From [HERE] The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on Wednesday upheld New Jersey’s law limiting the amount of ammunition that can be held in a single firearm magazine.

New Jersey established the law in response to the dramatic spike in active and mass shootings in the twenty-first century. The court cited statistics to show the 160-percent increase in active and mass shootings from 2006 to 2015. The law places a 10-round limit on the amount of ammunition that can be held in a single firearm magazine at one time. Those exempt from the law include active and retired law enforcement officers, and active military members.

On the same day the bill was signed into law, the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs and two of its members filed the lawsuit, seeking to strike down the law as unconstitutional and enjoin law enforcement officials from enforcing it.

The court upheld the law in accordance with the lower court’s decision, saying:

New Jersey’s law reasonably fits the State’s interest in public safety and does not unconstitutionally burden the Second Amendment’s right to self-defense in the home. The law also does not violate the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause because it does not require gun owners to surrender their magazines but instead allows them to retain modified magazines or register firearms that have magazines that cannot be modified.

The court further held that the law’s exemption for law enforcement officials does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection clause because they “have training and experience that makes them different from ordinary citizens.” The court also struck down the request for an injunction against the law’s enforcement.

[A STATE MONOPOLY ON WEAPONS? Last week NJ.com released a study that showed cops in New Jersey disproportionately assault, shoot, detain, search & arrest Black people despite a record low and consistently declining statewide crime rate.]

According to statist belief “the people” have delegated powers to politicians. And politicians have transferred or given police the moral right to commit acts of unprovoked violence on people. That is, police officers have acquired the moral right to initiate violence and commit acts of aggression against others (by way of so-called “laws”) “to protect” the people for their own benefit. [MORE]

Question here: can you delegate a right to someone that you don’t have? where does authority, the right to rule others, come from? Asked differently, you don’t have the right to initiate unprovoked acts of force against other people - so how can you delegate or authorize another person to do such things? How did police acquire such super-human powers? [MORE]

According to FUNKTIONARY: 

Second Amendment - (to the Constitution for the United States)—is only intended for a militia to enforce the First Amendment if and when deemed necessary. Every non-felon in the street has the guaranteed right to be packin' heat. Slave states (the overwhelming majority) are those that have criminalized openly carrying firearms. In the case of Silveira v. Lockver, Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski summed up the importance of the right to keep and bear arms: "The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once." The right to keep and bears arms actually serves as more than an insurance policy, it also serves as a deterrent. For when would-be tyrants know that the citizenry is well-armed, they think twice about imposing tyranny. (See: Gun Control & Militia)

tyrants - there are none; only tyranny exists. How can one man or woman rule a multitude against their will except through mind-control and word-conditioning control? "Find out the exact amount of injustice any people accept, and you will find out the exact amount of injustice they receive." -Freddy D. "The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it." -John Jay, Castilian Days II, 1872. (See: Tyranny, Terms, "The Law," Dictatorship, Corporate State & Fascism)

tyranny - the miscarriage of self-government. 2) the absence of ethical anarchy. In our system, tyranny must have an accomplice. The perpetrator by intent must be accommodated by the perpetrator by consent. The former initiates, the latter accommodates. Of all tyrannies, the greatest is the tyranny of the ego-mind. "If the government is allowed to place a tax on what is a natural right it can raise that tax to the point where that right has been effectively destroyed. That is tyranny."" Butcher's Union Company v. Crescent City. "No man, no group, and no nation has the right to any man's individual freedom. No matter how pure the motive, how great the emergency, how high the principle, such action is nothing but tyranny. It is never justified." -John W. Parsons. Tyranny Law #1 - Any power that can be abused will be abused. Tyranny Law #2 - Abuse always expands to fill the limits of resistance to it. Tyranny Law #3 - If people don't resist the abuses of others, they will have no one to resist the abuses of themselves, and tyranny will prevail. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime, and the punishment of his guilt. -John Curran. Retaining and exercising the unalienable right to distribute one's own property and wealth without restriction is the only guarantee of freedom from tyranny. (See: Labor, Anarchy, Appropriation, Income Taxes, IRS, Bill of Rights, Property, Freedom, Self-Determination, GIMME!, Autotyranny, Matrix, Organizations, Private Services & Liberation)