NJ Republican Signs 10 Anti-Gun Bills
- Thread starter dc dalton
- Start date
- Status
BHP FAN
Member
Rand Paul is looking better and better.
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
^^ I'm a fan, it just depends on if he can gain traction with the soccer-moms. Right now that's a bit of a doubtful thing. I had a pleasurable few minutes with him in NYC a few months back at a small private gathering that included David Keene and my very own WI Senator Ron Johnson. He was an inspirational speaker, and has literally been bred for the fight. It remains to be seen if he can really come up in the polls though. He's the real deal... Willie remains hopeful while at the same time skeptical in the ability of the soccer moms to listen long enough to get it.
Willie
.
Willie
.
Pffffft.
I live in Utah, the reddest state in the Union, which means I can vote my conscience in a Presidential Election (Libertarian) and it doesn't affect the outcome at all (Republican).
Now where it really matters; locally, Libertarian candidates do very well. So please, keep your defeatism to yourself, and I will be FOR the political races that actually affect me and that I am able to affect.
Christie isn't an alternative, or the lesser of two evils, he is a pile of crap that deserves every bit of scorn that anyone can muster.
Hurryin' Hoosier
Member
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2012
- Messages
- 635
The Pillsbury Dough Boy is the classic Republican In Name Only.
zxcvbob
Member
He has a secret weapon: he looks like a young Danny Kaye.
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
"The Pillsbury Dough Boy is the classic Republican In Name Only"
Precisely. In actual truth he's an Independant running as a Republican.
Which is why the following is true, and which is why he's highly electable in any national race (like it or not), and why he's been elected and will be re-elected in NJ:
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institute...titute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1932
Take some time to read the details. Interesting stuff.
Willie
.
Precisely. In actual truth he's an Independant running as a Republican.
Which is why the following is true, and which is why he's highly electable in any national race (like it or not), and why he's been elected and will be re-elected in NJ:
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institute...titute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1932
Take some time to read the details. Interesting stuff.
Willie
.
Last edited:
I think he's running for Vice-President in 2016.
He may not realize it, but that's what I think he's doing. Just as Soccer Moms and Volvo Republicans aren't comfortable with libertarians like Rand Paul, much of the Republican core isn't at ease with Christie. The Swamp People might well elect a fat governor with a funny accent (they've been electing governors like that themselves for a couple hundred years) but they aren't sure that Christie is the one, yet.
Eight years of observation at the Naval Observatory would make them feel more comfortable.
I have no idea as to who might win the #1 spot on the Republican ticket in 2016. A formula that's worked in the past is "a successful governor from a Southern or Western state" or "a General" (one who can keep his pants on, hopefully).
Christie needs avoid having the Republican party core going apoplectic at the thought of him as the #2 guy on the ticket. With the remaining bills, he must walk a fine line but as he is a successful lawyer and successful politician, I think that he can do it.
I don't think Swamp People believe that they need a Barrett .50 BMG rifle to shoot an alligator, and it would destroy the hide, so that one may not hurt him too much.
Sweeney's bill would.
Christie is younger than he looks. He'll be 54 in 2016 and still only 62 in 2024. I doubt he wants to retire to become president of a second-tier New Jersey liberal arts college at the age of 55 if he leaves the NJ governor's job in 2018.
Christie is "pro life", he vetoed an increase in the state minimum wage, vetoed Obamacare exchanges, vetoed gay marriage, and is generally at odds with the state employees unions and the NJ Supreme Court.
Maybe he's not a conservative ... but for New Jersey, he's pretty conservative.
http://www.app.com/article/20130126...from-last-session-168-year-low?nclick_check=1
Only 12.3% of New Jersey residents are gun owners, the state has a population of 8,864,590 (so maybe one million New Jersey residents own guns) and a small fraction of those gun owners are hunters. (In 2012, NJ sold about 50k hunting licenses and about 11k waterfowl licenses.) It's an uphill fight. Christie is not a gun guy or a 2A guy, so some of his decisions may emanate from a lack of familiarity with firearms.
I don't think banning the Barrett .50 rifle makes any sense at all, but I'm afraid that the chances are pretty good that he'll sign that one.
