NJ LAWMAKERS ANNOUNCE PLANS TO DESTROY RIGHT TO CARRY

[ATFspymen 15]

5 minutes ago, Mike77 said:

Explain how this is a victory?

The sponsor look like fools during the hearing today so many holes in the bill. The support testimony was weak and all the opposition had solid arguments on facts. Alot of the assemblymen kept saying how I feel or how I interpret where Bruen is extremely clear. That being said I wonder what they are going to change not much probably and they will probably have this back on the floor within a week or 2.

[DirtyDigz 1,811]

46 minutes ago, ATFspymen said:

Timestamp for Scott?

47:56

[Displaced Texan 11,731]

I’d take it as a short term win. They know as written, it won’t survive its first court challenge. 
 

They will retreat, regroup, and write something that is a little less shitty..but having a lesser chance of getting stomped on by a federal court. 
 

Take the short term win, but don’t stand down. The fight ain’t over yet. 

[DirtyDigz 1,811]

Twitter feed:

Quote

Legislative sources confirm: Concealed carry bill is being pulled from Assembly voting session today. Bill is held to make amendments; folks stress that it'll still reach the gov's desk.

"It's got more than enough votes. It's really just making sure that it is refined properly with the language," @LouGreenwald tells me.

From a Coughlin spox:“We’ve identified a technical issue that requires a minor amendment to the bill to ensure that the text meets the legislative intent. We plan on passing commonsense, thoughtful gun safety legislation through the Assembly once this amendment...

...has been adopted. We do not expect this procedural move to alter our original goal of passing the bill through both houses and getting it to the governor’s desk by the end of November.”

 

[kc17 622]

3 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

Damn, Scott is ripping them a new one. 

Listening now. He's making some very good points. I wish he was not putting as much emphasis on the training aspect. Almost giving them the go ahead to increase the requirements. 

[YankeeSC 1,204]

23 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

The slower it moves, the less chance it has of becoming law.

I'll argue instead, the greater chance it gets harder to shoot down.  They're busy fixing all the dumb mistakes that everyone's pointed out, that would have otherwise made it a slam dunk to kill.

[Displaced Texan 11,731]

22 minutes ago, ATFspymen said:

Alot of the assemblymen kept saying how I feel or how I interpret where Bruen is extremely clear.

Yep, it’s explicitly clear in Bruen, that they can’t make ‘everywhere’ a sensitive area just because it’s a densely populated area.

Their ‘feelings’ have absolutely jack shit to do with it. 
If I remember correctly, Thomas even called out areas that can be considered sensitive area, such as hospitals, schools, polling places, and major sporting venues. 
 

They are gonna have to abide by the law, feelings or no feelings. 
 

 

[DirtyDigz 1,811]

8 minutes ago, YankeeSC said:

I'll argue instead, the greater chance it gets harder to shoot down.  They're busy fixing all the dumb mistakes that everyone's pointed out, that would have otherwise made it a slam dunk to kill.

And why would it be harder to shoot down?  Because it would be more in line with the Bruen decision?  That is GOOD.

Also, the more delay there is, the more the chance that the NY judge rules on the TRO request there, and that may guide the legislators.

[Walkinguf61 40]

After reading the bill and the changes to it. I found a loophole that applies to me  that they didn’t anticipate in the 3rd revision of the bill. I don’t want to say what it until this legislation session is over but their rush to pump out this bill is allowing for these things , 

I can not participate as a plaintiff for the lawsuits but will be sending a donation soon. 

[Walkinguf61 40]

1 hour ago, ATFspymen said:

The sponsor look like fools during the hearing today so many holes in the bill. The support testimony was weak and all the opposition had solid arguments on facts. Alot of the assemblymen kept saying how I feel or how I interpret where Bruen is extremely clear. That being said I wonder what they are going to change not much probably and they will probably have this back on the floor within a week or 2.

It’s great to get the sponsors on the record as to their intent. When the court case comes up, it’s will be like gold. 

