New Jersey Gun Control Laws

State: New Jersey

Author: Paul D. Ciuppa (NetChatTV)

December 19, 2018

The stronger gun control is for law-abiding citizens, the easier it is for criminals. We need to go through extensive background checks here in New Jersey from the state, county, and local police just to get a firearm purchase card. That allows you to only buy rifles and shotguns. Then when you want to buy a handgun you need to go back to your local police station, pay again, and wait for the process all over again! When you receive the permit and go to the firearm store to buy… with all your paperwork …you need to get another background check! Totally redundant and totally useless..all as a deterrent to buy and to make money for the state of New Jersey! Law-abiding citizens are considered guilty of GOING to commit a crime here in New Jersey as soon as you apply for a permit to purchase. Not innocent before proving you can’t be trusted with a firearm but GUILTY! They have you convicted and sentenced as soon as you apply!! Meanwhile, if you were a criminal wouldn’t it be much easier to go out on the street and purchase a firearm…easy peasy. These laws do absolutely NOTHING to fight crime with a firearm…in fact…it makes it much much easier for criminals. Look at Wyoming, when you turn 18 you can purchase and carry a firearm until you prove you can’t! Remember one thing, if you want to commit a crime with a firearm you will!! Whether you had a permit to carry and purchase or NOT. You can always get a firearm here in New Jersey illegally…easy as taking a shit after drinking 4 glasses of apple cider!! So, if the anti-gun people really stopped and thought about it..they TOO will see strict gun control only benefits criminals and people that do not follow the laws anyway!
My opinion…


Temple University stands by Marc Lamont Hill after CNN fires him for anti-Israel remarks

By Brian FloodSamuel Chamberlain | Fox News


At least one person is somehow too polarizing for cable news, but apparently just fine for academia.

Temple University stood by Marc Lamont Hill on Thursday, the same day he was fired from CNN after he gave a speech at the United Nations in which he used language critics described as a dog whistle advocating the elimination of Israel.

Hill, a now-former CNN commentator, is also a professor of media studies and urban education at Temple University in Philadelphia. While the school doesn’t necessarily agree with Hill’s controversial rhetoric, it feels he has the right to speak freely.

“Marc Lamont Hill has been quoted extensively over the last 24 hours. Marc Lamont Hill does not represent Temple University and his views are his own. However, we acknowledge that he has a constitutionally protected right to express his opinion as a private citizen,” a Temple spokesperson told Fox News.

Hill had come under criticism for his remarks during a Wednesday meeting of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People in observance of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. He accused the Israeli government of “normalizing settler colonialism” and called for a “free Palestine from the river to the sea,” a remark that got applause from participating diplomats.

At one point, Hill poured himself some water and told participants that he just got off a flight from “Palestine” and that “I was boycotting the Israeli water so I was unable to quench my thirst.”


“If we are standing in solidarity with the Palestinian people, we must recognize the right of an occupied people to defend itself,” Hill said during a portion of his speech comparing the Palestinian movement with the American civil-rights movement. “We must prioritize peace, but we must not romanticize or fetishize it.”

On Thursday morning, Hill attempted to defend his remarks on Twitter. He wrote: “In my speech, I talked about the need to return to the pre-1967 borders, to give full rights to Palestinian citizens of Israel, and to allow right of return. No part of this is a call to destroy Israel. It’s absurd on its face.”

Still, critics noted that the phrase “from the river to the sea” is used regularly by numerous anti-Israel groups, including the terror group Hamas. Hill responded by claiming that the phrase “precedes Hamas by more than 50 years” and “has a variety of meanings.”

Media watchdogs pointed out that Hill’s controversial comment at the U.N. didn’t jibe with CNN’s anti-hate programming. The network parted ways with him after hours of speculation over the situation, during which many media critics questioned whether or not CNN would take action.


“Marc Lamont Hill is no longer under contract with CNN,” a spokesperson for the cable network told Fox News.

