Guest Post: New Jersey Will Pay You $1000 To Destroy The 2nd Amendment

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt Market

New Jersey Will Pay You $1000 To Destroy The 2nd Amendment

There is nothing more disgusting or detestable than a citizen informant.  Without citizen informants, tyrants could never retain the kind of power they wield.  In fact, without citizen informants, totalitarian movements would never gain traction.  This is why EVERY functional oligarchy throughout history has implemented programs designed to encourage the development of common spies, using the promise of monetary reward, or collective recognition.  

Sadly, there are many in our society that would gladly sell out their closest friends and family to the tortures of authoritarian bureaucracy for nothing more than a firm pat on the head and a few fiat dollars.  If there was ever a more degraded lot of bottom feeding opportunist scum, the citizen informant is the very epitome.

With the implementation of the “See Something, Say Something” program, and the increasing drive by the White House to institute community watch efforts to route out “extremists”, showcased quite clearly in strategic outlines like the  ‘Empowering Local Partners To Prevent Violent Extremism In The United States’:

The issue of informant networking has come to the forefront in America.  My personal view is that these nauseating and diseased people should be treated as treasonous as any globalist, regardless of stated intention.  That said, in an environment rife with extraneous poverty, informancy cannot be avoided.  Plenty of men and women, stricken with empty wallets and bellies, are extraordinarily prone to betrayal, regardless of their inherent morality.  This is the kind of world we will soon be living in, and this is the kind of environment that corrupt officials like those in New Jersey are prone to exploit.  Pathetic, weak, cowardly, but ultimately dangerous sheep unknowingly serving the very men who would seek to enslave them. 

In terms of 2nd Amendment rights, I find the very idea of debate rather pointless.  The logic is undeniable.  If you cannot defend yourself, you are a victim.  Period.  You become food for predators and parasites.  Any state government or national government which actively seeks to disarm its citizens is suspect.  I couldn’t care less about their stated rationalizations or rhetoric.  In New Jersey, in Chicago, in Washington D.C., or anywhere else for that matter, an innocent man who is disarmed by law will always be victimized by an outlaw who armed through criminality.  The concept of reduced crime through gun confiscation is so naïve it warrants considerable analysis.  Through such efforts, good men are left defenseless, while evil men are free to wreak havoc. 

The 2nd Amendment is not a negotiable or debatable pillar of the Constitution.  It is absolute in its protection.  Every American, regardless of the temporary circumstances of the times, is free to arm and defend himself from ANY enemy, from average criminals, to government thugs.  The gun confiscation program featured in the video below, and instituted by officials in New Jersey, should not be taken lightly.  The pure idiocy inherent in its premise cannot be ignored.  New Jersey’s willingness to pay off potential informants could very well be a petri dish test for much more expansive programs across the country in the future.  If we cannot stop the corruption and anti-constitutionalism of a pathetic state like New Jersey, then how can we expect to disrupt the same brand of corruption throughout the U.S.?

Guns are simply not the issue.  An armed and educated populace is a populace safe from crime.  This is a fact.  New Jersey’s informant program is a travesty of justice, not only because it encourages American on American treason, but also because it ignores the very purpose behind the Second Amendment; to create a populace free from the fear of tyranny.  If we do not put an end to the anti-gun tides in New Jersey, we should fully expect to see such atrocities against freedom planted at our own front doors in the near future.  There are no exceptions to the Constitution.  New Jersey is not outside of its jurisdiction.  Every person in that state deserves the same protections as anyone else.  We must disrupt the sick and perverted no questions asked buy off policies now prominent in that region, or be subject to the same in the near future…

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
RacerX's picture

Glad I don't live in Jersey.

kill switch's picture

Don't worry, it's just around the corner from your hood!!!

Oh regional Indian's picture

You know what kill switch?

Seems like NJ is just round the corner, for all of us. Here in India too. Censorship, Government is sacrosanct, guns for the thugs (cops and others) and nothing for law-abiding folk, 24 tier justice system....

The garden state..,,,

Snookie, sneakie, Tatts and tattles.




