ALERT!!!! APRIL 30th SENATE HEARING AT NOON not 10AM See SLP comte page

[SgtToadette 59]

I agree also. When it came time to "Speak on the Bill" and the speaker would go into a speech about 2A, not trusting the government, etc... instead of hammering specific points of the bills, it seemed like a wasted opportunity to engage Greenstien and Norcross in dialog that would have had a better chance of doing some good. Instead it just irritated them.

 

A.

 

Million.

 

Times.

 

This.

 

I'm angry about this, so I may say some things a bit more bluntly than I usually do.

 

This is our fault as a community. Our fault. For a community that likes to toot its own horn about how organized and factual we are, we don't deliver on either of those fronts when it matters. Did we show up in numbers? Sure. Were we cohesive in our message? Not even close.

 

It happened at the last committee hearing and we learned nothing. Going up and proselytizing about the second amendment doesn't work, but the more important point is who the hell thought it would? Do we honestly think that preaching to our representatives like they're children is going to do anything except reinforce the prejudice they have against us? We had to be reminded constantly, over and over and over and over again to stay on topic. But nooooooooooo. We had to continue to systematically act like an unorganized mob incapable of maintaining any kind of civility.

 

You have a legitimate disagreement with us? We don't argue against your assertions like reasonable people. We boo you.

You make a stupid rant about how people don't understand rights despite the fact that it has nothing to do with the hearing? We don't correct you. We cheer you.

 

I went to this meeting with specific criticism of the bills I found the most heinous. I was ready to meet each with fact-based criticism and legitimate concerns about the consequences should they pass. It didn't matter, not because the committee wasn't willing to hear what I had to say, but because by the time I got up to testify, they were so annoyed by everything that had happened in the hours before that they were zoned out, and understandably so.

 

What would have happened if every member of our side went up and spent their two minutes on the bill they opposed the most, and did so with logic and reason? Do you think that the committee would have been more receptive? Hell yeah they would have. The only times that the committee expressed genuine interest in our perspective is when someone opposed a specific bill and gave good reasons why.

 

If you maintained the defeatist attitude that this meeting was a sham from the beginning, do us all a favor and keep your ego at home and let the big boys do the real work, because making a fool of yourself does nothing but set us all back.

 

I got an email from the NJ2AS that they're no going to bus people in on Thursday. Good. It's about time that the NJ2AS realized that we're our own worst enemy.

 

I'm sorry for ranting, but I needed to get this off my chest.

[mikelets456 78]

+1.

 

People can hate, and flame away........but this IS NJ, and concepts of 'Liberty', natural born 'Rights', and things being 'Constitutional' are all foreign concepts that simply don't resonate. Seriously, look at the make up of the Legislature, they're dumber than a box of rocks...........

 

A commenter on a non gun related news article said it best....'This is NJ, when people think of Dolly Madison...they think of Ice Cream'.

 

When you don't practice or [even] believe it yourself it becomes a moot point with no reason behind why you believe it's a right in the first place. Keep playing by their rules, it's been working great so far... hasn't it?

 

Next time someone asks who grants rights tell them the government because if it ain't "God or nature" then it's government.

[Barms 98]

MIKELETS456:

 

you misunderstood my wording.. you harped on the word CRINGE. i wasnt cringing about what our liberties are.. i'm 100% behind that..

 

i cringe when i saw the way it was used in the testimony yesterday.. Did you watch the testimony? Please let me know. I was cringing at the way our point was being put across.. it did not go well. I am cringing at the entire process. I cringed at other things too. I cringed when someone called a legislator a terrorist in the proceeding (or something to that effect they shut the mics off when it gets unruly)

 

i am not cringing on "God Given Rights".. Do you want to win our battle with semantics or win this through understanding the enemy?

 

And i don't want this thread to drift on the word "CRINGE". I merely wanted to clear up a misinterpretation by Mike of what i wrote.

[PDM 91]

Most people on this forum seem to have a view of the Second Amendment limited to "what part of 'infringe' don't you understand." That's like describing an automobile as a metal thingy with four wheels. These same people insist that laws have no effect because "criminals don't follow the law." For example, they assert that background checks on private sales could not, by definition, do any good because criminals won't follow them. That's true, but law abiding people selling the guns will so at least in theory private background checks would make it harder for some criminals to buy guns. It's these kind of simplistic, unsophisticated arguments that make it harder to achieve our goals.

