Jump to content

John Willett

Members
  • Content Count

    148
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by John Willett

  1. It's even worse than that. The second bill prevents them from shooting their OWN guns at a range in Jersey without presenting their NJ FPID, PPP, or Carry License.
  2. From ANJRPC Yesterday. I'm going to the statehouse on Monday. Anyone else? On Monday, December 5, at 2:00 p.m., the New Jersey Assembly Law & Public Safety Committee is scheduled to hear A4179 and A4180 - "suicide prevention" bills which have little actual impact on suicide but represent a massive attack on every shooting range in the state and every person who uses them. Please attend this critical hearing at the New Jersey State House Annex, 125 West State Street, Trenton NJ 08608 (room to be announced). The bills as presently written would require the owner or operator of every range and gun club to verify that every range user has an FID card, NJ carry permit, or pistol purchase permit, along with government-issued photo ID, every time that person uses the range. That is an impossible burden for most ranges to meet - most ranges are unstaffed or staffed sporadically by volunteers. Few ranges have staff during all operating hours. NO SHOOTING ACTIVITY COULD OCCUR ON ANY RANGE THAT IS NOT STAFFED TO VERIFY CREDENTIALS. The bills as presently written would also prevent you from using your own firearms on a range unless the range first verifies your credentials, every time you use the range, and bans all temporary transfer on a range unless the range verifies the credentials of both the transferor and transferee. THIS IMPACTS A HUGE SWATH OF SECOND AMENDMENT ACTIVITY, INCLUDING TRAINING, COMPETITION, TARGET PRACTICE, OPEN HOUSES, RANGE GUESTS, HUNTER EDUCATION, WOMEN'S EVENTS, ETC. (see below for detailed examples). The bills, sponsored by Assemblyman Ralph Caputo (D28), are extremely overbroad and wide-ranging in their effect. Instead of narrowly addressing a specific limited problem, the bills cast an enormous net over every range in the state and every person that uses them, and would dramatically disrupt traditional Second Amendment activity that has occurred for decades without incident. Many ranges would be forced to close, and those able to stay open would be severely burdened and disrupted. We have communicated our concerns to Assemblyman Caputo and have been told that bill amendments are forthcoming, but our request to postpone the December 5 hearing has not been accepted. As a result, based on past experience, there will likely be confusion at the hearing Monday, as it is declared that last-minute amendments (that have not been fully analyzed) address our concerns, when in fact they do not. We have seen this scenario many times in the past on firearms legislation and we have not seen one instance where last-minute amendments have adequately addressed gun owner concerns. Please immediately contact all members of the Assembly Law & Public Safety Committee and Assemblyman Caputo and tell them to OPPOSE A4179 and A4180 or postpone the December 5 hearing. No one will be made safer by this legislation, and they should focus on targeted solutions directed at the specific issue they are trying to address, rather than a broad-brush approach that harms every NJ range and every person who uses them. Click here for Legislator contact information.
  3. I think you are looking at what is essentially political issue through a legal lens. Overriding the permitting process of a state for its own citizens, while they are in that state, is likely seen as a greater degree of intervention than requiring other states permits be honored. There used to be versions of reciprocity that allowed states which didn't issue permits to not have to honor out of state permits. But we now live in a world where every state has some kind of permitting process on the books. I think any kind of reciprocity is helpful, though a the stronger that reciprocity is the more beneficial to us
  4. He lives in a nice neighborhood, but his home is pretty modest. The cars his family drives, on the other hand, looked pretty fancy.
  5. These are vetoes. So there is a practical effect. He stopped the legislature from passing their new law defining justifiable need and the new smart gun mandate. Next he proposes eliminating Justifiable Need and making New Jersey shall issue, including the specific legislative changes necessary to effect that outcome. Even though it is extremely unlikely the legislature will take it up, they should have to hear from all of us again and again about how and why they should, IMO.
  6. That's nonsense. POS repeatedly refuse to be held accountable for their actions, which have created ill-will, while demanding accountability from others. "Good guys" don't personally attack and harass honest critics. The onus is on them to demonstrate their value, and so far it is dubious. For the sake of clarification, I appreciate Steven's commentary here and my comments are toward the POS, not him.