TruthInSunshine's picture

If you see a chicken coop in a neighbor's back yard, or a tomato plant - or any contraband, say something™.


Big 'Sis & Your Local Stasi Chapter

Zero_Sum's picture

Newark's not a bad place because people carry guns there; people carry guns there because Newark is a bad place. 


Guns or no guns, Newark will always be New York City's lower intestine.

Hugh G Rection's picture


I still believe the SF bay area is the anus of the USA, both geographically and politically.

Zero_Sum's picture

That opinion has merit. But at least they've got nice weather and scenery there.

Thomas's picture

Video looks like a hoax to me.

YBNguy's picture

Im not aware of NJ gun laws and no fan of informant4cash programs however did he not say 'illegal guns'?

zhandax's picture

And just what constitutes an 'illegal gun' and why is some snitch who wants a free $1000 going to worry about the difference?

Manthong's picture

I thought Cory was a smart guy.

If it isn’t a gun, it will be a knife.. or a shiv.. or a club.. or a fist, or a group or some other force multiplication for crime.

Guns wouldn’t be so scary if the government didn’t control them to the benefit of criminals.

The gun issue would settle out like it did before gun control laws.

The crime issue would settle out like it did before the police state was established.

And we didn’t have much of drug problem in the United States before a government dismissive of the Constitution decided it needed to engineer the better society from which so many who have been trained to avoid responsibility find the need to mentally escape.

But as worse, the idea of turning any segment of society into mercenary informants is a real bad idea. 

Muslim / Mexican style cartel retribution may be in store for Newark. 

The law of unintended consequences is always in force.

smiler03's picture

If you follow the link the "program" actually says this..

"Anyone with important information about a gun-related crime in Newark can call 1-877-NWK-GUNS (1-877-695-4867) to provide information anonymously. The Newark Police Department has a special Gun Stoppers Unit to operate the hotline and track down felons identified through it. Although callers are not asked their name, they do receive a code number to be eligible to collect a reward of up to $1,000 anonymously.!

My bold letters.

Manthong's picture

I'm not against citizens cooperating with LE to arrest violent criminals, but likely, just having one without the official permission of the state is a crime there.

The writers of the Constitution would have a problem with that.

Harlequin001's picture

Sounds like bullshit. 'Every American, regardless of the temporary circumstances of the times, is free to arm and defend himself from ANY enemy' - The big question is 'at what point do you get to decide who 'any enemy' is?'

Without that it's all horse shit. All you can do is to wait until someone else with a gun points it at you and then die, or cave. Guns are coercive and the small ones too easy to conceal. They are too dangerous for societies to tolerate because they take no skill whatsoever to point at someone if you are of a mind to use it, and in doing so force someone who is not to respond. That's why most of the civilised world chooses to live without them.

Ropingdown's picture

It is simply not true that most of the civilized world chooses to live with out them.  What is true is that much of the civilized world has decided to make them risky to own, so that the many who do own them tend to bury them in the yard, nearby woods, or some other hiding place.  In a truly civilized country such as Switzerland, handguns and semi-automatic rifles are found in probably a majority of homes. In countries which have systematically degraded their lower economic groups under a ruthless class system, as in the UK, guns of all sorts are difficult to own and pistols are impossible to own.  The large estates have such weapons as they need, though, and The City of London is extremely well policed unlike most locales.  The greater the class divisions (rich and nomenclatura versus ordinary folks) the more restrictive gun laws seem to be.  I get extremely fast police response if I call 911, under 1 minute 30 seconds.   Two miles away (in the city limits) it may be 45 minutes  even when a violent crime in progress is called in.  This has happened twice recently.  I find the comfortable who live in rather safe areas tend to vastly under-estimate the routine dangers for those who must (for their work, housing) mix with the worst-off or least-educated 20%.  I think it is arrogant and self-centered behavior.

Harlequin001's picture

Ok so explain to which majority parts of the civilised world choose to live with guns in general ownership. Switzerland is not the same. The Swiss do national service after which they are expected to maintain and be proficient in the art of shooting the rifle they are issued with during national service. That is not the same as any arsehole being able to buy and hold a pistol.

