Christie responds to a question about Brian Aitken

[SafetyHit 1]

Governors decisions such as pardons do not set legal precedent.

 

 

I was instantly aware of the poor wording and made an immediate correction, however you were very quick to the trigger and also I suppose edits don't show up here.

 

What I was trying to say and did clarify was that this could possibly be used down the line as justification for easing some of our horrific possession laws.

[SafetyHit 1]

so the law is the law unless it is the Constitution? I seriously think that even native born citizens need to take the same test that immigrants need to get their citizenship.

 

This statement reeks of pure arrogance. You know exactly what he meant and are looking to make someone feel stupid.

[hopper 36]

This statement reeks of pure arrogance. You know exactly what he meant and are looking to make someone feel stupid.

Unfortunatly there are people on here that do that to others ...

[SpecialK 193]

No I am simply pointing out how people in this state are stupid and do in fact think that it is ok to think that way. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land and myself and everyone else under its jurisdiction does not have to follow any law that is unconstitutional.

 

I understand that you are all used to living in this shithole that pretends it is America, but this place is terrible with how people think.

 

Anyone that agrees with "the law is the law" then ignores the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is stupid. That is a fact. If the poster was just pointing out that is how Christie, is then Christie is the stupid one. If the poster agrees that the law is the law the he is in fact stupid.

[SpecialK 193]

I was instantly aware of the poor wording and made an immediate correction, however you were very quick to the trigger and also I suppose edits don't show up here.

 

What I was trying to say and did clarify was that this could possibly be used down the line as justification for easing some of our horrific possession laws.

 

I can only hope and wish the same. I hope that he is pardoned and this is a start to this state becoming a better place to live.

[ianargent 7]

Christie has to know that the rest of the US does not view find the way NJ does. See John Kerry's hunting trip. So, on this case, his political instincts are against his prosecutorial instincts.

[hopper 36]

No I am simply pointing out how people in this state are stupid and do in fact think that it is ok to think that way. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land and myself and everyone else under its jurisdiction does not have to follow any law that is unconstitutional.

 

I understand that you are all used to living in this shithole that pretends it is America, but this place is terrible with how people think.

 

Anyone that agrees with "the law is the law" then ignores the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is stupid. That is a fact. If the poster was just pointing out that is how Christie, is then Christie is the stupid one. If the poster agrees that the law is the law the he is in fact stupid.

Wow , its funny that as smart as you are you dont understand that THE LAW IS THE LAW UNTIL THEY ARE CHANGED ...Just because you believe that we are all stupid for abiding by the laws this state has put forward on firearms does not mean we dont want change and dont disagree with them .We all want our 2nd amendment freedoms but until we get them back we must abide by the law ..

[kenw 293]

No I am simply pointing out how people in this state are stupid and do in fact think that it is ok to think that way. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land and myself and everyone else under its jurisdiction does not have to follow any law that is unconstitutional.

 

I understand that you are all used to living in this shithole that pretends it is America, but this place is terrible with how people think.

 

Anyone that agrees with "the law is the law" then ignores the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is stupid. That is a fact. If the poster was just pointing out that is how Christie, is then Christie is the stupid one. If the poster agrees that the law is the law the he is in fact stupid.

Let us know how that works out for you as defense if you ever find yourself in that predicament. And any lawyer who uses the "the law is unconstitutional so my client consciously and deliberately decided to ignore it" defense is a moron. And has a bigger moron for a client.

 

You don't like a law? Do whatever you can to see it changed. Become an activist. Take a public stand. Put your money, your credibility and perhaps your safety where your big mouth is.

 

You think it's unconstitutional in your position as a Constitutional scholar? File a suit. Get the media to support. Start an Issue advocacy organization. Don't just bloviate.

 

Don't ever advocate here that anyone has the right to just disobey a law because they "feel" it's unconstitutional.

[SafetyHit 1]

I can only hope and wish the same. I hope that he is pardoned and this is a start to this state becoming a better place to live.

 

 

As do I and also as does our friend who's comments you chose to mock. Of course our laws are garbage, we all know this.

 

But a wise and well known man once said: "There is no freedom without the law". We just need far better ones in place.

[KpdPipes 388]

No I am simply pointing out how people in this state are stupid and do in fact think that it is ok to think that way. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land and myself and everyone else under its jurisdiction does not have to follow any law that is unconstitutional.

 

I understand that you are all used to living in this shithole that pretends it is America, but this place is terrible with how people think.

 

Anyone that agrees with "the law is the law" then ignores the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is stupid. That is a fact. If the poster was just pointing out that is how Christie, is then Christie is the stupid one. If the poster agrees that the law is the law the he is in fact stupid.

