revolution. The whole concept of the re-enactment is history, and it is required that everything be accurate right down to the threading of the garments and the number of buttons, even the type of buttons," he said.

The arrest this week of six suspected terrorists accused of trying to kill personnel at Fort Dix has provided some steam for the controversial gun-ban bill.

"We have no intent of damaging or impeding the ability of hunters to hunt or re-enactors to do what they do," said Bryan Miller of Cease Fire New Jersey. "But every time we try to get people from the other side of this debate to help us draft a bill that works, they refuse. If this bill is flawed, it's their own fault."

Still, Assemblyman Reed Gusciora (D-Mercer), a primary sponsor of the .50-caliber ban, said he hopes to clear up the dispute with hunters and re-enactors by introducing amendments today when the measure goes before the Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee in Trenton.

"I just went to a tour of the Princeton battlefield today, so I understand the importance of the re-enactors and I plan to make sure the legislation is clearer so they are not affected. The amendments also will take out in-line muzzleloaders," Gusciora said.

The target of the law is supposedly the civilian model of the .50-caliber BMG rifle, including the bolt-action as well as any semi-automatic version of the gun. Such rifles are capable of effectively firing a .50-caliber, fixed-ammunition round about 1,000 yards.

A few trained military snipers have been able to kill enemy targets at much longer distances since the guns were invented in 1917.

Large and cumbersome, they are not widely owned in the United States, have not been used in crimes and, according to firearms experts, cannot shoot down commercial airplanes as some claim. But gun-control activists contend the large-caliber rifle has no legitimate sporting purpose and that, in the era of home-grown terrorists, the time has come to ban the gun.

"Especially in light of the events this week at Fort Dix, we need to remember we're now in a post-9/11 world where we have to be worried about someone misusing this gun," Gusciora said.

The in-line rifles and the guns used by re-enactors are all muzzleloaders -- rifles that use technology dating back hundreds of years. They do not use modern ammunition cartridges.

They are loaded by pouring black powder or powder pellets down the barrel of the rifle and then packing a bullet-type projectile down the barrel on top of the charge.

Some old models are ignited by burning a wick, as with the famous "Three Musketeers." Most replicas and in-line models used today are ignited by pulling a trigger that brings a hammer down to ignite a powder cap or an open pan of black powder, which sends a spark into the chamber of the rifle to ignite the packed powder and projectile in the muzzle.

The hammers are traditionally on the side of the rifle.

But modern "in-line" muzzleloading rifles have the hammer directly at the rear of the gun -- largely to permit hunters to keep their powder dry in damp whether.

About 9,200 deer are shot annually in New Jersey by muzzleloader hunters.

"In-line muzzleloaders are one of the most popular deer guns around. This bill attacks hunting along with the .50-caliber gun they want to ban," said George Howard of the New Jersey Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs. "They almost banned shotguns the last time they tried a bill like this, and I don't know whether it's deliberate or they just don't know what they are doing."

Legislative attempts to ban the .50-caliber BMG rifle have gone on for nearly a decade, but they also have stalled because of murky wording.

"I understand the intent of the law, and I might even agree with that intent," said John Peppas of Long Valley, who is part of the Revolutionary War re-enactment group, the 4th Light Continental Dragoons. "But I don't understand why they can't place the prohibition on the guns they want to prohibit, and not our replicas."

Brian Murray may be reached at bmurray@starledger.com

"A few trained military snipers have been able to kill enemy targets at much longer distances since the guns were invented in 1917"

well i missed a memo...

I am amazed that it was actually mentioned that the 50 BMG is:




Although the time has come to "ban it anyway"... fucktards....

As long as it's not one of those Cold Steel "Brooklyn Smashers" (synthetic baseball bats). Dem be restricted to send to Socialist Jersey too.

Heh, finally got to use the Ninja Turtle.

Anybody see Govenor (Groveler?) Johnny Corzine almost burst into tears talking about his (self-induced near fatal) accident when inteviewed in front of Cooper Hospital? What a "sensitive" in touch with his feelings modern guy he is.

I swear if I ever hear someone say "post 9/11 world" to me, I'm gonna bitch slap them. Since when do we judge time based upon a terrorist event? Oh shit 9/11, 9/11, 9/11!!!! What are we gonna do?! Bunch of guys grabbed box cutters and took over planes and smashed them into buildings, so lets ban every conceivable weapon an American can get their hands on. Because we all know that terrorists are law abiding Americans.

