|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
NJ: New Jersey attorney general moves ahead with firearm ‘micro-stamping’ regulations
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
New Jersey's top law enforcement officer has outlined the state's plans for mandating gun retailers sell firearms with microstamping technology.
Attorney General Matthew Platkin announced Tuesday that his office has formally established a process for handguns to be included on the state’s microstamping-enabled firearms roster.
Under the new standards, a firearm must leave an "identifying marker" on expended cartridge cases, perform without physically deforming or deteriorating when firing rounds and with no less reliability than other commercial firearms sold in New Jersey, "and otherwise comply with all applicable State and federal laws," Platkin said. |
| Comment by:
shootergdv
(8/24/2023)
|
| Ignorance coupled with arrogance . Guess exceptions made for LEO ? |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