He may not realize it, but that's what I think he's doing. Just as Soccer Moms and Volvo Republicans aren't comfortable with libertarians like Rand Paul, much of the Republican core isn't at ease with Christie. The Swamp People might well elect a fat governor with a funny accent (they've been electing governors like that themselves for a couple hundred years) but they aren't sure that Christie is the one, yet.
Eight years of observation at the Naval Observatory would make them feel more comfortable.
I have no idea as to who might win the #1 spot on the Republican ticket in 2016. A formula that's worked in the past is "a successful governor from a Southern or Western state" or "a General" (one who can keep his pants on, hopefully).
Christie needs avoid having the Republican party core going apoplectic at the thought of him as the #2 guy on the ticket. With the remaining bills, he must walk a fine line but as he is a successful lawyer and successful politician, I think that he can do it.
I don't think Swamp People believe that they need a Barrett .50 BMG rifle to shoot an alligator, and it would destroy the hide, so that one may not hurt him too much.
Sweeney's bill would.
Christie is younger than he looks. He'll be 54 in 2016 and still only 62 in 2024. I doubt he wants to retire to become president of a second-tier New Jersey liberal arts college at the age of 55 if he leaves the NJ governor's job in 2018.
Christie is "pro life", he vetoed an increase in the state minimum wage, vetoed Obamacare exchanges, vetoed gay marriage, and is generally at odds with the state employees unions and the NJ Supreme Court.
Maybe he's not a conservative ... but for New Jersey, he's pretty conservative.
http://www.app.com/article/20130126...from-last-session-168-year-low?nclick_check=1
New N.J. laws from last session at a 168-year low Christie makes history with fewest signed said:
Only 12.3% of New Jersey residents are gun owners, the state has a population of 8,864,590 (so maybe one million New Jersey residents own guns) and a small fraction of those gun owners are hunters. (In 2012, NJ sold about 50k hunting licenses and about 11k waterfowl licenses.) It's an uphill fight. Christie is not a gun guy or a 2A guy, so some of his decisions may emanate from a lack of familiarity with firearms.
I don't think banning the Barrett .50 rifle makes any sense at all, but I'm afraid that the chances are pretty good that he'll sign that one.
This is a interesting thread not only about gun rights in NJ (or the lack of), but also how the political process really is in New Jersey. Having spent a lot of time researching New Jersey's gun laws (because I wanted to see how and why it got to be the way it is), I learned some things from this thread.
The political process and the drive to take NJ to the nanny state it is today has been long in the making. Not only did a judge strike down an appeal to the 1966 FID law, the judge called basically called the second amendment a convenience. It seems the state and municipalities started micromanaging the lives of its residents from the early to mid 1900's and up.
New Jersey historically has used the excuse "Public Safety, Health and Welfare" to restrict or ban anything that it deemed remotely harmful, whether it restricts BB guns, Black powder firearms, or bans slingshots and fireworks.. these restrictions and bans are over bearing knee jerk reactions that still exist today.
When the subject of fireworks is bought up every year around the Fourth of July and NJ residents go to Pennsylvania to buy their fireworks because NJ bans all fireworks. Instantly, the state goes on the offensive and throws out their favorite excuse that fireworks are banned in NJ because of "Public Safety, Health and Welfare".
So what makes NJ unique that it needs to ban fireworks where the most of the country allows some type of fireworks? The fireworks ban is not popular with the residents, otherwise why would they cross the Delaware to buy them in PA in droves. The NJ State police actually has lookouts staked out in Pennsylvania (out of their jurisdiction) to spot cars with NJ plates, write down the license plate numbers and then pull the cars over once they cross the river back in NJ. Your tax dollars at work folks...Nanny State Police watching your every move.
(More enterprising people who cross into PA go in two different cars, one car waits by a diner or a rest stop. The other car buys the fireworks while the State Police write down the license plate. Then they drive the car to other car waiting at the diner, take out the fireworks from the trunk and transfer it to the other car. Then both cars head back to NJ, the car that gets stopped now has no fireworks in the trunk...the other car never gets stopped has the fireworks.)
I know people originally from NJ, their main reasons for moving out of the state was the taxes, overall cost of living there and overall quality of life issues. The only regret they had is that they did not move sooner. That is not only a telling statement, but a sad one as well. I have visited the state myself, the boardwalk and shore area is nice, Northwest and Western NJ is really scenic in the fall, the food is great. But I could never live there.