[kc17 622]

2 hours ago, DirtyDigz said:

Haven't seen any other source for this yet, but hot damn if true:

https://thelakewoodscoop.com/news/breaking-concealed-carry-restriction-bill-pulled-from-voting-session/

 

 

Additional source:

https://newjerseyglobe.com/gun-control/concealed-carry-reform-bill-pulled-from-planned-vote-in-assembly/

 

[M1152 713]

7 minutes ago, kc17 said:

Additional source:

https://newjerseyglobe.com/gun-control/concealed-carry-reform-bill-pulled-from-planned-vote-in-assembly/

 

Interesting they’ll probably revamp it and try some other shit again after the midterms  

[Mike77 169]

Anyone familiar... As for the sensitive areas, and 98% gun free zones, based on NYC, and Buren...... What do you expect the final results to be?

[M1152 713]

here's ANJRPC's release

https://www.anjrpc.org/page/CarryBanStallsInAssemblyPassesInSenCommittee

[silverado427 10,692]

Ed Durr testifing

 

 

[M1152 713]

7 hours ago, silverado427 said:

Ed Durr testifing

Got to love the red shirt Mom's backdrop, what a bunch of lost souls..  

.... and if you could stomach it more from Danielsen

https://www.facebook.com/franklinreporter/videos/496216619057662/

[Lucky Lefty 112]

21 hours ago, DirtyDigz said:

Per NJ Court rep - they received 1,500 PTC applications in August.

They estimate they'll receive a total of 11,000 by 2022 year end.

So where is the 300k PTC applications number coming from!?

My guess is that there have been approx 100-150k applicants so far, just from the various streams of information I've seen, such as the gentleman who owns Gun For Hire stating a couple weeks ago that his facility has had over 20,000 people take their PTC qualification course post Bruen.

That's just 1 establishment with over 20,000 qualifications in 3.5 months

[Lucky Lefty 112]

3 hours ago, FXDX said:

Got to love the red shirt Mom's backdrop, what a bunch of lost souls..  

.... and if you could stomach it more from Danielsen

https://www.facebook.com/franklinreporter/videos/496216619057662/

One of the best parts of Danielson's BS from that interview

Flat out says this bill has nothing to do with stopping criminals, it has everything to do with law abiding gun owners.

https://mobile.twitter.com/avsternator/status/1585776402796023808?fbclid=IwAR3GPXEJ_0C0kZ7_C2SszTfXgqU4E349w3YgjUe8JlYOck0EAhepDN6oYVM

[CMJeepster 2,777]

10 hours ago, silverado427 said:

Ed Durr testifing

 

 

According to her logic (can I still say "her"), every man with a penis is a potential rapist. 

[DirtyDigz 1,811]

Interesting - If Assemblyman Rooney is to be believed, the bill was really pulled because they were not going to have enough votes to pass it (my emphasis added on that part):

 

Quote

A LEGISLATIVE UPDATE FROM

ASSEMBLYMAN KEVIN J. ROONEY

Concealed Carry Restriction Bill A4769 Discussion & Vote POSTPONED!!

 

Friday, October 28, 2022

 

Dear Friends,

 

Thanks to the efforts of Republicans in the Assembly, the Speaker announced at yesterday’s Voting Session that bill A4769, also known as the Concealed Carry Restriction bill, would be held and all discussion and voting would be suspended at this time

Word traveled quickly around the State House that due to the efforts put forth by my fellow Republicans and me in different committees and in communications with our Democratic colleagues across the aisle about our concerns regarding this bill, the sponsor was not able to convince 41 members of his caucus to vote yes.

 

As this bill moved through the committee process, I and my fellow Republican caucus members have voiced legitimate objections to the legislation in light of the Bruen decision by the Supreme Court of the United States and the way in which this bill punishes law abiding gun owners.

 

This delay in this bill’s egregious overreach moving forward is a victory for lawful firearm owners and for common sense gun legislation. I am proud that our efforts have caused our Democratic colleagues to think twice and hold the bill. The battle was won but the war is far from over.

 

We need your help to keep the pressure on! Let your voices be heard so that elected officials from around the state are hearing REAL CONCERNS from REAL CONSTITUENTS!

 

Here is the contact information for bill no. A4769’s six primary sponsors:

 

Assemblyman Joe Danielsen (D-17):

732-247-3999

[email protected]

 

Assemblyman Lou Greenwald (D-6):

856-435-1247

[email protected]

 

Assemblywoman Mila Jasey (D-27):

973-762-1886

[email protected]

 

Assemblyman John McKeon (D-27):

973-377-1606

[email protected]

 

Assemblywoman Ellen Park (D-37):

201-928-0100

[email protected]

 

Assemblywoman Annette Chaparro (D-33):

201-683-7917

[email protected]

 

As more information becomes available, I will pass it along to you in real time as it comes across my desk.