Hill previously taught at Morehouse College in Atlanta and Columbia University in New York.

Fox News’ Adam Shaw contributed to this report.

Mark Penn: The Mueller investigation has come up empty on Russia — You won’t believe what’s coming next

By Mark Penn | Fox News


The pattern and purpose of Mueller’s investigation and the endgame is becoming clear, and yes, it’s clearly get the president at all costs. The team Mueller hired really foretold the story — Andrew Weissmann as the stop-at-nothing pit bull and a group of Democratic-leaning lawyers, including some who have represented the Clintons, had the obstruction of justice charge ready to go on day one.

Trump’s first team of lawyers with their “don’t worry and cooperate” strategy set the president back, and let the whole thing spiral out of control.

The investigation, I believe, has come up truly empty on its central charge related to the president — collusion with the Russian government. They are now trying to find someone, anyone who had any contact with Julian Assange with the aim of calling that collusion-lite.

But mostly what Mueller’s team is doing is bludgeoning witnesses on unrelated charges to piece together a case against the president. They are shaping that case through the indictments — and threats of indictments — that are being used to get guilty pleas to make the president seem like an obstructor or co-conspirator. They are literally creating the crimes.

Let’s review what Mueller and his team are doing:

Michael Flynn — They discovered unreported lobbying by Trump’s former National Security Adviser and leveraged that to get him to plead guilty to lying to the FBI. Why? So that they can claim Trump’s comment to James Comey about letting him go was obstruction of justice. Yet no other prosecutor would ever have brought this charge.

Michael Cohen — They got Trump’s former lawyer on all sorts of financial crimes related to his businesses and loans. But he pled guilty to campaign finance violations for payments that in the past would have been ruled on as personal expenses. Now they’ve also gotten him to cop to lying about when he killed the perfectly legal Russia tower project, only it appears that Trump’s lawyers ducked that perjury trap in the written questions.

George Papadopoulos— The former member of  Trump’s foreign policy advisory panel was forced to plead to lying about the timing of his contacts. The goal was to legitimize the start of the investigation around him when all he did was pass on a surmise or a tip he received. Was the time and expense worth a 14-day sentence? Of course not. They had all the records they needed to figure out who he contacted when.

Jerome Corsi – The best-selling author was threatened with pleading to lying about his contacts with his friend and former Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone. There was nothing illegal about his comments or actions, and he is a journalist, though obviously, the general rules of journalism don’t apply to conservatives like him.

Roger Stone — The former Trump campaign adviser sent out a tweet suggesting Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta was next, and an email to Corsi asking him to get the rest of the emails. He was obviously trying to find out what was going on with these emails, and that’s not illegal in any way.

Paul Manafort – The former Trump presidential campaign chairman’s old tax and reporting cases going far back were dusted off to get him under the thumb of the prosecutor. It was revealed that he continued a joint defense agreement with the president and suddenly the prosecutor is saying he lied about his business dealings. It’s all about vengeance on him for failing to give them what they want and to make Trump look bad.

Sure, there are some anonymous Russians who will never be tried to add on top of this record. But it’s clear now Mueller is no longer looking for crimes in the presidential race of 2016. He is simply creating a narrative to delegitimize the president and to string together his words to Comey with the Flynn indictment, Cohen with Stormy Daniels payment, Roger Stone and Jerome Corsi with ties to Julian Assange, and now Cohen with underplaying Russia connections. And let’s not forget the Trump Tower meeting with the attorney who was also conveniently working with Fusion GPS.

There’s no doubt that the outline of Mueller’s report was written a long time ago and is being filled in. For those who thought Mueller would deliver a balanced and thoughtful report, these latest actions suggest that instead, we are seeing an all-out attack on the president and the presidency the likes of which we have never seen.

Get ready for the fight of the century coming soon and it will be about everything except collusion with the Russian government.