The assault weapons ban, the one handgun a month, the unneeded Firearms ID card, Permit to purchase a pistol, the Graves Act, Smart Gun Mandate, BB Guns & Black Powder restrictions and needs based carry didn't happen overnight. It was over the course of many years that these draconian and onerous anti-gun bills came into being. I think it will be many years before NJ rids itself of these restrictions if it ever does.
If there is a state that needs needs our help, it is New Jersey and its gun owners. It should have never got this bad, but it did and it needs to be turned around.
The political process and the drive to take NJ to the nanny state it is today has been long in the making. Not only did a judge strike down an appeal to the 1966 FID law, the judge called basically called the second amendment a convenience. It seems the state and municipalities started micromanaging the lives of its residents from the early to mid 1900's and up.
New Jersey historically has used the excuse "Public Safety, Health and Welfare" to restrict or ban anything that it deemed remotely harmful, whether it restricts BB guns, Black powder firearms, or bans slingshots and fireworks.. these restrictions and bans are over bearing knee jerk reactions that still exist today.
When the subject of fireworks is bought up every year around the Fourth of July and NJ residents go to Pennsylvania to buy their fireworks because NJ bans all fireworks. Instantly, the state goes on the offensive and throws out their favorite excuse that fireworks are banned in NJ because of "Public Safety, Health and Welfare".
So what makes NJ unique that it needs to ban fireworks where the most of the country allows some type of fireworks? The fireworks ban is not popular with the residents, otherwise why would they cross the Delaware to buy them in PA in droves. The NJ State police actually has lookouts staked out in Pennsylvania (out of their jurisdiction) to spot cars with NJ plates, write down the license plate numbers and then pull the cars over once they cross the river back in NJ. Your tax dollars at work folks...Nanny State Police watching your every move.
(More enterprising people who cross into PA go in two different cars, one car waits by a diner or a rest stop. The other car buys the fireworks while the State Police write down the license plate. Then they drive the car to other car waiting at the diner, take out the fireworks from the trunk and transfer it to the other car. Then both cars head back to NJ, the car that gets stopped now has no fireworks in the trunk...the other car never gets stopped has the fireworks.)
I know people originally from NJ, their main reasons for moving out of the state was the taxes, overall cost of living there and overall quality of life issues. The only regret they had is that they did not move sooner. That is not only a telling statement, but a sad one as well. I have visited the state myself, the boardwalk and shore area is nice, Northwest and Western NJ is really scenic in the fall, the food is great. But I could never live there.
The assault weapons ban, the one handgun a month, the unneeded Firearms ID card, Permit to purchase a pistol, the Graves Act, Smart Gun Mandate, BB Guns & Black Powder restrictions and needs based carry didn't happen overnight. It was over the course of many years that these draconian and onerous anti-gun bills came into being. I think it will be many years before NJ rids itself of these restrictions if it ever does.
If there is a state that needs needs our help, it is New Jersey and its gun owners. It should have never got this bad, but it did and it needs to be turned around.
I've had thought the post-Civil War root of nanny-statism regarding firearms dates to New York's 1911 Sullivan Law. Some decades later, passage of New Jersey's 1966 law followed some of the early rioting in the 1960s (Harlem was 1964, Watts was 1965) but was in place before the many riots that occurred in 1968 and later.
(It wasn't always like it is now. I do remember when hunters walked down the street with a shotgun over their shoulders, and I do remember when the NJ State Fair had shooting galleries with .22 rifles.)
Christie has said that Brady ranks the state as #2, I'm not sure that is still the case after what has happened in New York, Maryland and Connecticut within the past year.
New Jersey had a 2010 homicide rate of 4.1/100,000 and a firearms homicide rate of 2.8/100,000. The respective values for Kentucky were 4.5/2.7. About the same, but New Jersey's population demographics differ from Kentucky's. New Jersey probably has less diversity from neighborhood to neighborhood and zip code to zip code.
"It's the people", not the guns, of course, but it's difficult to convince the Soccer Moms.