[matty 810]

Meh. there was plenty of pontificating and extemporizing by the anti-2A people there as well. The college prof/alleged clergyman up there lecturing for one, and all the hand wringing criers, especially that chick from Morristown. I thought she peed her pants when she got up there and said she was scared of the crowd. This argument has been used before, in 1991, and probably in 1965. there was plenty of logical, factual points made to little avail, again, even more so in the past likely.

 

You also make the assumption that these hearings are about gathering of facts and opinions and getting input. They are not, and never have been, nor will be. They are political shouting and posturing and chest beating, and penis showing. By both sides. As everyone knows and was stated, the outcome was known way beforehand. Showing up in numbers makes the next step of the game harder for the politicians to ignore, in this case Christie, and Sweeney for the floor votes.

[wooly bugger 1]

A.

 

Million.

 

Times.

 

This.

 

I'm angry about this, so I may say some things a bit more bluntly than I usually do.

 

This is our fault as a community. Our fault. For a community that likes to toot its own horn about how organized and factual we are, we don't deliver on either of those fronts when it matters. Did we show up in numbers? Sure. Were we cohesive in our message? Not even close.

 

It happened at the last committee hearing and we learned nothing. Going up and proselytizing about the second amendment doesn't work, but the more important point is who the hell thought it would? Do we honestly think that preaching to our representatives like they're children is going to do anything except reinforce the prejudice they have against us? We had to be reminded constantly, over and over and over and over again to stay on topic. But nooooooooooo. We had to continued to systematically act like an unorganized mob incapable of maintaining any kind of civility.

 

You have a legitimate disagreement with us? We don't argue against your assertions like reasonable people. We boo you.

You make a stupid rant about how people don't understand rights despite the fact that it has nothing to do with the hearing? We don't correct you. We cheer you.

 

I went to this meeting with specific criticism of the bills I found the most heinous. I was ready to meet each with fact-based criticism and legitimate concerns about the consequences should they pass. It didn't matter, not because the committee wasn't willing to hear what I had to say, but because by the time I got up to testify, they were so annoyed by everything that had happened in the hours before that they were zoned out, and understandably so.

 

What would have happened if every member of our side went up and spent their two minutes on the bill they opposed the most, and did so with logic and reason? Do you think that the committee would have been more receptive? Hell yeah they would have. The only times that the committee expressed genuine interest in our perspective is when someone opposed a specific bill and gave good reasons why.

 

If you maintained the defeatist attitude that this meeting was a sham from the beginning, do us all a favor and keep your ego at home and let the big boys do the real work, because making a fool of yourself does nothing but set us all back.

 

I got an email from the NJ2AS that they're no going to bus people in on Thursday. Good. It's about time that the NJ2AS realized that we're our own worst enemy.

 

I'm sorry for ranting, but I needed to get this off my chest.

You took the words out of my mouth. The few times people raised real technical issues in a reasoned way, they actually feigned attention. That woman (forgot her name) said to Bob Barusch, "maybe we'll consider that." Yes, a pretty poor victory but more of a victory than the glazed eyes during the 2A rants.

 

I also came with very specific critiques and proposals but didn't even get called to speak.

[wooly bugger 1]

Meh. there was plenty of pontificating and extemporizing by the anti-2A people there as well. The college prof/alleged clergyman up there lecturing for one, and all the hand wringing criers, especially that chick from Morristown. I thought she peed her pants when she got up there and said she was scared of the crowd. This argument has been used before, in 1991, and probably in 1965. there was plenty of logical, factual points made to little avail, again, even more so in the past likely.

 

You also make the assumption that these hearings are about gathering of facts and opinions and getting input. They are not, and never have been, nor will be. They are political shouting and posturing and chest beating, and penis showing. By both sides. As everyone knows and was stated, the outcome was known way beforehand. Showing up in numbers makes the next step of the game harder for the politicians to ignore, in this case Christie, and Sweeney for the floor votes.

I had a long discussion with that priest/professor (if we're talking about the same person.) He had some very erroneous ideas about the current laws and seemed very open to being cordially corrected. We exchanged business cards and agreed to be in touch. He'll also be at the Westfield meeting.

 

It may not seem like it, but there are limits on their political capital as well. It's a tiny chance that some of them actually do care about safety, but if that chance is real, then educating them on how some parts of the bills just replicate or even weaken existing laws might help to get them off of our backs and focus on their real obsession with limiting magazine capacity. I don't want any of this to pass, but if they would just back off on some of this asinine FID stuff, I'd consider it a small victory.