Mark Penn is managing director of the Stagwell Group. He was chief strategist on Bill Clinton’s 1996 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton’s 2000 Senate campaign, and Mrs. Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.

Trump shares image calling for his opponents to face trials for ‘treason’


President Trump on Wednesday morning shared an image calling for his opponents to face trial for “treason,” with many of them behind bars.

The image, which the president retweeted from a pro-Trump Twitter account, depicts a host of figures Trump has criticized, including former President Obama, 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, special counsel Robert Mueller, former FBI Director James Comeyand former President Bill Clinton.

“Now that Russia collusion is a proven lie, when do the trials for treason begin?” the caption on the photo reads.


Several of the figures in the image were targeted with mailed explosives allegedly from a Trump supporter last month.

The retweet comes as reports emerge that Mueller’s team is working on their final report about its investigation into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Trump on Monday lashed out at Mueller as a “conflicted prosecutor gone rogue” following a new filing from the special counsel that claims Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafortviolated a plea agreement by lying to federal prosecutors.

In a series of tweets, Trump accused Mueller of causing “tremendous” damage to the nation’s criminal justice system and “only looking at one side” in his investigation.

Border agents used pepper spray more under Obama than under Trump

Federal law enforcement at the border used tear gas and pepper spray during the Obama administration at significantly higher rates than either of the two years President Trump has been in office, according to government data obtained by the Washington Examiner.

Under President Barack Obama in 2013, U.S. Customs and Border Protection used Pava Capsaicin, known as pepper spray, at nearly three times the rate it did in 2017, Donald Trump’s first year in office.

In 2012, 95 pepper spray incidents were reported. That number surged to 151 in 2013 then dropped to 109 in 2014, according to data provided by the Department of Homeland Security.

Pepper spray incidents then dropped significantly to 30 in 2015 and 49 in 2016.

In 2017, 56 similar incidents took place. In the last fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, saw 43 deployments of pepper spray under Trump. The spray is directed toward an assailant’s eyes and causes the eyeballs to burn for a few minutes.

CBP, a homeland security agency that includes U.S. Border Patrol, Air, and Marine Operations, and the Office of Field Operations, has also been using tear gas since 2010. DHS only provided data since 2012.

Tear gas, technically referred to as 2-chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile (CS), was used by CBP officers and Border Patrol agents on 26 occasions in 2012.

That number dropped over the next few years down to three total incidents in fiscal 2016.

The use of tear gas has crept back up to levels seen in 2012 and 2013 during Trump’s first two years in office. In 2017, 18 deployments of gas were documented. Twenty-nine were counted in 2018.

Border Patrol agents stationed in the San Diego Sector used tear gas Sunday when between 500 and 1,000 people attempted to storm the border near the San Ysidro port of entry.

Images from the incident showed agents used the gas after people started crawling in a gap between old, dilapidated fencing and new, replacement wall.

However, other images of the event showed families and children in the vicinity, prompting some Central American leaders and U.S. Democratic politicians to scold CBP and the Trump administration for what they said were attacks on children.

[Opinion: Don’t want your kids to get tear-gassed? Leave them at home when you riot]

“Under no circumstances should CBP be using tear gas on children. This show of violence is outrageous and inhumane. The migrants at our southern border are human beings, including mothers and small children, who are exercising their legal, human right to seek asylum,” Lorella Praeli, deputy political director at the ACLU, said in a statement.

Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, wrote on Twitter that chemical weapons were being used.

“Tear gas across the border against unarmed families is a new low,” Schatz wrote. “Who gave the order? Did it implement or contravene policy? … Why tear gas? Is this consistent with the Conventions on Chemical Weapons?”

Schatz later deleted the set of tweets.

Mexico’s Interior Ministry announced Monday it was deporting 98 foreigners who had assaulted federal law enforcement on Sunday.

Late Monday, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said more than 600 members of the 10,000 migrants are convicted criminals.