Truth is that I am not new to weapons of the semi automatic, short, long barrel and even the revolving barrel variety and I have thought long and hard about buying a gun myself. Fact is I choose to live in a country where guns are banned and the police are routinely criticised for not dying in shoot-outs in which the criminals almost always wind up dead. Alternatively I could choose to live in an environment such as the US that entitles me to own one but as in all things, it is the nature of a society that we give up some of our rights for our own collective good. I forego my natural right to walk across your property at will so that we can both enjoy ownership rights to property etc.

I don't need a gun to defend myself and history has shown that you don't either, It is my choice to give them up so that I need not worry too much about someone else pointing one at me. It is of cold but nonetheless some comfort to know that anyone who does is likely to wind up dead in very short order. Perhaops that's why the place where I live is one of the most peaceful on earth, and is enjoyed by many expats including Americans...

Arrogant and self centered? I would be if I chose to carry a gun; giving up that right is far from it.

Urban Redneck's picture

Switzerland is definitely different.  Actually you can get gun with the equivilent of a green card, (perhaps a perverted fantasy of Eric Holder) the circumstances of which, would in and of themselves, prevent someone from performing the national service and receiving the state training to become proficient.  Looking at the miniscule entirety of gun crime of Switzerland, by far the biggest slice of that pie would be guns possessed illegally, followed by guns legally owned by those who have served in the armed forces, and the smallest potion is those who owns guns legally but have served in the military.  The violent crime divide isn't the result of some State approved training & service course, it is the misfits and miscreants in an educated culture of respecting laws and fellow man.       

Harlequin001's picture

Like I said, I have thought about buying a gun but that would only be for sport shooting purpose, which I can do here if I wish. I choose not to, and I choose to live in a place where I like others are banned from private gun ownership because collectively it makes for a safer place to live.  Your comments on Switzerland I don't disagree with...

chumbawamba's picture

I was annoyed enough by your words to offer you a personal reply.

"I could choose to live in an environment such as the US that entitles me to own one but as in all things, it is the nature of a society that we give up some of our rights for our own collective good."

Spoken like a truly Godless communist.  If you were an American, thoroughly imbued with the freedom that such status affords (which excludes 99.9% of those inhabiting the area collectively known as the United States of America), you would understand that our society is in fact an armed society, deliberately, and from the very get go.  It is the only nation in this Hell world that ever codified the right to own firearms, a key pillar of our society.  If you are an American without a gun then I say to you that you are no American, but you are a sheep waiting to go to slaughter.

"I forego my natural right to walk across your property at will so that we can both enjoy ownership rights to property etc."

That's another right that America reserves for the people, the right to private property.  You do not have a "natural right" to walk across MY property.  You demonstrate with your own words your terrible ignorance of rights.  What you want are privileges, not rights, and you seem to want to be the one that decides for all who has what privileges.  You forego your natural desire to be a petulant tyrant who ignores other people's rights and boundaries because you know that, ultimately, someone is going to have the firepower to keep you off their private property.  Isn't that the real reason why you don't want people to have guns?  So you can walk on their lawn and laugh in their face when they complain?  You don't know the first thing about Rights, so why do you even try to prounounce the word?

"I don't need a gun to defend myself and history has shown that you don't either."

History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of man.  Where do we start?  The Palestinians (disarmed)?  The Tutsis (disarmed)?  The Jews (disamred)?  The Armenians (disarmed)?  How far back do we need to go--past the invention of firearms?--to demonstrate that throughout history those with the guns did the killing, and those without did the dying?  You don't need a gun to defend yourself?  What if the person against whom you are defending yourself has a gun?  Are you going to use Jedi mind tricks to disarm him and make him repent for his evil desire to threaten you with a firearm?

That you are an idiot is well-established by now.  At this point we are still left with wondering just what kind of an idiot you are.  This final sentence will help us elucidate the matter.

"It is my choice to give them up so that I need not worry too much about someone else pointing one at me."