[wooly bugger 1]

I agree also. When it came time to "Speak on the Bill" and the speaker would go into a speech about 2A, not trusting the government, etc... instead of hammering specific points of the bills, it seemed like a wasted opportunity to engage Greenstien and Norcross in dialog that would have had a better chance of doing some good. Instead it just irritated them.

Also, hammering home the benefits of of the 2A in resisting tyrannical government is kind of a losing argument with members of such tyrannical government. Use that one on the occasional sheep with some fire in his eyes. It hurts us when you use it to let the government know that we want them to help us oppose them.

[NJCK 5]

I had a long discussion with that priest/professor (if we're talking about the same person.) He had some very erroneous ideas about the current laws and seemed very open to being cordially corrected. We exchanged business cards and agreed to be in touch. He'll also be at the Westfield meeting.

 

It may not seem like it, but there are limits on their political capital as well. It's a tiny chance that some of them actually do care about safety, but if that chance is real, then educating them on how some parts of the bills just replicate or even weaken existing laws might help to get them off of our backs and focus on their real obsession with limiting magazine capacity. I don't want any of this to pass, but if they would just back off on some of this asinine FID stuff, I'd consider it a small victory.

 

Most every single one of the anti-gun right speakers were painfully mistaken and ill-informed. That particular gentleman's statistics were incorrect because he is not aware of what comprised the statistic in the first place. Might I add that EVERY statistic put forth by the anti-gun side would not withstand the scrutiny of Statistics 101 given the sample size is far too small. Then the NJ mayor up there who made the comment about Armslist was completely off-base. I could go on. This is the problem, they are ill-informed, ignorant of not only State law, but Federal law, and also the very process involved with purchasing a firearm in NJ. These things were not countered in our side's testimony, and providing testimony is to be just that - speaking to the points at hand and countering the opposing viewpoint. Any thing else gets tuned out very quickly, and that was all over Norcross' face and most of the rest of the committee. I didn't even get opportunity to speak even though I arrived by 10am and signed up for testimony, yet Bryan Miller, who lives (and has for about 5 years) in PA, has extended time and the ear of the committee. I actually stayed up overnight reading all 31 pages of S2723 and prepared a brief of the issues with it (many), and was already prepared to speak on two other but didn't get my two minutes, but I will still deliver my points to a Senator I found willing to listen and be truly educated.

[matty 810]

That's as may be, but I don't trust them. They love to have 'good gun owners' in their camp. Watch your back, they will at bast do lip service, at worst attack you publicly in their den of snakes. If they are sponsoring/participating in a forum that is headlining Jim Florio and Asm Cryan, they are up to no good. rememebr also they they are all Democrats or voted for them and likely will continue to do so. These people are actively campaigning to deprive you of your civil rights. Don't be fooled.

 

 

I had a long discussion with that priest/professor (if we're talking about the same person.) He had some very erroneous ideas about the current laws and seemed very open to being cordially corrected. We exchanged business cards and agreed to be in touch. He'll also be at the Westfield meeting.

 

It may not seem like it, but there are limits on their political capital as well. It's a tiny chance that some of them actually do care about safety, but if that chance is real, then educating them on how some parts of the bills just replicate or even weaken existing laws might help to get them off of our backs and focus on their real obsession with limiting magazine capacity. I don't want any of this to pass, but if they would just back off on some of this asinine FID stuff, I'd consider it a small victory.

[mikelets456 78]

Meh. there was plenty of pontificating and extemporizing by the anti-2A people there as well. The college prof/alleged clergyman up there lecturing for one, and all the hand wringing criers, especially that chick from Morristown. I thought she peed her pants when she got up there and said she was scared of the crowd. This argument has been used before, in 1991, and probably in 1965. there was plenty of logical, factual points made to little avail, again, even more so in the past likely.

 

You also make the assumption that these hearings are about gathering of facts and opinions and getting input. They are not, and never have been, nor will be. They are political shouting and posturing and chest beating, and penis showing. By both sides. As everyone knows and was stated, the outcome was known way beforehand. Showing up in numbers makes the next step of the game harder for the politicians to ignore, in this case Christie, and Sweeney for the floor votes.

 

I'm starting to wonder if these people are inciting us to "rebel" or do they really believe we're stupid peons that need them to make every decision.

[Cemeterys Gun Blob 165]

You also make the assumption that these hearings are about gathering of facts and opinions and getting input. They are not, and never have been, nor will be. They are political shouting and posturing and chest beating, and penis showing. By both sides. As everyone knows and was stated, the outcome was known way beforehand. Showing up in numbers makes the next step of the game harder for the politicians to ignore, in this case Christie, and Sweeney for the floor votes.