I don't know how much of a difference it would make if the state significantly relaxed their gun laws. You can see America (Pennsylvania) from the NJ State Capital building. The legislature's presumption seems to be that gangsters are too dumb or lazy to walk across the bridge to Pennsylvania, or to order ammo over the internet.
Annoying as New Jersey's firearms laws are, New Jersey's taxes are more of an issue (and a poison to the state economy) than the gun laws.
(It wasn't always like it is now. I do remember when hunters walked down the street with a shotgun over their shoulders, and I do remember when the NJ State Fair had shooting galleries with .22 rifles.)
Christie has said that Brady ranks the state as #2, I'm not sure that is still the case after what has happened in New York, Maryland and Connecticut within the past year.
New Jersey had a 2010 homicide rate of 4.1/100,000 and a firearms homicide rate of 2.8/100,000. The respective values for Kentucky were 4.5/2.7. About the same, but New Jersey's population demographics differ from Kentucky's. New Jersey probably has less diversity from neighborhood to neighborhood and zip code to zip code.
"It's the people", not the guns, of course, but it's difficult to convince the Soccer Moms.
I don't know how much of a difference it would make if the state significantly relaxed their gun laws. You can see America (Pennsylvania) from the NJ State Capital building. The legislature's presumption seems to be that gangsters are too dumb or lazy to walk across the bridge to Pennsylvania, or to order ammo over the internet.
Annoying as New Jersey's firearms laws are, New Jersey's taxes are more of an issue (and a poison to the state economy) than the gun laws.
45 Dragoon
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,785
It's Great to see so many folks that DO get it, and don't want to just give our rights away SLOWLY (voting for the "lesser" anti gunner)!!!!!! No matter what state, county or city, IT affects ALL weather you like it or not !! Reading back through this thread, you can point to the few that would be called PATRIOTS !!!!!!!
Thank you Bart. thank you to those that wont cower, thanks for those that would stand WITH our FOUNDERS instead of sitting on the sidelines waiting to see who you need to "buddy up" with!!!! STAND FOR SOMETHING OR YOU WILL FALL FOR ANYTHING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
45 Dragoon
Thank you Bart. thank you to those that wont cower, thanks for those that would stand WITH our FOUNDERS instead of sitting on the sidelines waiting to see who you need to "buddy up" with!!!! STAND FOR SOMETHING OR YOU WILL FALL FOR ANYTHING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
45 Dragoon
jaytex1969
Member
Or possibly a person of reason with limited resources wishing to maximize their effectiveness in an overwhelming battle.
Not to put too fine a point on this discussion, but any Republican that is equivocal about the Right to Keep and Bear Arms actually is worse than a Democrat like Feinstein who hates the 2nd Amendment. For example, Bush I pushed the Assault Weapons Ban through executive order. Some would say that he yielded a peripheral issue to preserve our gun rights--e.g. a realist. I would say, however, that he actually pushed the area of acceptable policy options to the left and prepared the ground for the Clinton AWB. After all, Dems could point out that Clinton's actions were similar to that of Bush I.
What has happened is that politicians who don't really care about gun issues are all too ready to sell those issues out to preserve their so-called electability. Generally speaking, gun rights advocates are better off with a politician that are unequivocal in their support for gun rights than relying on someone who is concerned with their electability. The latter will betray you when things get tough such as the Sandy Hook mass shooting. Remember, it is always easier to go after a specific item such as assault rifles or hi capacity magazines than deal with our splintered and failing mental health care. If you fix the mental health care system, it would save a lot more lives than any assault weapons ban--both in preventing spree killings and in saving lives from suicide by cop or simply self suicide through drugs, weapons, etc.
Mentally healthy people do not go out on spree killings--leaving terrorists such as Hasan aside.
What has happened is that politicians who don't really care about gun issues are all too ready to sell those issues out to preserve their so-called electability. Generally speaking, gun rights advocates are better off with a politician that are unequivocal in their support for gun rights than relying on someone who is concerned with their electability. The latter will betray you when things get tough such as the Sandy Hook mass shooting. Remember, it is always easier to go after a specific item such as assault rifles or hi capacity magazines than deal with our splintered and failing mental health care. If you fix the mental health care system, it would save a lot more lives than any assault weapons ban--both in preventing spree killings and in saving lives from suicide by cop or simply self suicide through drugs, weapons, etc.