Your tombstone (if you should be lucky enough to be appropriately interred and not just thrown in a quickly dug ditch with the rest of the sheep who didn't have guns to defend themselves) may well read:

Here lay a man whose convictions failed him...if only he had had a gun.

Or maybe it'll be more ironic (maybe I'll be the undertaker):

There are only two kinds of people in this world: those with guns, and those with only words engraved on a rock to mark their presence.

A bit winded...I may have to shorten that up.

I am Chumbawamba.

Harlequin001's picture

You might want to go read my comments again. you seem to have gone off on one of your usual tangents...

chumbawamba's picture

Yes, of course: the issue not your miscomprehension of logic but rather my miscomprehension of your words.  I see.

Nice try.

I am Chumbawamba.

Harlequin001's picture

No, it's the bullshit tangents you go off on.


'There are only two kinds of people in this world: those with guns, and those with only words engraved on a rock to mark their presence.' -What else is there to say? You're a fucking idiot. Go bug someone else.

Or maybe I shouldn't say that because you own a gun...


Yardfarmer's picture

i for one have been missing the usually brilliant and insightful postings of Chumba. it's good to know you're still out there Chumba. how's the junk business? as for Harlequin 001. you're a good little schoolboy. scout's honor!

Harlequin001's picture

Brilliant and insightful? I must have missed that one. The man's a prick, and you're no better...

Do us all a favour and fuck off.

And take your guns with you...

VelvetHog's picture

If you are unarmed that 1 minute and 30 seconds can literally be an eternity.  The police CANNOT protect you.  All they can do is perform an investigation after the fact.  It is irresponsible for a citizen to not be armed.

Harlequin001's picture

'Fact is I choose to live in a country where guns are banned and the police are routinely criticised for not dying in shoot-outs in which the criminals almost always wind up dead.'- I choose to live in an environment where the one minute and 30 seconds doesn't routinely happen.

If as you say, the police cannot protect you then why do you bother with them? Would I be near the mark if I suggested that the reason that the police cannot protect you is because you have guns?

It's like picking up a broken bottle in a pub fight. When you do you announce to all and sundry that you haven't the skill or ability to do what you set out to do, which is to fight someone. Picking up a broken bottle, just like picking up a gun gives you the confidence to do something you wouldn't otherwise be capable of, and would not otherwise do, which is to coerce somebody into doing what you want. I choose to live in a society where people cannot hold guns because it removes the opportunity for small weak minded little shits to stick a gun in my face because they feel big. The result is that there is little or no gun crime here because those that perpetuate it know that the police will turn up in the dead of night and they will not survive the arrest. They don't seem to last for very long hence the culture doesn't seem to perpetuate, and there certainly isn't any recurring problem when these arseholes get out of prison because they're dead. They held guns and they are dead. That's the way it should be. Like it or not, an effective police force, which you would have without gun ownership leads to a safer and more peaceful existence. It's why we give up our right to hold guns in favour of law and order and a police force to enforce them.

Do you wonder why the world views Americans as insular and paranoid?


chumbawamba's picture

Good luck defending your insular chosen society when armed bandits arrive at the gates demanding riches and women.  Maybe you can throw printed out copies of your messages here at them, properly wadded up to provide for better aerodynamic stability.

I am Chumbawamba.

yakmerchant's picture

I decided a long time ago gun grabbing retards like you are the "Enemy".   Useful idiot for the evil ones you are.

jaffa's picture

Most constitutions require that amendments cannot be enacted unless they have passed a special procedure that is more stringent than that required of ordinary legislation. Examples of such special procedures include super majorities in the legislature, or direct approval by the electorate in a referendum, or even a combination of two or more different special procedures. Thanks.
Criminal Lawyer Toronto

YBNguy's picture

Do you really have to ask what makes a gun illegal? I own many LEGAL guns, I went through the proper steps and filled out the forms, got checked via NICS... ILLEGAL guns, Id assume, are bought blackmarket, unknown chain of ownership and/or has the # scracthed off... Damn youre paranoid. If I were arrested due to some loser citizen trying to make 1000 off me legally having my gun Id sue the dept for making an arrest on flawed information... How many of those lawsuits could the dept take before they had to fold...

pods's picture

The police is the STATE, they would merely put a gun to someone else's head for payment.


toady's picture

And who determines which guns are illegal? The same guys (FEDS) that allow thousands of assault weapons to go to drug cartels?