I will never stop fighting for you and my constituents in Legislative District 40 and around New Jersey!

 

Sincerely,

Kevin J. Rooney

Assemblyman

 

[ATFspymen 15]

2 hours ago, DirtyDigz said:

Interesting - If Assemblyman Rooney is to be believed, the bill was really pulled because they were not going to have enough votes to pass it (my emphasis added on that part):

 

 

I'm definitely going to be calling each of the assemblymen and communicating my resentment for these bills and money that they are trying to waste in legal fees to defend this unconstitutional bill.

[hostak126 8]

I'm in the auto parts business and when customers look at my prices and start to complain even a little I tell them all the same thing. Look at who's in office, look at whats going on in the world, and think about who your voting for in November.

Problem is I'm literally preaching to the quire as all of them agree with me on who needs to be voted out!

[1LtCAP 4,262]

16 minutes ago, hostak126 said:

I'm in the auto parts business and when customers look at my prices and start to complain even a little I tell them all the same thing. Look at who's in office, look at whats going on in the world, and think about who your voting for in November.

Problem is I'm literally preaching to the quire as all of them agree with me on who needs to be voted out!

most of us in shops know the deal. there's a few out there that're liberals and don't get it.....but not many......

[1LtCAP 4,262]

19 hours ago, silverado427 said:

Ed Durr testifing

 

 

that last question he asked was all that needed saying.

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

19 hours ago, silverado427 said:

Ed Durr testifing

He was the subject of some quite unfair mockery on the left when he got elected. Because when I listen to him, I hear a remarkably pragmatic AND well-spoken person. Go, Mr. Durr!

[ATFspymen 15]

 

2 hours ago, DirtyDigz said:

Interesting - If Assemblyman Rooney is to be believed, the bill was really pulled because they were not going to have enough votes to pass it (my emphasis added on that part):

 

 

Left everyone of the sponsors on this list a nice VM about how unconstitutional this bill is how it will waste tax payers money in legal fees that will end up being payed out to 2A advocacy groups. I also noted how everyone right now is talking about how each side cant follow the democratic process but here we are throwing a temper-tantrum in the courts by not following the supreme court. I left Mr.Danielsen a very nice message pointing out everything wrong with this bill and how on the podcast he mentioned this doesn't stop crime he just wants people to not be able to carry, also said its pretty bad that he cant name one place where you can carry even though hes been questioned at 3 different meetings about it.. All the other assemblymen and women I just said how can you co-sponsor an unconstitutional bill that is full of very obnoxious errors like the "WEAPONS" classification, pretty much said how can you put your name on bill that wasn't properly legally proof read it makes it look you don't know how to properly do their job.

 

Every assemblyman/women I left my contact information will be funny to see if anyone reaches back to me about my concerns or if they will just immediately delete the VM.

[Mike77 169]

I was listening to the 3 hr audio. Had to stop after 30mins. The fact that their opinion is superior, and always right, and the fact they have zero proof a PTC will increase gun violence, and all PTCs are dangerous, was making my blood boil.

[Walkinguf61 40]

On 10/27/2022 at 8:19 AM, 1LtCAP said:

isn't going counter to the constitution, and/or ignoring it considered treason?or a felony? it is absolutely a breach of the peace. if that's not, then there's video evidence of what? a half dozen 'rats encouraging violence?

Nope. Violation of an individual’s constitutional rights isn’t treason which is a crime against the US government itself .

[Fred2 367]

10 hours ago, Walkinguf61 said:

Nope. Violation of an individual’s constitutional rights isn’t treason which is a crime against the US government itself .

Would this apply?

https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law

 

 

[Walkinguf61 40]

3 hours ago, Fred2 said:

Would this apply?

https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law

 

 

Nope. The legislature isn’t the one who is doing the act itself or even directly ordering it done.

A good example of what I am talking about is with a judge. A judge signs a search warrant that is determined to be unconstitutional, they aren’t held accountable. The cops who execute the warrant are the ones who are ( the cops get sued and not the judge). Same with the civil rights charge. But in the case where the judge ordered a bailiff to use his taser on someone in the court room, the judge would be liable to that civil rights violation.