 

Truth

[EchoMirage 137]

You also make the assumption that these hearings are about gathering of facts and opinions and getting input. They are not, and never have been, nor will be. They are political shouting and posturing and chest beating, and penis showing. By both sides. As everyone knows and was stated, the outcome was known way beforehand. Showing up in numbers makes the next step of the game harder for the politicians to ignore, in this case Christie, and Sweeney for the floor votes.

 

 

and thats exactly why the buses were canceled. the NJ2AS KNOWS what the deal is. its THEIR bills that we are trying to talk them OUT of. with the elitist arrogant attitude each one of them possess, if they believed the sky was green, yet we took them outside to see the blue sky, they still wouldnt agree or even entertain anothers opinion.

[EchoMirage 137]

if anyone is interested, the nj.com article is here, with pics and videos. ray is pictured clearly, and you can see half my face to his right. it also shows the excellent testimony given by nora craig.

 

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/04/nj_senate_committee_passes_sla.html

[johnott 5]

I was at the meeting yesterday and was sitting way in the back behind the "bluewavenj.org" people. I had a cane and wore an Air Force Veterans hat. I could have sat closer but the Bluewave people were claiming that the seats were reserved. I then told one of the officials I was looking for a seat and he said "first come first serve, there are no savings seats". The Bluewave people apparently overheard this and as I turned around to sit in one of the closer front row seats they swooped in and sat down. So much for civility.

 

I was called on to speak close to the end of the proceedings, but could not think of anything to say that had not already been said, and said better than I could have done. Anyway what could anyone say in two minutes on seven individual bills that would sway the minds of people who have an anti-gun bias that spans decades if not their entire lifetime? During the meeting Senator Weinberg summed up the democrats philosophy by saying something to the effect that she's going to do whatever she thinks is best for the people of NJ. Well the people of NJ were there to voice their own opinion but no one was listening. So much for a representative form of government.

 

It seems speaking to our so-called Reps doesn't work. We would have been better off standing outside in protest and boycotting the meeting. Thus garnering media attention for our cause and putting some heat on what was going on inside.

[Vlad G 345]

I don't think the arguments, well reasoned or not matter one bit. Thats why I gave up trying to make reasonable arguments with them. I think people desperately want to believe this is rational discourse and if only we could explain our side they would see it our way. That just simply isn't true, I could have Jesus himself walk in with Jefferson on one shoulder and Washington on another and our politicians would not care what they have to say.

 

This is entirely about showing anger, and force because they are the only concepts the thugs in power understand.

[mikelets456 78]

if anyone is interested, the nj.com article is here, with pics and videos. ray is pictured clearly, and you can see half my face to his right. it also shows the excellent testimony given by nora craig.

 

http://www.nj.com/po...passes_sla.html

 

I applaud you all ....this is disgusting!! You guys are in our prayers and this ain't just a NJ "thing" it's a USA "thing". I don't care where anyone lives in this country, their 2A rights are in DANGER. Good job with keeping it civil, but more importantly you did not back down. I'm one for being civil and courteous during debates, protests, etc. But I've done that for 5 years and we're still portrayed as racist, bigots. I really don't care anymore because the line in the sand has been crossed...I'm still civil but no longer am I nice!

[CMJeepster 2,777]

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/04/nj_senate_committee_passes_sla.html

Anyone want to briefly tell about the guy getting tossed out?

[OldCrow 1]

After attending hearings, writing letters, sending numerous emails and making phone calls, I can only come to one conclusion. The only thing the Legislators of NJ will pay attention to is the BALLOT BOX. The Anti's need to be voted out of office!

The NJ legislature is controlled by the Democrats. The vast majority of them are anti-gun. These are THEIR proposals we are trying to convince them that are not good for NJ gun owners. They are not going to change their mind about them.

Our only hope on whatever package finally hits Christie's desk is that he will veto some of the things. But if you take the NJ SAFE report and compare it to whatever hits his desk; I'm sure the things that match up will be signed into law by him.

As I stated earlier our only hope for changing the course of this debate going forward is to get more gun owner friendly candidates into office. If we don't our rights as gun owners will only continue to erode.

+1

[OldCrow 1]

Do you know why the Bill of Rights are "God given" Rights? Really, you "cringe" when someone says that...really? Why? See, Progressives believe they are the grantor of "rights" which means they can give them to some and deny them to others. When a Right comes from God it can not be altered, granted or taken away...it is a RIGHT for everyone.