These people are ignorant, they think by doing things like this it will all magically stop. Terrorists aren't like normal Americans, they don't hear something is banned and just say, "Aw, well screw it, we'll get something else then." No. They have conviction, it may sound sick, but I almost admire the filthy bastards. They don't quit, they don't stop. They don't have something, they make it. Is it wrong to admire ones enemy?

Right now, floating free online, in book stores, printed out and in the wrong hands. Are plans to make everything from silenced pen guns, to anti-tank guns and rocket launchers. A guy I worked with here in Iraq went to his local Army surplus store and ordered a used Apache barrel, a few days later he had a .50 BMG. Said it shot great, and was a blast. He made it from the Apache barrel which requires nothing but cash to buy, some plate steal, a drill press, and a side grinder. If they want it, they'll get it.

Another thing, they think because its a big bullet that it will magically demolish a plane in one shot like some kind of movie or video game. That is the most ignorant thing I've ever read. The only way Mr. 50 cal is gonna take down that plane is if he wastes the pilot AND copilot. Now seeing as how I work in Iraq, I've been on a plane more times than a few. Those windows aren't that thick. I sure don't think they are bullet proof, they don't look like it to me. If anything I'd bet a .308 would punch through that glass just fine, and if it didn't an AP round surely would. Oh but those are banned? Wait are bullet molds, raw steel, and a mini furnace also banned? It would be difficult but someone so obsessed with creating an AP round could do it, no doubt about it.

I got it let's ban all guns! Everyone of them! Guess what, you just alienated a bunch of law abiding Americans, by making them felons. And we aren't like the Eurotrash or the Aussies. We'll keep our guns even if we can't use them, you still won't get them. We'll bury them in the ground, under porches, hide them in lakes, rivers and streams, on mountains, in caves, in the very walls of our homes. And if it came to it and you told us, "We know you have them somewhere. Give them here or else" I will take my beloved Saigas out of their case, take them to my garage and procede to cut them into a thousand pieces, before I ever give you any single one of my guns in any form that will give you aid in any way.

I can see where they come from on this though. I understand that momma slapped them when they were little and gave them that bit of fear that hung with them forever. And now scary loud things need to go away because of what COULD happen. There is a village in Pakistan, that manufactures thousands of bullets, and on average 1000 firearms, rifles and handguns combinerd, a DAY. They do this without any form of electricity, by hand. They get the metal from blown up tanks and cars, most of the gunpowder comes from artillery rounds. Don't believe me search Youtube, it's there. These people need to understand if someone wants something, they WILL get it. You don't run your life off what could happen if that were the case we would all live in bomb shelters with a 10 year supply of food, fuel, and water.

Look I'm sorry I wrote a novel here, if I'm way out of line just delete this post. I'm just pissed off about this stuff. I'm finaly old enough, and have the funds to enjoy shooting again and I have some assholes living in a place I've never been nor seen, who don't do dick for me but take my money, telling me what I can and can't own and how I should live my life. And I don't know about ya'll but I'm fed up with some one I don't owe a damn thing pushing their moral/ religious/ political values on me. If you ask me their a bunch of terrorists, because that's exactly what the terrorists want to do. Push THEIR beliefs on US through intimidation and fear.

they tried that here in NY. trust me, when those HOLLAND AND HOLLANDS and GRANDPAS TEN BORE has to be handed over, the people in power will forget all about the law.

remind them of that, New Jerseyiets. they will think twice. had over your mossberg 500 slug barrel that cost you 100 or 150 bucks, and tell your politicians that they or thier husbands must forfeit ther 125k H+H in the humid proof case. see what they say about that. this law would apply to also seize 400 year old octagonal and spun paradox barrels, as well.

thats how we won against that bill, here.

WHAT DO I SHOOT TASTEY ANIMALS WITH THEN?>???? awww....not THAT. yeh,. hand over your 125k gun, asshole. you aint no better than me.

GEORGE WASHINGTON HAD A MUSKET, BUT HE WASNT BEING SHOT AT WITH A MACHINE PISTOL BY A CRIMINAL OR TERRORIST, EITHER.

I will say another thing I say often now, as well.

