• Announcements

    • Maksim

      NJGF's Gun Range & Store Database   05/23/2017

      Excited about launching a new feature, our very own member- driven range and store database.  Read the announcement and watch the video here... www.njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/86658-njgfs-gun-store-range-database/

John Willett

Premier Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


Community Reputation

60 Excellent

About John Willett

  • Rank
    NJGF Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location:
    Vineland, NJ

Recent Profile Visitors

448 profile views
  1. Is it because he misuses words like reality? Frankly, there is an objective reality to be explored on matters like firearms and violence, IMO (and I suspect most here would agree). Many seem to want to subscribe to a subjective view of the world, which leads them to spout nonsense like this. (I think exploring the ideas of meaning and symbolism can be useful in determining why people think what they do, but it isn't useful in understanding phenomena in the physical world.)
  2. Any worthwhile representation at that level is going to be frighteningly expensive. That's why cases supported and guided by institutions (like ANJRPC) are so valuable. The fact that an individual decided it was too expensive to finance on their own doesn't mean a whole lot. By the way, I'm not arguing Nappen is a saint or some kind of savior. My point was that I don't think he deserves much of the criticism that I see here based on things I personally have witnessed.
  3. So Nappen said that he wanted too much money to continue his case? That doesn't make any sense.
  4. And I know several people he has helped. Can he be hard to get a hold of sometimes? YES. But then again, so am I. My "ONE phone call" is to my wife, not my lawyer. Should I need to make it, she knows what to do from there. (God forbid).
  5. If you were following Pantano, you know that the NJ Supreme Court decided to not hear the case, claiming that their earlier decision to hear it was "improvident", I think. If he couldn't appeal a state court ruling, my understanding is that it would have changed the path to SCOTUS to be through the federal court system, which we had already done with Drake, et al.
  6. Based on what, exactly? The irony here is that now you will have started a rumor and in 3 to 6 months I'll be reading about how some numbskull "knows" this is true cause he "read it somewhere". Here is what I know about Evan Nappen. He has appeared at each NJ SAFE Conference. Do you know what we pay speakers? Nothing. If they come from out of state, we offer them a room to stay in the night before. He has been doing a Continuing Legal Education course with us too. You know how much money we paid him for that course? Nothing. Zero. Zilch. So for the past couple years, he takes his own time to travel to NJ, spend a day with us teaching CLE to help other lawyers know the gun laws better, and then speaks at the conference.
  7. For what its worth, here is a link to DSG Bloom's presentation at NJSAFE.
  8. For those interested in an analysis of the concealed carry litigation environment by the attorney who filed ANJRPC's challenge:
  9. This is patently ridiculous. The prominent lawyers in New Jersey's 2A community do not prefer the "status quo", have never said they support the "status quo", and have done far more than most to change the "status quo".
  10. If you read the email, it specifically mention that NRA is involved in the lawsuit in a supporting role. Emphasis mine
  11. Thanks for the feedback. It's very much appreciated. Glad to hear you were able to hit the range too that day!
  12. I'm very glad it got addressed. Thank you for allowing that to get brought to the open forum. I wish the actual people involved could have responded as well. Of course! Part of our mission is about bringing members of the community together. It certainly would have made for more of an exchange. Those that lobbed those bombs have been invited numerous times over the years. However, they clearly indicated that they would need to have the conference operate "under" their "banner" to "protect their brand". The conference is specifically not owned by any group so that all groups might be encouraged to participate. Their lack of participation has been their choice, no one else's.
  13. Honestly, they did a lot of work on Christie to get him where he ended up vetoing a ton of stuff that would have screwed us. I think we need both the folks that can work the inside track quietly and the guys who can get loud on the outside track. It's even better if they can stay aligned and try not to step on each others toes.
  14. Thanks for the full review! Completely valid criticism. I would like to be clear that no one can pay to be on stage. I did offer that the first year, and did not like the results. I make all decisions about content based on my interest and what I think would be valuable for the folks attending. Some of them were absolutely more "pitchy" than I intended. I agree the community panel should have been longer based on our panelists, we had a late addition after the schedule was largely locked in. I try to ensure that there is content that is stimulating for folks with different levels of interest or expertise.