Jump to content
Cemeterys Gun Blob

Gov Chrisite could announce his gun control package tomorrow

Recommended Posts

I think Paul or Rubio have a better shot than Christie.

 

They are as seen too far to the right (although gun owners do like these guys), whereas Cuomo and Malloy are too far to the left. Christie seems to playing his cards just right as to be a moderate republican. I think he will be the GOP's nominee. I not sure who the dems are planning on using, Hillary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moderate Republican = RINO = NOT A CONSERVATIVE.

 

The only hope for the Republican party is to swing RIGHT again, to pick up their base- they keep trying to get the middle, and keep losing, while at the same time losing their base who is staying home before voting for a moderate. 4 million republicans didn't vote last time BECAUSE a moderate republican was the nominee.

 

While I think Christie has been generally good for NJ, I don't want him anywhere near the white house- he can't be trusted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moderate Republican = RINO = NOT A CONSERVATIVE.

 

The only hope for the Republican party is to swing RIGHT again, to pick up their base- they keep trying to get the middle, and keep losing, while at the same time losing their base who is staying home before voting for a moderate. 4 million republicans didn't vote last time BECAUSE a moderate republican was the nominee.

 

While I think Christie has been generally good for NJ, I don't want him anywhere near the white house- he can't be trusted.

Maybe Christie has the opportunity to do the "right" thing here and will continue it going forward in positioning himself as a Presidential candidate...one can hope. I'm not sure the Country can go from this extreme left back to the right without some transitional period under someone like Christie. Going this far left under Obama has me already feeling like we live in a sophisticated banana republic. Swinging too quickly will only make it worse and our citizens more contentious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I respectfully disagree, Shawn. It's no different than a literacy test to vote.

 

Yes, I've seen people do unsafe thing. I've even done some unsafe things and I have 30 years of experience. I think the degradation of our rights ought weighs any benefits from training.

Sadly, if we were all debating in good faith, I think a lot of people would be fine with a requirement that, say, before picking up your FID, you spend 30 minutes with an officer on the police range going over basic safety.

 

But we're not debating in good faith. It's 100% certain that any training requirement will be made as onerous as possible. Even if not now, after the next tragedy, you'll get the likes of Mainor and Cryan demanding more and more stringent training and qualification requirements, to the point where you'll have to spend >$1000 and have to qualify for the Olympic National Team before meeting the requirements. Or it will be chicken and egg thing, where to get the training, you need a firearm, and to get the firearm, you need training....

 

Sort of parallel to the Pittman-Robertson Act. No one seems to mind, because it's in good faith. We pay a little extra to keep our hunting and fishing heritage alive. But we'd bitterly fight against even a 1% tax to help fund "school safety," because we all know exactly what that's all about.

 

Much of this debate could be resolved with good faith, and the past few months have brought out the demons on the left, to the point where I will never cooperate one bit with them, no matter how "sensible" the bait being offered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He could also tell the the assembly and senate to come back with something based on the commission's findings or else he will veto. That would buy more time and make him look marginally less anti-2A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry I don't buy that line of reasoning. A training requirement is either constitutional or it isn't. Weather you carry a firearm outside the home or not, it will sometime leave going to a range or some other place to be fired for practice, potentially exposing other people to ineptitude. Even inside a home if used improperly it can affect your neighbors. As for how do you train without one, how does every new driver learn how to drive if they don't have a car? This is a problem we have a solution for, to say nothing that it would create opportunities for lots of small business trainers. Hey, it's a jobs program!

 

Understand what I'm saying, I rather there not be such a law, but I can't see how such a law would be unconstitutional and maybe we need to focus more on the laws that would be. By all means, we should oppose it, but let's not fall in the hypocrisy mindset we accuse the anti-gunners about. We can dislike firearms IDs but we can't then grumble about requiring voter IDs, we can't say that the militia is everyone in the 2A but the say that section 8 doesn't apply to everyone.

 

Vlad I am usually right there with you but I think your missing the boat on this. It is another infringement andI equate it to Obamacare... mandate that YOU have health care. Another Mandate... another rule to live under.

 

NOW I do believe in a training requirement to obtain a CCW. But then again... its NJ and that would never happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you guys will think Im nuts but I'm honestly hoping for a Christie nomination. I think a moderate such as himself who can win broad appeal among independants is our best chance of a republican president in 2016. Hence why I'm hoping for him to come out swinging and veto every bill that makes it through the senate. But that's probably a longshot.

 

Yeah, that would be a great idea! NOT!

 

Either working for the other side, OR, haven't paid attention to the last two elections. A RINO "moderate" Republican cannot beat a liberal statist in an election. The ONLY hope for our country is a Constitutional Conservative that can speak clearly and enunciate his or her views clearly and appeal directly to the people, and not through the talking heads of each of the two parties or the MSM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I half agree with the safety class. I hate having to pass a class to exercise a right. But I've seen people that down right scare me with guns

 

Yeah, hopefully Biden will be out of a job and he can teach it. When they mandate parenting classes and classes for public officials to avoid corruption, scandal, lying, etc. then I will consider it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the "independent" vote is a sham. There is no such thing as this amorphous group of voters that swing from election to election. All there is are two blocs, and one of the two becomes less enthused than the other to actually get out and vote.