Interesting how you demean others when you are somewhat off base yourself. You DO understand that the US Constitution as written pertains SOLELY to the FEDERAL Govt, and unless and until, the Ammendments are "Incorporated' under the 14th Ammendments, the States WERE NOT BOUND by the US Constitution, but by their individual STATE Constitutions. Because of abuses by the states, which cause specific cases to go through the Apellate Divisions, State Supreme Courts, US District Courts, and Finally SCOTUS, Various Rights garunteed under the US Constitution have been Affirmed as binding upon the states. the entire PREMISE of the Constitution, and the founders was that the Federal Gove was to have as LITTLE impact on the day to day lives of the citizens as possible. the US Constitution was written and enacted to serve two purposes. #1, lay out the rules by whch that Govt operates, and more importantly #2, LIMIT the power that govt has over the individual states, through the Ammendments. Read them some times..... Congress, Congress, The United States, Shal Not/Shal, Ect... And for the reciord the NJ state Constitution which dates to 2 July 1776, 2 days BEFORE the Declaration of Independance was signed has NEVER had an RKBA written into it.

 

I have news for you.... the Second Ammendment DID NOT APPLY to the state of NJ until march of THIS YEAR, once the McDonald case Affirmed that the RKBA was an individual Fundamental right on ALL levels. That said, while there were some individual areas that saw the handwriting on the wall after Heller, and began changing their laws in anticipation of McDonald, MOST places with restrictive laws will not change them until forced to do so through the progression of Caselaw makes them invalid. Until that time those laws are in force and binding, and unless you have a suitcase of money, or a family member who is Admitted to argue in front of SCOTUS, I wouldnt suggest you play test Case. if you Do want to play "It violates the Constitution, I'm going to ignore it"..well Stupid games win Stupid prizes.

[Bob B 103]

Interesting how you demean others when you are somewhat off base yourself. You DO understand that the US Constitution as written pertains SOLELY to the FEDERAL Govt, and unless and until, the Ammendments are "Incorporated' under the 14th Ammendments, the States WERE NOT BOUND by the US Constitution, but by their individual STATE Constitutions. Because of abuses by the states, which cause specific cases to go through the Apellate Divisions, State Supreme Courts, US District Courts, and Finally SCOTUS, Various Rights garunteed under the US Constitution have been Affirmed as binding upon the states. the entire PREMISE of the Constitution, and the founders was that the Federal Gove was to have as LITTLE impact on the day to day lives of the citizens as possible. the US Constitution was written and enacted to serve two purposes. #1, lay out the rules by whch that Govt operates, and more importantly #2, LIMIT the power that govt has over the individual states, through the Ammendments. Read them some times..... Congress, Congress, The United States, Shal Not/Shal, Ect... And for the reciord the NJ state Constitution which dates to 2 July 1776, 2 days BEFORE the Declaration of Independance was signed has NEVER had an RKBA written into it.

 

I have news for you.... the Second Ammendment DID NOT APPLY to the state of NJ until march of THIS YEAR, once the McDonald case Affirmed that the RKBA was an individual Fundamental right on ALL levels. That said, while there were some individual areas that saw the handwriting on the wall after Heller, and began changing their laws in anticipation of McDonald, MOST places with restrictive laws will not change them until forced to do so through the progression of Caselaw makes them invalid. Until that time those laws are in force and binding, and unless you have a suitcase of money, or a family member who is Admitted to argue in front of SCOTUS, I wouldnt suggest you play test Case. if you Do want to play "It violates the Constitution, I'm going to ignore it"..well Stupid games win Stupid prizes.

 

All good points. I just wanted to point out that the current NJ Constitution is a result of the NJ Constitutional Convention of 1947... and the reason that the RKBA was not included, was that it was thought to be a fundamental civil right protected under the civil rights discrimination clause.

 

N.J. Constitutional Convention: Vol. 1, Page 305

 

STATE OF NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1947

Wednesday, August 13, 1947

 

MR. STANGER: Senator, do you consider that the anti-discrimination clause as to civil rights will cover this provision as to militia, the thought being that civil rights include military rights?

 

MR. VAN ALSTYNE: Judge Stanger, that point was raised in committee and I can tell you that the committe unanimously felt - there are a number of lawyers on our committee - that the right to bear arms was a civil right. That is very definitely one of the rights of citizens. We therefore did fully cover the situation.

 

 

http://www.njstateli...Const1n305.html

 

Somewhere along the line, that idea got lost.

[BRN169 6]

Interesting how you demean others when you are somewhat off base yourself. You DO understand that the US Constitution as written pertains SOLELY to the FEDERAL Govt, and unless and until, the Ammendments are "Incorporated' under the 14th Ammendments, the States WERE NOT BOUND by the US Constitution, but by their individual STATE Constitutions. Because of abuses by the states, which cause specific cases to go through the Apellate Divisions, State Supreme Courts, US District Courts, and Finally SCOTUS, Various Rights garunteed under the US Constitution have been Affirmed as binding upon the states. the entire PREMISE of the Constitution, and the founders was that the Federal Gove was to have as LITTLE impact on the day to day lives of the citizens as possible. the US Constitution was written and enacted to serve two purposes. #1, lay out the rules by whch that Govt operates, and more importantly #2, LIMIT the power that govt has over the individual states, through the Ammendments. Read them some times..... Congress, Congress, The United States, Shal Not/Shal, Ect... And for the reciord the NJ state Constitution which dates to 2 July 1776, 2 days BEFORE the Declaration of Independance was signed has NEVER had an RKBA written into it.

