|
|
|
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 |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