Something tells me that any weapon found in Newark will be 'illegal', if it is illegal or not.

smiler03's picture

The video is essentially a scam. Like lots of scams it tells you something at the start, in this case $1000!! but if you follow the link it clarifies it to this . "Anyone with important information about a gun-related crime in Newark". 

TBT or not TBT's picture

The Feds *directed* semiauto civilian guns of their choice, those gun types most diabolised by the Brady Bunch, to go to *known* straw purchasers, and then on to drug dealers south of the border, for ONE reason: So that later seizures of those diabolised types of guns in Mexico could be later shown to be traced back to gun shops in the U.S.

A little economics problem with this that ZH'ers should appreciate: What the cartel gangbangers want are "select fire" weapons capable of full auto OR semi-auto fire, which they can buy AT LOWER COST from bent federales and global arms makers than they can via smuggling semi-auto-only rifles bought one-of in gun shops in the US.

Urban Redneck's picture

The sear & bolt carrier on a semi auto rifle can be swapped out in under 90 seconds, and are cheap parts to begin with. 

As for price and availability- it is also a hell of a lot cheaper than paying MIC-government-approved-contract-price-markup for a select fire weapon upfront (unless you get the uncle sam favored friend discount- at taxpayer expense), While any individual gang member might be able to get a great bargain on a select-fire gun from a corrupt relative or friend, the issue of availabilty and scale negates price (too many guns go missing from the local office and somebody loses their cushy job and side gig) . 

Economics problem solved.

erg's picture

It makes sense geographically seeing that Florida is America's wang.

Iam_Silverman's picture

"Florida is America's wang."

Sad, if true.  Notice that it always points down?

Ropingdown's picture

No, it's pointing into Latin America.

Hugh G Rection's picture

Florida is the front legs, you can't see the wang as it's buried balls deep in Mexico.

TBT or not TBT's picture

And psychologically among a big part of the demographic in SF, not a place known for procreative sex.

Theta_Burn's picture

Anus of the USA, that di-stink-tion belongs to CAMDEN NJ

NJ is 1 of the most difficult states to get firearms...2nd amendment yeah sure, and still the consequence is not as sever as NY if caught with an "unregistered" gun (ask Plaxico....that idiot)


Am I missing something here? if legally owned no worries.

If ratted on by some pc. of shit for 1k it's highly likely you  are your a pc of shit who shouldn't have an illegal gun

ToNYC's picture

No wonder it's in the top 5 desireable US locations thanks to anusophiles like Mr. Rection.

Hugh G Rection's picture


Never hit the pooper before, always been afraid of getting shat on. 

Just look at the density of asshats living in the Pacific Heights area alone, Pelosi, Feinstein......

The only thing I miss about Californication is the In N Out burgers.

trav7777's picture

the guns have nothing to do with it.  It's all about demographics.

Atomizer's picture

Hey TRAV, picking up from last night's auto post.. Central planning never works!!!

Trav777: I'm going to tell you another secret. Cars are going to be equipped with a hotspot. For a fee, you will be told to download a movie to keep the kids quiet. The cost for a new automobile will rise in cost because you're not getting this service for FREE.

This new technology attempt will backfire. Why? People like me will not renew the (free) paid service included in the sale of vehicle. Think LTE & NFLX

Go long, then short the fuck out of the stock. :) Again, my NAV back seat TV entertainment center has never been loaded with a DVD. I sold my BMW 750 V12 two years ago. I had a equipped TV front console. For all of you liberal retards, the TV would shut off at 5 MPH and go back to system monitoring details. When we converted to digital TV, static appeared on the monitor with limited channel availability.  

Those were the past days of free access. Today's Government irony: The Public needs to pay by receiving our (free) services thru book cooking efforts; our investors will believe we're churning a profit.  

A: No customers, no profit.

Central Planning never works, when the society host will not play the hide & seek game.