 

I have news for you.... the Second Ammendment DID NOT APPLY to the state of NJ until march of THIS YEAR, once the McDonald case Affirmed that the RKBA was an individual Fundamental right on ALL levels. That said, while there were some individual areas that saw the handwriting on the wall after Heller, and began changing their laws in anticipation of McDonald, MOST places with restrictive laws will not change them until forced to do so through the progression of Caselaw makes them invalid. Until that time those laws are in force and binding, and unless you have a suitcase of money, or a family member who is Admitted to argue in front of SCOTUS, I wouldnt suggest you play test Case. if you Do want to play "It violates the Constitution, I'm going to ignore it"..well Stupid games win Stupid prizes.

 

 

OFFICIAL REGISTER OF THE OFFICERS AND MEN OF NEW JERSEY Page 330

 

On the 3d day of June, 1775, an act providing a "plan for regulating the militia of the Colony" was passed in the Provincial Congress of New Jersey, then in session at Trenton. It was as follows:

 

"The Congress, taking into consideration the cruel and arbitrary measures adopted and pursued by the British Parliament and present ministry, for the purpose of subjugating the American Colonies to the most abject servitude, and being apprehensive that all pacific measures for the redress of our grievances will prove ineffectual, do think it highly necessary that the inhabitants of this Province be forthwith properly armed and disciplined for defending the cause of American freedom; and further considering that, to answer this desirable end, it is requisite that such persons be entrusted with the command of the militia as can be confided in by the people, and are truly zealous in support of our just rights and privileges, do recommend and advise that the good people of this Province henceforward strictly observe the following rules and regulations, until this Congress shall make further order therein:

 

 

OFFICIAL REGISTER OF THE OFFICERS AND MEN OF NEW JERSEY Page 333

On the 31st of August, 1775, it is noted that the "Minute Men" were directed to adopt for their uniform, hunting frocks, as near as may be to the uniform of riflemen in Continental service.

 

The Congress of New Jersey passed more stringent regulations for the militia, October 28th, 1775. Men capable of bearing arms who were "requested" to enroll themselves by the first military ordinance were now "directed" to do so. They were directed with all convenient speed to furnish themselves with "a good musket or firelock and bayonet, sword or tomahawk, a steel ramrod, worm, priming-wire and brush fitted thereto, a cartouch-box to contain twenty-three rounds of cartridges, twelve flints, and a knapsack." They were also directed to keep "at their respective abodes, one pound of powder and three pounds of bullets. Fines, if not paid, were ordered to be collected by warrants of distress, levied on the goods and chattels of the offender. In case of an alarm, the "Minute Men" were directed to repair immediately to their captains' residences, and he was to march his company instantly to oppose the enemy. Companies of light-horse were ordered to be raised among the militia.

 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

 

Opinion of the Court

 

c. Meaning of the Operative Clause. Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. This meaning is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment. We look to this because it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed.” As we said in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553 (1876), “[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed . . . .”

 

In a 1780 debate in the House of Lords, Lord Richmond described an order to disarm private citizens as “a violation of the constitutional right of Protestant subjects to keep and bear arms for their own defense.”

 

The US Constitution was ratified in 1788...

 

Cute argument however, I know you think the Constitution "grants" us rights however the right to keep and bear arms is a pre-existing right that predates the Constitution. The Second Amendment to the Constitution is merely an acknowledgement of the natural right of self defense or self-preservation. McDonald merely incorporated the Second Amendment against the states most of which (42 to be exact) already had a right to keep and bear arms in their state constitutions.

 

BTW one question I like to ask NJ LEOs, if New Jersey's state constitution allegedly protects the "natural and unalienable rights" of its citizens to defend their life and liberty and protect their property (sounds an awful lot like a natural right to self defense to me) how can it do so while effectively criminalizing every effective tool one would use to defend one's self?

 

Also if this is important enough to be the first enumerated right and privilege listed in the NJ Constitution why is self defense not considered a "justified need". I guess we should all use our over-sized tax bills to fend off attackers with paper-cuts...

 

NEW JERSEY STATE CONSTITUTION 1947

 

ARTICLE I

RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES

 

1. All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain natural and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.

[BRN169 6]

All good points. I just wanted to point out that the current NJ Constitution is a result of the NJ Constitutional Convention of 1947... and the reason that the RKBA was not included, was that it was thought to be a fundamental civil right protected under the civil rights discrimination clause.

 

 

 

http://www.njstateli...Const1n305.html

 

Somewhere along the line, that idea got lost.

 

 

I was looking for that but had a senior moment and couldn't find it...