Mentally healthy people do not go out on spree killings--leaving terrorists such as Hasan aside.
45 Dragoon
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,785
Not to mention, taking away these gun free zones the anti-crowd created (where these atrocities tend to happen). Non of my anti gun neighbors have the stones to put up "gun free zone" signs in their yards, but they raise hell if your kids DON'T go to one to learn.
PLEASE don't wish Barbara Buono on us. It's already awful enough.
http://www.buonoforgovernor.com/issues/GunViolencePrevention
http://www.buonoforgovernor.com/issues/GunViolencePrevention
It took me a while to read everything to catch up. A few statements all ring to well with what is being said in other forums.
First off they are the same. As much as I disagreed with some of the tea parties people I did like that they were bringing something different to the table.
Second is that they lie. This one statement pi$$es me off the most. If I was to go to work and accomplish nothing or flat out lie about anything I would expect to get fired. Do y'all understand that politicians are the only people that say one thing and do another and feel no repercussions from it? I'm just tired of it all.
Another post tracked by the government.
First off they are the same. As much as I disagreed with some of the tea parties people I did like that they were bringing something different to the table.
Second is that they lie. This one statement pi$$es me off the most. If I was to go to work and accomplish nothing or flat out lie about anything I would expect to get fired. Do y'all understand that politicians are the only people that say one thing and do another and feel no repercussions from it? I'm just tired of it all.
Another post tracked by the government.
Deer_Freak
Member.
We have to make the best choice we can make. Lets be honest, republican or Democrat our RKBA would be trashed under the right circumstances. We need to vote for someone who is a gun owner, from a pro gun state and get this settled in the primaries.
I don't want to be faced with the lesser of two evils again. I believed that Romney would have signed anything put in front of him by the Brady bunch just as fast as Obama. He had already done so in his home state of MA.
I don't want to be faced with the lesser of two evils again. I believed that Romney would have signed anything put in front of him by the Brady bunch just as fast as Obama. He had already done so in his home state of MA.
R.W.Dale
Member
The problem with this is our dysfunctional fractured primary system has a bunch of liberal blue states selecting the candidate for the red ones. You literally have states selecting the republican they'd want if they weren't going to vote Democrat by default.
For the life of me I cannot understand why more people don't see this fundamental malfunction of our political system
I haven't got to vote in a primary that wasn't a forgone conclusion in the 15yrs I've been a voter yet
Can I ask you all a question? If a Republican governor, like Christie for example, was elected in a liberal minded state, do you all think he should some what do the bidding of the majority of people he was elected to represent, or should he say to hell with them & his job and strictly vote along party lines with little regard for the people that elected him? I think he's not being a typical stubborn politician, and is doing what the voters in his state hired to do....
I do not see how it's dysfunctional. The blue states have a higher population, thus they have more say so. In any event, Obama won both the Electoral and Popular vote in both elections, so again, I do not see what was so unfair. Also, even if some people in the blue states are doing what you say in the primaries, I do not see it making much of a difference because the Republican candidate has always been the candidate that a majority of Republican supported and who were nominated in the most Conservative states. Name one Republican candidate, that was not supported by most Republicans, who was nominated as a result of votes from Democrats in blue states?
I do not see how it's dysfunctional. The blue states have a higher population, thus they have more say so. In any event, Obama won both the Electoral and Popular vote in both elections, so again, I do not see what was so unfair. Also, even if some people in the blue states are doing what you say in the primaries, I do not see it making much of a difference because the Republican candidate has always been the candidate that a majority of Republican supported and who were nominated in the most Conservative states. Name one Republican candidate, that was not supported by most Republicans, who was nominated as a result of votes from Democrats in blue states?
Last edited:
That's because we want them to lie to us. We wouldn't like or elect them if they told us the truth. We can't really be upset that we'd be fired for lying while politicians get to keep their jobs when we're the person who's responsible for doing the firing.
Deanimator
Member
Utterly irrelevant with regard to whether I should vote for him at a national level.
I DON'T live in New Jersey and never WOULD.
I would no more vote for the anti-gun Christie than I'd vote for the anti-gun Giuliani.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked