Walkinguf61

NJ has a better shot— the SCOTUS justice that covers NY is Sotomeyer. NJ is Justice Alito. But don’t count of it coming anytime soon.

That’s literally the job of the PBA union. Look out for the best interests of their members period. If the democrats offered an exemption for members of NJ forum, the majority would take it then fight the rest of the bill to court . I saw it New York. I saw it in PA. I saw even in NJ. I saw it on the federal level. People got grandfathered in and didn’t fight for the guys who weren’t.

Go look at the committee testimony. He was afraid of Denison ( I misspelled his name). You can see it especially when they disagreed about holsters. Signing that form and endorsing the bill was the price of getting exceptions for their members . You can tell and they even say during the testimony, they spoke about the bill earlier and were going to speak after the hearing.

I reread what you wrote . When you say “ state hires”, that usually means employees and not elected officials. And where in the bill does it give these guys who passed the bill the ability to carry with a card by the superintendent? This bill was not sponsored by the state PBA. Their endorsement was hijacked by certain politicians ( more like blackmail). Go watch the hearings and how they were scared to cross the bill’s sponsor. Exemptions were put in place for their members and that was the price of that “ endorsement “. But that was blackmail.

The lawmakers are going to get slapped down hard just based on their comments of the goals of the bill

I have separate insurance as well as an umbrella policy . Does the bill require that the liability coverage be separate?

Who are you calling an asshole? You make it appear you are calling people like correction officers and other LE assholes who have nothing to do with this law. “ We pay [your] salary “BS I can respond to now that I am retired. I am more than happy to give people their twenty five cents back if it means they all have to shut up. Just because some professions can carry doesn’t mean you should take it out on them . It has the opposite effect of what you want. I’m immune to most of this BS and carry without a NJ permit in NJ. And I still send money to the fight against these laws in NJ. Talk like that makes me want to take my ball and go home.

The legislative branch is not liable for any law they propose or pass. The legal liability falls on those who enforce it. It has always been this way. A quick question about the insurance part of the bill. Does a general liability umbrella policy satisfy this part of the bill?

Awesome. Thank you for the information.

Is NJ really accepting out of state applications or is it really lip service and they don’t approve them in reality?

The problem isn’t his vote. It’s his authorship and cheerleading of the bill.

There are a lot judges who disagree with the interpretation of the 2nd amendment. Some still think it’s a a collective right as opposed to an individual right. The important thing is that it’s not what SCOTUS said , and they have to overlook their belief and follow the court decision.

Hopefully enough district judges and appeal courts knock this nonsense down quick and see it as more than a 2nd admendment case but what it really is. An attack on the courts .

Looks like I’m going to have to get that umbrella policy

Just to add. Try to get self defense liability insurance in NJ or NY. They have chased the insurance companies that do it out .If that is a requirement in the law, it’s another point to get it thrown out.

It will backfire. Cuomo did the same thing with the NY SAFE when he was on the short list to run in 2016. The gun control thing doesn’t work in the south and other places.

This TRO was issued by another judge in a different federal district . New York is covered by more than one federal district . This TRO is still in effect as of last night ( I didn’t check this morning yet). This is the third district judge to rule parts of the New York law as unconstitutional.

New York’s law that is similar to this bill just got smacked down with a ruling by a federal judge in the western district . Is the 2nd circuit going to overrule this, probably but that’s three judges calling this law unconstitutional. That puts pressure on the 2nd.

It’s typical. If they want any influence, they can’t buck the leadership. And pro-gun democrats in politics are as rare as hen’s teeth now.

When is the end of the legislative session for the year?

Like what happened in New York? Police officers, active peace officers and retired police are exempt but retired peace officers are not. And a savvy politician would not because it would be a news story how they screwed up not allowing police officers to be exempt. And they are not creating two classes of citizens. That already exists both at the NJ state level and on the federal level. But that is after giving years of service. Veterans get benefits that mere citizens don’t also. I made a choice to work in a profession that my gun rights would be recognized when I retired. I would have taken a different profession if they weren’t . This is not to say others shouldn’t have their rights recognized too.

I stand corrected. Sort of. You are correct . But if you are a member of a large union , that the upper union leadership don’t necessarily represent the views of some or even most of their members. And I only saw white faces up there. I doubt these particular union leaders truly understand what it’s like to be a cop and live in these urban neighborhoods. However, it doesn’t really matter because they got the exemption for their members. That’s is their job . Like a lawyer, their responsibility is solely to their client and not other people’s clients. They were kissing butt to get it and is not necessarily what their members believe .

Me for one. I hope it was recorded and available on YouTube later

So it passed or it didn’t pass?

It’s not the police making these laws. And it was only the state troopers unions that testified to the bill. They did it to get exceptions for their members as was their job. Note the urban officers did not testify . These lawmakers who made this law don’t give a —— about what cops think. Especially retired cops ad proven by the the 3rd revision to the bill and the one lawmaker harping on the fact that retirees don’t have a legal obligation to the general public. They only put it in for the political optics . Did you see how the bill’s sponsor was arguing over his holster requirement for a retention strap with the police who did testify ? He does not care about the police beyond a political expediency.