|
|
|
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:
Did restrictive New Jersey gun laws kill Carol Bowne?
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"A brutal murder case in southern New Jersey has put that state’s restrictive gun laws in the spotlight, and yesterday’s National Review fingered the 'deadly consequences' of those laws as police hunted for the man they believe stabbed a woman to death earlier this week."
"Carol Bowne had applied for a gun permit in April. She had a protective order against a man who has been described as an ex-boyfriend, but he allegedly killed her, anyway. So much for the deterrent effect of a piece of paper against someone determined to harm." ... |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(6/10/2015)
|
NJ law requires the resident's 'controlling authority' respond to applications for FOIDs or handgun purchase permits 'within 30 days'. The Police Chief in her jurisdiction didn't. When questioned, he stated he 'wasn't aware of the time limit' . IOW a bureaucratic "FU" to Ms. Browne and her surviving family he'll not be penalized for !!
My eldest, a licensed EMT, whose license requires both state and federal background certifications, experienced the same delays. He moved out of NJ.
We'll never know if having a hand gun would have saved Ms. Browne, but CCW isn't possible for ordinary citizens in NJ. But far better to make your case to twelve than be carried by six. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