DO YOU THINK THAT OUR FOREFATHERS DID NOT FORSEE FIREARMS DEVELOPING FURTHER??? give me a break. make laws that make SENSE, not that rob honest americans bound by our forefathers words to defend our state of our means do to so. the originators of this country knew god-damned well what they fucking said on that piece of parchment. and people need to get over it already and TALK and make GOOD laws. THAT WORK.

the right to bear arms allows one to outgun the government, and IT SAYS THAT AS WELL.

anything THEY have, we should be allowed to have, if well-regulated. I have news for you all, that yellow transfer paper is WELL REGULATED. it should end there. but it dont. you all scream NO LAW, when there has to be SOME law, and then the ALL LAW people win once in a while and cripple us all. fuck you im shooting back, in a big way. Im not one of those spineless assholes that dont know what was given to me.

this type of sneaky law making makes me sick. you know they will reverse it when thier showpiece has to be forfeit, and wheres YOUR gun gonna be? GONE.

fuck them. THIS is really whats is undermining america. those people need to focus on OTHER things that are happening and stop playing pussy-foot with it. 10k fine PER HEAD for hiring illegals is a good start, and enabling any bonbded public offcial to make that call on the fine issuance.

another one that comes to mind is why are illegal aliens' babies american citizens? uhhh.,.......think about that for a minute. now THAT dont make sense.

this exact discussion and how it comes out REALLY makes me mad. In a big way.

whos the traitor?? IT AINT ME MY FRIENDS.

I am sorry for the rant.

Thank you BVamp, I got in an argument the other day with a coworker over that. He insisted we had no use for an AK with a 30 round clip, saying it had no legitimate purpose. I said bullshit, there is no sporting purpose clause in the 2nd Amendment. He asked why I would own something like that, I told him because I can and because it pisses people like him off. He said the fore fathers had no clue they were going to invent things like 30 round magazines, I told him of course they did. Ole George and the boys never looked at their muskets and said, "Welp, this is as good as it is going to get."

I told that ignorant fool "What if the government you trust so much told you that you and your family had to leave your home and go to a concentration camp". To which he replied, "That'll never happen". "It happened in Germany", "Well that's different", "And it happened here in America as well". "No it didn't!", "It sure did!" I reply "After Pearl Harbor nearly all Japanese or asian decendants even American born ones, civilians and military alike, were put in conentration camps made from horse stables and barns and the like. Most of them lost everything, because they were only allowed one suitcase, and couldn't make their mortgage payments anymore and lost theirs jobs" I asked him if he'd like a muzzle loader to defend himself from that tyrrany or an AK with a 30 round clip. He replied he'd rather go with them that fight, I asked what if you knew you were gonna lose everything, or die like in Germany wouldn't you at least want a fighting chance? He declined saying he'd rather they just killed him. Pathetic.

This "If this bill is flawed, it's their own fault" is crap. We don't want the law, that's why we don't help you write it. We're aren't going to assist you in making laws that are against the supreme law of the land, The Bill of Rights. The reason we don't let these laws like this happen is because it starts here. And it ends with the gun grabbers getting what they want. A nation of victims. I will never be a victim.

BVamp has a good point about those C&R big bores and H&H hunting rifles. The bad thing is those people that can afford things like that, are somehow immune to the law. Disgraceful. If only George were here he'd probably shove flintlock rifles right up ever gun grabbers ass he could find.


HELL YEAH!

yup, you just re-read what I said. I edited my post and only added to it.

G W had musket and CANNON and passed that RIGHT to US. CANNON TOO. that was no accident.

this is what our attitude should be.

"yeh, and george washingtons troops werent being shot with ak47's either"

fuck them.

I got a nice rail we can tar, feather, and ride them on to the hanging noose with if youi are interested. you can see it in my avatar.

Hellz yeah, they need to be tar and feathered. I never new George had a cannon, I want a cannon. Hell I want a full auto PKM. It pisses me off and amazes me sometimes that the people without the guns are telling the people with the guns what to do. It's only a matter of time.............

it is only because those of us with the guns havent dealt with those that dont. that is why the laws dont make a fucking whit of sense. there has to be a few and some laws, but just like all the rest of america, please leave them to the experts.

I am all for keeping potent wepons out of criminals and terrorists hands. this isnt how you do it.

Holy crapola, am I the reason this got trashed? Dang that wasn't my intention if that is the case I thought me and BVamp were having a good lively conversation.

+1 on that, that is the stupidest shit i ever heard and retarded politicans and reporters say it all the time now

None of these gun bans make any sense and they are all made up by idiots who kbnow nothing about guns.

I know it's like 9/11 was the greatest turning point in our entire society. I mean why don't we live in a post 4/19 world? (Oklahoma City Bombing) Or a post 2/28 world? (Branch Dividian siege) To me the killing of 79 people by our own government while in THEIR CHURCH, is pretty mind numbing to me.

Oh well. But honestly what can we do about this? Join NRA, JPF, GOA? Send our money to some groups and hope they use it the way we want it to be used? Write letter, emails and make phone calls to local, state and federal officials? Storm the walls of DC and demand our rights?