 

Trust me, the last two candidates were chosen under that exact prescription "they can appeal to those middle-of-the-road people!" instead what happens is they fail to excite a solid base and they are the ones who in turn don't show up.

 

Think about it: how many people do you actually know that legitimately vote for an R today and D tomorrow, and back again? That's absurd. Anyone who thinks they do that and are "enlightened" are morons. As far as I'm concerned there are no good democrats and maybe 2 or 3 good republicans. the rest are forgettable.

 

Reagan (ran as, key word) an ardent neo-conservative. He was unapologetic. He crushed his opponent.

 

This coming from a person who is sympathetic to libertarianism: Moderates are a farce. Republicans and democrats are a farce (to me you are either a statist or proponent of liberty, the party labels are just nonsense) But the fact is republicans lose because every time they castrate themselves trying to sound like compassionate progressives, and that is not in fact what their base and libertarian outliers want to hear. They haven't seemed to learn their lesson in 10 years, except briefly in 2010 when they latched on to this "tea party" movement and saw wild gains. They would be smart to continue down that path of liberty and reject large government and statism at every turn.

 

That is mostly BS. The last two elections were purposefully thrown by Republican heads that are on the same agenda path (secretly) of Obamanism. The Republics came out weak intentionally, and the talking heads that promoted that brilliant Republican plan are still in power. It's good cop/bad cop and we are all sitting in the interrogation room. America is already bankrupt. There is NO mathematical way to turn it around, so the clowns down there is Washington are trying to exert as much control as they can, hold onto as much power as they can, and to let us down as gently as they can....

 

The fact is that most people given a proper education, etc. and a healthy childhood, etc. gravitate to conservative values. What I am saying is that if you have a "great communicator" that can appeal to that innate conservative value system, then as has happened in the past, there would be a land slide. The flip side of this is that most liberals have some kind of mental deficiency. They have been marginalized, victimized, not taught to be independent, etc.. And, the powers that be want to promote that kind of mentality. But, with cogent thinking and logic, and someone that can express them, conservative views win. I am not talking about the radical right, I am talking about a conservative frame of mind with a libertarian slant. The people aren't fooled and they know that neither parties have any intention of putting forth conservative candidates that believe in a limited role of the government, and in concentrating the power with the people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who else you think can pull it off?

 

A true-to-form NJ State of Mind! Help us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are as seen too far to the right (although gun owners do like these guys), whereas Cuomo and Malloy are too far to the left. Christie seems to playing his cards just right as to be a moderate republican. I think he will be the GOP's nominee. I not sure who the dems are planning on using, Hillary?

 

They are being villainized as being to far to the right by a dishonest MSM. Christie has an identity crisis... He's a RINO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vlad I am usually right there with you but I think your missing the boat on this. It is another infringement andI equate it to Obamacare... mandate that YOU have health care. Another Mandate... another rule to live under.

 

NOW I do believe in a training requirement to obtain a CCW. But then again... its NJ and that would never happen.

 

Yes, even if it was a logical thing, the government would not get it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vlad I am usually right there with you but I think your missing the boat on this. It is another infringement andI equate it to Obamacare... mandate that YOU have health care. Another Mandate... another rule to live under.

 

NOW I do believe in a training requirement to obtain a CCW. But then again... its NJ and that would never happen.

 

It is only and infringement if it isn't constitutional. It is hard to argue that it would be unconstitutional. Look at is this way, should we look hypocritical fighting one part of the constitution while supporting the other, or should we shape the conversation by saying bring on the training requirements, as long as we get a say in those training requirements, we hear there is an organization dedicated to that called the NRA which might even give free one year memberships with every training class? Which one is the smarter play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes, even if it was a logical thing, the government would not get it right.

The bill that made it through the assembly had some details on the training. While I had questions and concerns it did mention that the NRA course would count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1000. Moderate Republicans are now further left than the Dems were in the 60s.

 

the "independent" vote is a sham. There is no such thing as this amorphous group of voters that swing from election to election. All there is are two blocs, and one of the two becomes less enthused than the other to actually get out and vote.

 

Trust me, the last two candidates were chosen under that exact prescription "they can appeal to those middle-of-the-road people!" instead what happens is they fail to excite a solid base and they are the ones who in turn don't show up.

 

Think about it: how many people do you actually know that legitimately vote for an R today and D tomorrow, and back again? That's absurd. Anyone who thinks they do that and are "enlightened" are morons. As far as I'm concerned there are no good democrats and maybe 2 or 3 good republicans. the rest are forgettable.

 

Reagan (ran as, key word) an ardent neo-conservative. He was unapologetic. He crushed his opponent.