  7. I have been fortunate, in the course of producing a podcast and an annual event focused on 2nd Amendment issues here in New Jersey, to have developed relationships with many members of the 2A movement here. Maybe you can clear something up for me. I often see social media posts from POS and its members, but they have said they won't do podcast interviews without their attorney. Do you clear all their postings regarding the case? I want to support all the efforts, but they have to make sense to me. I've had misgivings about a strategy or tactic in the past, and been proven wrong. I have also made the mistake of supporting an effort, against my better judgement, and seeing it fail miserably. I told Al years ago that the likely best case scenario was that he would get a permit. I'm glad it happened. However there is a lot of crowing about that permit, and I still don't see any benefit attributing to those who contributed. I am sure there are a lot of folks on forums around the country with a whole host of opinions on New Jersey, hahaha. My comment was directed more toward the folks populating the groups working to improve things here.
  8. Almeida and POS regularly disparage other groups in their postings on social media and here on these forums, at least until a group acquiesces to their greatness. Then they are friends. It's bullying. They accused a prominent attorney and the leader of a group of conspiring to stifle Almeida's case. When confronted Almeida has resorted to his usual grade school name calling. Other in POS, will say they took down the Facebook post, which apparently they think should absolve them. However, if you have shown yourself untrustworthy, it's on you to build that trust, not the parties lied about.
  9. Nothing happened between us. I simply won't stand for people making shit up, and acting like they are the victim of some bullshit conspiracy
  10. You've admitted here that your case against Justifiable Need is DOA until you get to the Third Circuit, en banc. The only people who may benefit are the named plaintiffs that you can pressure the state issuing permits to. I have yet to hear anyone argue that NJ is a lost cause, expect POS members putting words into others mouths. If the work is going to be done in the federal system, then cases nationally should figure into that strategy. It appears that there are simply stronger cases outside of NJ now.
  11. I think it is awfully tough to work with someone who has already shown that they are willing to blatantly spread lies and gossip about you to try and raise money. Appears it wasn't even that effective.
  12. Thanks for that. I have read the complaint, though I don't think I read the preliminary motion you mention. Are there specific obstacles that you expect may prevent you from making that challenge? For example if all the plaintiffs are granted permits, will they maintain standing to bring a challenge? Another item in your post was interesting to me. Could you expand on that? While I am not a lawyer, I do consider myself a student of this issue here. My understanding is the the definition of "justifiable need" as codified is based on how the courts defined it in Siccardi. Meanwhile, the legislature itself has yet to provide a definition (though the anti's here are seeking to remedy that now).
  13. If eliminating or redefining "justifiable need" isn't the purpose of this case, what is?
  14. I understand that not everyone spends part of each day studying this issue, but the resources are available to all of us to get a handle on what the legal parlance means. There are a couple of podcasts focused specifically on New Jersey, Gun for Hire Radio and Bear Arms Show (shameless plug for mine ) Also, many youtube videos published by NJ2AS or NJ SAFE Conference (another self plug) that go into great detail as to what the laws mean. POS has yet to lay out their plan in these forums for how they will accomplish their stated goal of challenging the state's need requirement. In their own filings they argue that Mr. Almeida and Mr. Tuminelli MEET the standard. We already know the result of this case up to the third circuit. We also know that SCOTUS has denied several carry cases over the past couple years, including Drake, and that was with Scalia on the court. Filing lawsuits for the purpose of filing lawsuits, without a plan to get a decision that benefits us, isn't a viable strategy. Its reckless. Also, this idea that the folks you are demanding support you have to go to some bar to have their questions answered is ridiculous. They have appeared on podcasts before, their lawyer has appeared on podcasts before, why all the secrecy? It's silly Probably one of the best posts on this thread, save Newtonian's brilliant poetry.
