Jump to content
M1152

NJ LAWMAKERS ANNOUNCE PLANS TO DESTROY RIGHT TO CARRY

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Fring Spield said:

Thankfully, after Bruen, the Presiding Officers intent to "provide perspective on the critical public health, safety and welfare issues that led the Legislature to enact Chapter 131.” means jack. The days of interest balancing are over in 2A issues.

NJ: Our law is rooted in history and tradition. We wouldn't have passed this law without it.

Judge: Show me

NJ: Fuck...

  • Like 2
  • Haha 6
  • Crazy 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

Wait, what? Does our distinguished governor realize the fellow he praised is the same supposed right wing judge that slapped NJ down? I had to double check the last name, how can Judge Quraishi be the same guy? Wow, talk about egg on the governor's face, ha.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Moutinas said:

Wait, what? Does our distinguished governor realize the fellow he praised is the same supposed right wing judge that slapped NJ down? I had to double check the last name, how can Judge Quraishi be the same guy? Wow, talk about egg on the governor's face, ha.

That's above his pay grade!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DirtyDigz said:


And now here's the response whining:

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/31/judge-new-jersey-law-gun-industry-00080467
 

Quote

A spokesperson for Murphy said the governor was “disappointed” by Tuesday’s order, but is “confident that this decision will be swiftly reversed on appeal.”

In a strongly-worded statement, Platkin called the decision “unprecedented.”

“The district court’s decision enjoining New Jersey’s public nuisance law is unprecedented and unsupportable,” Platkin said. “The New Jersey Legislature acted lawfully when it adopted public nuisance legislation to hold the gun industry accountable, and nothing in federal law allows firearms manufacturers to violate our state statutes with impunity. Another district court already rejected the exact same arguments put forth by the gun industry last year, and we look forward to swiftly appealing this misguided, outlier decision. We will always put public safety ahead of the profits of the gun industry.”

At least they didn't call the judge "radical right wing" this time...

image.png.8aba1ec65be99ca82c1fda0e5e6b6ce6.png

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So our governor is is encouraging people to post gun free zone signs. The first person who is robbed or worse at gunpoint will wonder why his sign was not honored, hmmmmm. Maybe we should pass a law removing qualified immunity for stupid advice offered by state officials so people can drag politicians into court.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DirtyDigz said:

"Ask Gov. Murphy" aired last night, and he took a question on the TRO's, said they'll appeal and urged private property owners to put up "no guns allowed" signs:

25:32 - 28:53

https://westchester.news12.com/ask-gov-murphy-jan-31-2023



 

see? this is one of the places where our so-called republican representatives need to jump in.

 

 it's fine if he wants to encourage property owners to put those signs up. and they're free to put them up. if they DO so choose to disallow firearms on their property(business and/or personal), then there should be a new law(i just puked a little typing that) that those property owners MUST provide FREE and secure storage for our firearms while we are there   storage that only we as the firearm owner will have access to upon leaving their business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DirtyDigz said:

"Ask Gov. Murphy" aired last night, and he took a question on the TRO's, said they'll appeal and urged private property owners to put up "no guns allowed" signs:

25:32 - 28:53

https://westchester.news12.com/ask-gov-murphy-jan-31-2023



 

and on this note, why didn't anyone call in and ask the governor why exactly he thought that vetted law abiding citizens were a/the problem?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moutinas said:

Maybe we should pass a law removing qualified immunity for stupid advice offered by state officials so people can drag politicians into court.

There should be harsh criminal and civil liability on property owners for any firearm related death or injury that occurs in a "gun free" zone.  If a property owner is going to enforce that, the owner then has a duty to protect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Displaced Texan said:

I thought I remembered Judge Bumb saying something to Cai about that in the hearing…

Yeah, it was something like the state should say "may post a sign" as opposed to "should post a sign".  No surprise the state's way of thinking is to just tell people what to do, as opposed to making a suggestion.  This *is* NJ, ya know.  :rolleyes:

3 minutes ago, YankeeSC said:

There should be harsh criminal and civil liability on property owners for any firearm related death or injury that occurs in a "gun free" zone.  If a property owner is going to enforce that, the owner then has a duty to protect.

We "should" also have constitutional carry, but oh well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fawkesguy said:

Yeah, it was something like the state should say "may post a sign" as opposed to "should post a sign".  No surprise the state's way of thinking is to just tell people what to do, as opposed to making a suggestion.  This *is* NJ, ya know.  :rolleyes:

I think you’re right..I knew I remembered something about it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

President Obama had a similar Constitutional disconnect. Not sure if it's ignorance or worse. They may know then subtly lie to the low information public. The President famously said the Constitution gives citizens rights. We all know that is not true. Our God given rights predate the USA, the founding documents and all the Amendments protect these rights. It's a fine point but makes a huge difference. When the powers gives you something, they can take it away which would be any tyrant's preference.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Moutinas said:

President Obama had a similar Constitutional disconnect. Not sure if it's ignorance or worse. They may know then subtly lie to the low information public. The President famously said the Constitution gives citizens rights. We all know that is not true. Our God given rights predate the USA, the founding documents and all the Amendments protect these rights. It's a fine point but makes a huge difference. When the powers gives you something, they can take it away which would be any tyrant's preference.

Yep.  That's why I have that link in my signature.  It's a great article that explains rights quite clearly.

https://www.backwoodshome.com/we-dont-need-no-steenking-2nd-amendment/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...