Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl in Tampa
OH LOOK! blueash is back posting. Here he is at post #58 and he has not yet responded to my post #37.
You may recall that he had ridiculed a statement that I made, and because he believed that "fact" was in error he questioned all the "facts" that I had presented.
The problem is, as proven in post #37 with a direct quote from the law, my fact was correct.
Blueash, who says he posts on this thread only to "correct" the pro-gun posters, can't seem to bring himself to acknowledge that he was wrong when he said my statement was incorrect.
Wonder why....................
.
|
I post when I know an answer, I don't speculate, I try not to claim any expertise if I don't have it. I am not a lawyer nor a legislator. I believe but do not know that you are misunderstanding the NJ law. I believe it allows but does not require the use of smart guns by police once they have been approved by a special panel to look specifically at the issue from a police perspective. I have written to a member of the NJ legislature asking for a clarification who was involved in the drafting of the legislation and I await a reply from that legislator or his staff. So no, I did not ignore you. Instead what I did was seek competent advise and information so that I could correctly reply to your contention. Multiple online sites believe as I do that the law exempts police. Here are several examples from pro-gun sites and organizations, but they are not authoritative:
"The NRA did not respond to requests for comment, but Scott L. Bach, the executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, said the technology is flawed, and could put gun owners in danger when it fails. He also questioned why law enforcement officers are exempt.“New Jersey’s smart-gun law is as dumb as it gets,” Bach, of West Milford, said in a statement. “It forces you to use an unproven technology to defend your life, and then exempts the state from liability when the gun goes ‘click’ instead of ‘bang.’ If it’s such a great idea, then
law enforcement shouldn’t be exempt, and the free market should be allowed to determine its viability.” - See more at:
NJ's 2002 smart-gun law could take effect soon, limit supply - NJ State News - NorthJersey.com
From Fox News which you might consider authoritative
New Jersey Smart Gun Legislation Enacted | Fox News
Under the New Jersey law, the technology will be required in all new handguns sold three years after the state attorney general determines a smart gun prototype is safe and commercially available.
Weapons used by law enforcement officers would be exempt.
'Smart gun' law, a first, is signed N.J. becomes the only state to require that guns eventually contain technology that thwarts unauthorized use. - Philly.com
Police organizations supported the law, but lobbied to have themselves exempted from its requirements. The original idea for the smart gun was to protect officers from having their weapons turned against them.
Under the law, a panel would be appointed to review when such weapons
could be used by law enforcement
This quote from the Philadelphia Inquirer interprets the law the way I would interpret subsection dd, in that it allows law enforcement to use smart guns but not require. So I will reply with a definitive answer when/if I receive a reply from NJ. I will only add that my understanding of the law is consistent with everything I found in reading multiple website. There will be no requirement for NJ police to adopt smart gun technology, just an option. So we will have to agree to disagree about whether you have proven anything.