  15. So the lead plaintiff in a federal 2A case out of New Jersey has a permit issued because the state says now that he has sufficient "need", and we are supposed to act like its never happened before? Seriously, I am glad that Albert got his permit. Hopefully Michael gets his too. Not sure what else has changed...?
  16. ive referred to this as a generational fight too, but one in which I am willing to engage. Antis have largely succeeded in killing lawful gun culture here. First step is trying to grow it as much as possible. Some people visibly doing great work on that front with programs, others doing it with friends and family. All those efforts count.
  17. For this thread to come to a relatively amicable end, I think, is a step in the right direction.
  18. On point one, fair enough, but your peeps don't seem to have gotten that message. There will be another conference in 2017. Come and decide based on experience what you think it is. We are posting all the videos we could capture to YouTube, check them out. (Some of the conference is lost due to the power outage that occurred). This year we had 13 students in the continuing legal education course on NJ Firearms Law. 6 of off them were attorneys. We got them state CLE credit on gun law and now they are better prepared to represent their clients! I think that alone represents something new and different, and isn't a dog and pony show. There was an NRA Family day at the range on Sunday that weekend, in connection with the conference. They alone had 300 people come and learn to shoot or a new shooting or archery discipline. We plan to expand on that next year as well. I take the education in our name seriously, and will stand by our programs. FYI: If you do come, do not introduce yourself to my wife under any circumstances. She isn't as tolerant as me I may not believe that your case will be a game changer for us here in NJ, but I can work with people I disagree with when our interests align. My problem with your group right now is you've attacked people who work on this issue in good faith and given me reason not to trust you all . I would love for that to change, but it will take serious time and effort.
  19. Thanks for the screenshot. I can refer to it the next time one of your group erroneously claims you guys support or "commend" the conference. I was specifically told you guys weren't referring to SAFE with the "dog and pony" line. Maybe you should send the rest of POS a memo on how many of you there are and what you have actually said on behalf of the group. Amateur? You literally just said I was in it for the money!!! Absolute proof you just make it up as you go along. Hahahaha Look, I hope you prove me wrong and do something good for 2A, but please, at least try not to be despicable while you do it. And congrats on doing something not completely about you. Hopefully you will do more of that and less of the lies and stuff.
  20. Rally in Trenton- no Albert Recall Sweeney- no Albert Diversity Shoot- no Albert NJ2AS Meetings- no Albert Gun Society Social shoot- no Albert NJ SAFE 2015- no Albert NJ SAFE 2016 - no Albert Where's Albert (and company) Spamming your Facebook group for donations Spreading lies and rumors for donations Insulting those who don't give him money Calling your "boss" cause they don't like your forum post Calling you a whiner for complaining about not getting the items they promised Seriously, enough is enough
  21. For profit? Guess what chump, I've put my own money in to make those conferences happen. There is NO profit involved. But you don't see me crying about it and begging for donations every 5 minutes. The only reason it's not a nonprofit is that I don't want to be hamstrung by the political speech rules.
  22. Calling me out? For what, making an observation that you guys were dismissive of someone who gave you money in good faith? That's rich. But you don't really care anyway! Right? That's what you told him. Also, you guys at POS are really arrogant for people that have accomplished... What exactly? Filing a lawsuit? That and $5 will probably get you a bowl of soup. Maybe some bread too! Of course you have much more than $5. Newtonian gave you $115 himself! That's a lot of soup. Enough for 6 of you. Of course there are only 3 or 4 of you, depending on which of you is asked, and if they remember all the members at the time. You've really got your shit together. Finally, why don't we ever see you out in the community supporting other groups? Every time you appear it's another pitch, or seeking to position yourself in a photo op. If it weren't so shady, your operation would simply be embarrassing. I have a lot of tolerance for for people disagreeing with me or even calling me names, as I've demonstrated. I don't however have much tolerance for people taking advantage of others.
  23. Absolutely amazing to me that Newtonian gave them more than $100, and now he's the asshole...?
  24. Thanks guys! I am continually impressed by the tenacity of our community. Looking forward to next year, when we will continue to improve the event. Any feedback, please send to [email protected]
×
×
  • Create New...