Quote:
Originally Posted by matthewb0051
Jeez, guilty until you prove to the contrary? I've seen that before in about 2008ish when Congress slipped a similar burden shift into the UCMJ sexual assault statute. Totally unconstitutional but why should that matter?
Pretty sure I have a couple of .22 rifles that fit the NJ def of assault weapon. One was my Granny's, who knew she was a criminal?
God speed to Mr. Nappen!
|
At one point our legislators wanted to ban tube loaded .22 cal rifles because they held too many rounds. That got nixed.
__________________
Si non potes inimicum tuum vincere, habeas eum amicum and ride a big blue trike.
"'Bipartisan' usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out."
|