 

This coming from a person who is sympathetic to libertarianism: Moderates are a farce. Republicans and democrats are a farce (to me you are either a statist or proponent of liberty, the party labels are just nonsense) But the fact is republicans lose because every time they castrate themselves trying to sound like compassionate progressives, and that is not in fact what their base and libertarian outliers want to hear. They haven't seemed to learn their lesson in 10 years, except briefly in 2010 when they latched on to this "tea party" movement and saw wild gains. They would be smart to continue down that path of liberty and reject large government and statism at every turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, if we were all debating in good faith, I think a lot of people would be fine with a requirement that, say, before picking up your FID, you spend 30 minutes with an officer on the police range going over basic safety.

 

But we're not debating in good faith. It's 100% certain that any training requirement will be made as onerous as possible. Even if not now, after the next tragedy, you'll get the likes of Mainor and Cryan demanding more and more stringent training and qualification requirements, to the point where you'll have to spend >$1000 and have to qualify for the Olympic National Team before meeting the requirements. Or it will be chicken and egg thing, where to get the training, you need a firearm, and to get the firearm, you need training....

 

Sort of parallel to the Pittman-Robertson Act. No one seems to mind, because it's in good faith. We pay a little extra to keep our hunting and fishing heritage alive. But we'd bitterly fight against even a 1% tax to help fund "school safety," because we all know exactly what that's all about.

 

Much of this debate could be resolved with good faith, and the past few months have brought out the demons on the left, to the point where I will never cooperate one bit with them, no matter how "sensible" the bait being offered.

 

Bingo. There are some absolutists who believe that no laws regarding guns are constitutional and that "laws don't stop criminals", which is inane. But I think many gun owners or perhaps most oppose any new gun laws because they know that the other side is not acting in good faith, so why agree to anything? We know that Feinstein, Bloomberg, Schumer, etc. are not "gun safety advocates" and do not just want "common sense" laws. They are opposed to civilian gun ownership and want to do everything in their power to undermine Second Amendment. If our overlords in NJ were genuinely interested in promoting public safety while also protecting people's rights they wouldn't be proposing any of these new laws. We'd know they were acting in good faith and I and I'll bet many people would be ok with required training, certainyl for obtaining a CCP. But that unfortunately isn't reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is only and infringement if it isn't constitutional. It is hard to argue that it would be unconstitutional. Look at is this way, should we look hypocritical fighting one part of the constitution while supporting the other, or should we shape the conversation by saying bring on the training requirements, as long as we get a say in those training requirements, we hear there is an organization dedicated to that called the NRA which might even give free one year memberships with every training class? Which one is the smarter play?

Trust me I can see the value-add here for a person like you, me or the rest of the membership here. Cost is a big sticking point with me. If the training req becomes cost prohibitive, then we are pushing out the financially constrained. If the training is excessive man hrs, then we are pushing out the working class. If the training is physically demanding, then we are pushing out the old or disabled. Mandates are rules and rules are for the stupid so they can manage others.

 

Personally, training is a no brainer, but it should be optional and that option should get us more freedom and leeway within the laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, looks like we have a crack smoker in da house!

 

There are countless examples in which the Republicans showed their incompetence during the last two national elections. And, if you think it is just stupidity, then so be it. I do not. Boner was handed the House of Republicans by his base and the American People (who form the Tea Party), and what did he do, he gave them the finger and cried. Give me a break. If you think for one minute that these clowns aren't working together in that "transparent" government down there to find ways to tax us and take away our freedoms, while growing government, you are mistaken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • olight.jpg

    Use Promo Code "NJGF10" for 10% Off Regular Items

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Posts

    • I very seriously doubt this has anything to do with terrorism.    1) Harbor pilots are VERY seriously vetted, and highly trained. Not to mention extremely well paid. My experience knowing a few of them, and knowing how they are recruited and screened tells me that there is a slim to highly unlikely chance that a harbor pilot would have participated in anything like that.    2) Maintenance of foreign flag ships is well known to be dubious. Especially these days. These were NOT US flag, Jones act sailors. It was (to my understanding) a largely Indian crew on that ship, with a Ukrainian Captain. Indian crews are not exactly known for being stellar.    3) The bunkers (fuel) these ships use is ‘Bunker C’, which is a heavy, dirty fuel oil that can, and usually is, pretty contaminated. This stuff ain’t your car grade gasoline or diesel fuel. It’s nasty.   It requires nearly constant filter changes and maintenance to the engine/generators. The ship took on fuel prior to departing port, which would stir up all kinds of shit in the fuel tanks, which would contribute to particulates in the fuel lines/filters.    4) I’d say the posting of the chief engineer for Maserek above was pretty spot on as far as chain of events.    This was a shitty accident, with horrible timing and outcome. Not a terror attack. 
    • I saw Lara's interview on Bannon's War Room, and that gave me pause for thought. Her conjecture depends primarily on the veracity of her sources. Regardless, if it's not applicable in any way to this ship disaster, the methods described seem valid to me. And worthy of consideration for the future. As I said before, IMO something is coming. Death by a thousand cuts? Lara Logan Provides Comprehensive Baltimore Update: Experts in Behavioral Analytics, Counter-Terrorism, and National Security Analyze Recent Incident | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft
    • Another big windfall for governments'. The 'winner'? Not so much. Mega Millions $1.13 billion winner is facing mega tax bill. The amount is staggering. - nj.com
×
×
  • Create New...