 

You need to decide, either acknowledge that Rights are from God or from Government. There is no in between. If you want to cringe and avoid/deny Rights are from God, then good luck preserving them and you're part of the problem. The time for trying to agree and find common ground with these Anti-Americans is over and if you think removing God from the conversation is going to help then you are flat out wrong. Look where it has got us....you tell me if being PC has helped our cause. Convince me why removing God from our rights will help us advance our freedom from government control.

 

Simple history will show that EVERY tyrannical and BIG government agenda had to remove every trace of God, the Bible and his Word. But I digress...

Alright - I know I'm setting myself up for a world of crap, but here goes:

 

Just because something is true doesn't mean it's helpful. Frankly, I think we did our selves more harm than good yesterday. Calling politicians "oath breakers" to their face in a public forum is not going to win them to your cause. Funny costumes and talking about protecting our country from tyranny the other side doesn't believe could ever exist doesn't convince them - just confirms their opinion that we're all paranoid nut balls. Talking about how we won't comply with any new laws does not promote the image of a law abiding citizen who can be trusted with a firearm.

 

And my single biggest complaint: Shouting down the opposition and attempting to intimidate them does not promote the image of rational, non-threatening gun owner - It just makes us scary people to be feared, and that shouldn't have a gun.

 

Passion for the cause is a wonderful thing, but I wish everyone would think about how to communicate with the other side. Slogans that get us fired up won't get through to them, even if their true - they just don't see the world the same way. Rational arguments, presented in a calm, factual manner might have a chance with people of good will. The theatrics just burn up whatever good will might exist.

 

I've said my peace...feel free to fire away.

[OldCrow 1]

A.

 

Million.

 

Times.

 

This.

 

I'm angry about this, so I may say some things a bit more bluntly than I usually do.

 

This is our fault as a community. Our fault. For a community that likes to toot its own horn about how organized and factual we are, we don't deliver on either of those fronts when it matters. Did we show up in numbers? Sure. Were we cohesive in our message? Not even close.

 

It happened at the last committee hearing and we learned nothing. Going up and proselytizing about the second amendment doesn't work, but the more important point is who the hell thought it would? Do we honestly think that preaching to our representatives like they're children is going to do anything except reinforce the prejudice they have against us? We had to be reminded constantly, over and over and over and over again to stay on topic. But nooooooooooo. We had to continue to systematically act like an unorganized mob incapable of maintaining any kind of civility.

 

You have a legitimate disagreement with us? We don't argue against your assertions like reasonable people. We boo you.

You make a stupid rant about how people don't understand rights despite the fact that it has nothing to do with the hearing? We don't correct you. We cheer you.

 

I went to this meeting with specific criticism of the bills I found the most heinous. I was ready to meet each with fact-based criticism and legitimate concerns about the consequences should they pass. It didn't matter, not because the committee wasn't willing to hear what I had to say, but because by the time I got up to testify, they were so annoyed by everything that had happened in the hours before that they were zoned out, and understandably so.

 

What would have happened if every member of our side went up and spent their two minutes on the bill they opposed the most, and did so with logic and reason? Do you think that the committee would have been more receptive? Hell yeah they would have. The only times that the committee expressed genuine interest in our perspective is when someone opposed a specific bill and gave good reasons why.

 

If you maintained the defeatist attitude that this meeting was a sham from the beginning, do us all a favor and keep your ego at home and let the big boys do the real work, because making a fool of yourself does nothing but set us all back.

 

I got an email from the NJ2AS that they're no going to bus people in on Thursday. Good. It's about time that the NJ2AS realized that we're our own worst enemy.

 

I'm sorry for ranting, but I needed to get this off my chest.

You said it better than I did.

[Fred2 367]

I think you have some good points.

I think wearing a suit would give our side more credence than we were getting.

 

 

If you want to be respected by these politicians, you have to dress like them.

[Vlad G 345]

I don't want to be respected by them, stop thinking they care about you

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

 

Alright - I know I'm setting myself up for a world of crap, but here goes:

 

Just because something is true doesn't mean it's helpful. Frankly, I think we did our selves more harm than good yesterday. Calling politicians "oath breakers" to their face in a public forum is not going to win them to your cause. Funny costumes and talking about protecting our country from tyranny the other side doesn't believe could ever exist doesn't convince them - just confirms their opinion that we're all paranoid nut balls. Talking about how we won't comply with any new laws does not promote the image of a law abiding citizen who can be trusted with a firearm.