All we want is our right to keep our firearms for self defense or any other reason why have. If someone tells you that you have an inferiority complex and thats why you need a gun. Tell them they're a hopolophobe and thats why they dont want you to have one. It is important that these things be kept from criminals and the insane. It says that the right to keep and bear arms was just that a right. Is it justifiable to takes a persons right even if they are a criminal? For that matter what defines the word "people", in the 2nd Amendment. If someone takes a right they have and uses it with ill intent are they no longer a "person of the people". Are they forever a criminal?

It's hard defining these things. Some would say yes, you commit a crime and you are no longer one of the people and don't deserve the right. I think yes, that if you take a right and use it to harm others directly with fear or by pain of death you are no longer a person of the people. There should be a seperate statute of laws for these kinds of things. For example: Armed robbery with a knife= 5 years, armed robbery with a gun= 20 years.

It is not the gun that makes competent men into criminals. I believe this is the only way for us to all get what we want. We want our guns, we want to use them, to carry them to keep them. On the other side of the line, they want to take them and melt them down so we can't have them and so criminals can't get them. The problem is, we won't bow down to them, but maybe we aren't helping enough either. Guns will never go away, if someone wants something they will get it, bottom line. Punishing the majority for minority is ridiculous. Making guns or ammo so expensive only the wealthy may have them is unconstitutional. It's ignorant to think you can allow someone to make them and set the bottom price. And you can't shutdown the gun industry. There is a reason why they are so powerful in Washington. It's a BIG business, with LOTS of AMERICAN employees.

It would be stupid to vote to shutdown the gun industry in a time where people need jobs. Hell I had to move to Iraq to find a damn job. I've been here going on 3 freaking years and don't know when I'll get to go home. I can find a job at home, but not one you can live any kind of life off of. Not at my age.

922r is stupid beyond belief. The bill Clinton put in that said only Saigas and VEPRs and a few other rifles can be imported in from Russia is idiotic. I'm an American damnit, I pay my taxes, I do my part. I should be able to buy whatever damn rifle or handgun I want from whatever country I want so long as it conforms to all local laws. Half the electronic shit in my house is manufactured in Japan or China, and China is a fucking Communist country. I can own cars from German (BMW), motorcycles from England (Triumph), and 4-wheelers from Canada (Bombardier). But I can buy a Tigr hunting rifle from Russia? WTF? We've never fought a war with Russia other than a "my winky is bigger war". On the other hand we have fought against Germany, England, and Japan. Ignorant laws.

We need something better. I have an idea. If I were a law maker, I wouldn't write a law about airplanes. I don't know dick about an airplane other than they scare the shit out of me. So why is it people who don't shoot, carry, or own guns are writing laws about them.

OK Cliff-notes:

I believe in harsher time for crimes commited using guns, and the revoking of the right to bear arms for said individuals.

922 is stupid, and so is the Clinton-Putin arms agreement.

What ideas do ya'll have that'll apease the gun grabbers yet give us more rights at the same time?

I have yet to hear an anti-gun proponent make a reasoned argument as to why my rights to firearms should be restricted. Almost to a person, they make the "logical" assumption that if there were no guns then there would be no crimes involving guns.
Somehow, it is impossible for them to make the connection that even without GUN crime, there would still be CRIME and CRIMINALS.

I once debated gun control with a journalist this way:

He asked me why I would ever need an "assault" rifle for private ownership.
I asked him why he'd want to use a computer and word processing software (complete with spell checker) when a pencil, some paper, and a dictionary would suffice.
I also asked him that if I hired someone to build me a house, and it fell on top of me because the carpenter didn't do his job properly, do I go after the carpenter or the tools that he used?
His reply was that both questions were ridiculous analogies for gun control because guns only have one purpose and that is to kill.
My point is that guns are only tools. Nothing more, nothing less.

We have several thousand laws addressing violent crime conducted with a firearm. To me that is reasonable enough.

I am in no way interested in appeasing such narrow-minded people. It is even more hypocritical when the politicians who draft laws making it impossible for you to defend yourself at any time or place are protected 24/7 by bodyguards.

I have a theory as to why gun-control is so appealing to some sectors of society (other than believing the hype about guns being "evil").
I think there are certain people that like the idea of relying on the police to protect them because it removes a level of responsibility and accountability from their lives. If that is in fact the case, I have no problem with that. What I can't understand is why they would think that I would want to live that way?

amen to that this thread doesn't belong in trash. this is real stuff. i don't see any internal conflict among members. lots of rantin and ravin but it's all mutual.