200 rounds of ammo is a small arsenal? Really?

Register to hide this ad
Anything more than the weapon can hold without reloading is too much to own.
BTW, that number of rounds seems to be 10. Since that's as high a capacity magazine as they want you to have?
 
:eek: OMG! He had hollowpoints! Anti-gun media at it's finest. Or worse.
 
Perhaps some gents or ladies who live in NJ can jump in, but I believe non-police are not allowed to have hollow points.

Also, from the point of view of many police administrators and chiefs from around the country, anything more than 50 rounds is excessive since their patrol people aren't expected to use any more than that in practice.

While some police depts. stress regular qualifications, many don't push it. Think of all
the wonderful police turn-ins over the years that while worn on the outside hadn't seen
more than 100 rounds or 200 rounds in a 20-year period.
 
I know a guy personally that ran afoul of the People's Republik of New Jersey.

He had a .380 in his car loaded with 8 HP's and they stuck a charge on him for each cartridge plus the gun.

Lost his gun, paid a huge fine and a bunch of bucks for a lawyer to avoid jail time.

Young and stupid . . . :(
 
I know a guy personally that ran afoul of the People's Republik of New Jersey.

He had a .380 in his car loaded with 8 HP's and they stuck a charge on him for each cartridge plus the gun.

Lost his gun, paid a huge fine and a bunch of bucks for a lawyer to avoid jail time.

Young and stupid . . . :(

Hollowpoints in Jersey, you can own em, target shoot with them and hunt with them. You CANNOT carry them in your firearm. Only active police officers may carry HP's in Jersey. If you (LEO) retire, you must carry BALL or EFMJ rounds.
 
What bothers me more than 200 rounds being considered an "arsenal" is that a thoughtless remark can result in the confiscation of property and an excessive bail amount.

The government was after him and http://turnerradionetwork.com/ is why.
 
I never read or heard of the guy. So he said some judges "deserved" to be killed? That aint saying he would or wanted to do it! Tell me how often on this board and others have we seen the same thing? Say we are talking about osama Bin lauden? Nobody ever heard that statement? Nobody ever seen similar in charged child molesters etc? Guess we better start watching our mouths and idle talk! Freedom of speach seems to be a thing of the past. Didnt president bush want Bin Laudin, or was it Saadom Husein dead or alive? He wasnt CONVICTED either. These judges are special people, I tell ya! I think every person alive said similar at least in grade school! (Guess the truth hurts!)
 
Wow I have more than twice that much ammo in my BOB, I am like a few others I don't see how the comment he made was a threat in anyway just an opinion. Also what exactly is a "hate blogger" this is the first that I've heard of it, did they make up this title especially for him?
 
feralmerrill,

haven't you heard that obamanation wants a law saying you are a terrorist if you write a letter to you elected officials expressing displeasure with the way they run the country? this whole thing is going to get out of control before it's over, i'm afraid.the military and police say they won't confiscate guns due to illegal orders but what if the "officials" make it a federal law that guns can't be owned by the population? this has been talked about before on here. i wonder how deep the convictions go with those who would be charged with carrying out these seizures? doesn't sound very good to me. what say you all?
 
I'd say that only 200 rounds of ammo is a way too small "arsenal".
 
A mere 200 rounds "an arsenal?" Please.

I loaded more than that Wednesday night.
 
What bothers me more than 200 rounds being considered an "arsenal" is that a thoughtless remark can result in the confiscation of property and an excessive bail amount.

The government was after him and http://turnerradionetwork.com/ is why.

Yep. There was a case like this in my old Con Law text book, it was in there to illustrate that something along these lines was indeed protected speech under the 1A.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top