Can someone translate this?
 

(1) How is armor piercing ammunition defined under New Jersey law?

A: Under N.J.S. 2C:39-1gg., armor piercing ammunition is defined as:

(1) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and is constructed entirely, excluding the presence of traces of other substances, from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or (2) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile. (3) "Armor piercing ammunition" shall not include shotgun shot required by federal or State environmental or game regulations for hunting purposes, a frangible projectile designed for target shooting, a projectile which the United States Attorney General finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes, or any other projectile or projectile core which the United States Attorney General finds is intended to be used for industrial purposes, including a charge used in an oil gas well perforating device.


I wonder if number 2 is limited to those listed in (1)?

I can't translate what you posted but to me an armor piercing round is designed to penetrate armor.

So anything that can't isn't??? :confused:

That would make sense unless you were in New Jersey.

Note the word "or", in bold. To me, that means number 2 is not limited to items specified in number 1.

I read it as:
1. No steel or other metal core allowed. Bullet must be pure lead basically. OR
2. If bigger than .22, any metal jacket must be thin and not weight more than 25% of total bullet.
3. "AP" doesn't apply to shotgun for hunting, target rounds, sporting or cartridges for industrial uses

Thanks. I've also had to replace all my mags larger than 10 rounds.:mad:

(not a lawyer or gunsmith here)
I re-read and may have made a mistake with the crappy language.

def of AP:
"a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and is constructed entirely, excluding the presence of traces of other substances, from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium"

-If bigger than .22, then the outer copper/steel jacket can't weight more than 25% of total.

-But the core may be composed of the other metals including denatured uranium as long as it's not 100%.
Dip it in copper chrome and it's ok i think.

As a lay person, I agree with this interpretation^^.

It's the "entirely" and "traces" terms that are still a bit open. Just how much is "traces?" Conceivably, a bullet constructed of all or some of the mentioned metals and some portion of lead would not be "entirely" constructed of those forbidden metals. Don't even know if it's practical to make an AP projectile with lead in the core, but, IMO, it would not qualify as AP from the definition as the presence of lead in more than a trace amount, removes it from being entirely made from the hardened metals.

I translate it to read:

we, the leftist politicians of New Joisey, hate the 2nd amendment. We are doing all we can think of to erode your right to keep and bear arms.

that is indeed the hidden text. If I don't permanently pin/alter my mags at 10 rounds it is punishable by 18 months and $10K!

FYI for anyone interested
 

STATE OF NJ AND NATIONAL GUN BAN GROUPS
PILE ON IN ANJRPC’S MAGAZINE BAN LAWSUIT!


State of NJ, Everytown, & Giffords Center Move Against
Injunction That Would Put Mag Ban on Hold While Court Decides Case

State Calls Previously Legal Magazines “Dangerous and Unusual Weapons” Not Protected by the Second Amendment

State Says Banned Magazines “Not Needed” For Self-Defense,“Perfectly Suited For Illicit Use,” Yet Creates Exemptions to Protect Lawmakers With Them

Court to Hear Argument on Injunction Request Tomorrow

July 11, 2018. ANJRPC’s federal lawsuit to overturn Governor Murphy’s firearms magazine ban is starting to pick up speed. There has been a flurry of activity since the court scheduled an expedited hearing on ANJRPC’s request for an injunction (to halt enforcement of the ban until the case is decided).

The State of New Jersey was first to oppose the injunction motion, arguing among other things that the newly banned magazines are “dangerous and unusual weapons” not protected by the Second Amendment, which pose a danger to the public even in the hands of law-abiding citizens. The State also argues that the banned magazines are not needed for self-defense, but are “perfectly suited for illicit use.”

“Claiming that banned magazines are not needed for self-defense while simultaneously exempting their use for the protection of lawmakers is outrageous and the height of hypocrisy,” said ANJRPC Executive Director Scott Bach. “This elitist double standard is irrational, indefensible, and shows the utter contempt New Jersey has for its ‘subjects,’” said Bach.

Piling onto the State’s papers, the Giffords Law Center and Everytown For Gun Safety filed their own opposition to the injunction motion, arguing among other things that standard capacity magazines are best suited for military use, that NJ’s prior regulation of magazine capacity for several decades makes the new ban presumptively valid, and that the ban will make mass shooting incidents “less lethal.”

On July 9, ANJRPC ripped all of these arguments to shreds in a reply brief filed in the case.

Click here to see all the key filings in ANJRPC’s magazine ban lawsuit.

Tomorrow (July 12), The U.S. District Court is scheduled to hear argument on ANJRPC’s request for an injunction halting enforcement of the ban. A decision on the motion could come later this month.

This case was filed in cooperation with the National Rifle Association. “We thank the NRA for its incredible support and guidance, which made this aggressive lawsuit challenging the magazine ban possible,” said Bach.

(This needs to become reality)

https://www.thoughtco.com/about-that-proposed-28th-amendment-3299418
" Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States"."