 

And my single biggest complaint: Shouting down the opposition and attempting to intimidate them does not promote the image of rational, non-threatening gun owner - It just makes us scary people to be feared, and that shouldn't have a gun.

 

Passion for the cause is a wonderful thing, but I wish everyone would think about how to communicate with the other side. Slogans that get us fired up won't get through to them, even if their true - they just don't see the world the same way. Rational arguments, presented in a calm, factual manner might have a chance with people of good will. The theatrics just burn up whatever good will might exist.

 

I've said my peace...feel free to fire away.

 

A lot of truth in that, IMHO.

[mikelets456 78]

 

Rational arguments, presented in a calm, factual manner might have a chance with people of good will. The theatrics just burn up whatever good will might exist.

 

I understand what you're saying but I've been to so many events, town halls, peaceful assemblies, radio interviews, tv, speaking against these groups, NJEA, etc that playing nice does nothing. I'm not saying we need to scream or be rude, but it's time to be firm and stop taking crap. These people taste victory and our time is just about up. Obviously being nice and standing quietly has not worked but being rude does not either.

 

We need to be armed with the facts and be very cognoscent of the people watching...that's who you want to convince. Don't back down, keep in the public's eye and know convincing facts....if you have to get a little loud do it, but to get your point across. Once again, take into consideration you're teaching the "jury" not the judge.

 

Convince those that are watching because politicians don't give a crap about us...if those watching aren't convinced then its time for a completely different strategy....completely!

[Mikeg1970 0]

 

 

A.

 

Million.

 

Times.

 

This.

 

I'm angry about this, so I may say some things a bit more bluntly than I usually do.

 

This is our fault as a community. Our fault. For a community that likes to toot its own horn about how organized and factual we are, we don't deliver on either of those fronts when it matters. Did we show up in numbers? Sure. Were we cohesive in our message? Not even close.

 

It happened at the last committee hearing and we learned nothing. Going up and proselytizing about the second amendment doesn't work, but the more important point is who the hell thought it would? Do we honestly think that preaching to our representatives like they're children is going to do anything except reinforce the prejudice they have against us? We had to be reminded constantly, over and over and over and over again to stay on topic. But nooooooooooo. We had to continue to systematically act like an unorganized mob incapable of maintaining any kind of civility.

 

You have a legitimate disagreement with us? We don't argue against your assertions like reasonable people. We boo you.

You make a stupid rant about how people don't understand rights despite the fact that it has nothing to do with the hearing? We don't correct you. We cheer you.

 

I went to this meeting with specific criticism of the bills I found the most heinous. I was ready to meet each with fact-based criticism and legitimate concerns about the consequences should they pass. It didn't matter, not because the committee wasn't willing to hear what I had to say, but because by the time I got up to testify, they were so annoyed by everything that had happened in the hours before that they were zoned out, and understandably so.

 

What would have happened if every member of our side went up and spent their two minutes on the bill they opposed the most, and did so with logic and reason? Do you think that the committee would have been more receptive? Hell yeah they would have. The only times that the committee expressed genuine interest in our perspective is when someone opposed a specific bill and gave good reasons why.

 

If you maintained the defeatist attitude that this meeting was a sham from the beginning, do us all a favor and keep your ego at home and let the big boys do the real work, because making a fool of yourself does nothing but set us all back.

 

I got an email from the NJ2AS that they're no going to bus people in on Thursday. Good. It's about time that the NJ2AS realized that we're our own worst enemy.

 

I'm sorry for ranting, but I needed to get this off my chest.

 

 

Amen.... Organizing a large crowd to just holler out or speak nonsense is useless..

 

Next time get a couple of dozen well spoken individuals and give them a piece of paper with prepared speaking points. Ask everyone else to provide support by just being there, no need to speak.

 

The idea of showing up and speak your mind only does the cause a disservice.

 

Mikeg1970

[maintenanceguy 510]

Where can I find the final votes for Tuesday? I know that all but 1 bill passed the committee but I'm not sure if everyone on the committee voted yes. I'm writing my letters and I want to accuse or thank everyone appropriately. I don't suppose I get to thank anyone do I?

[lunker 274]

Politicians care about two things:

1) Getting re-elected

2) Not being hassled.

 

Our pontificating about rights they don't care about or believe in does nothing but make us feel good. Until gun owners can muster the political strength to put a dent in #1 (let's face it, we haven't come close), we can only worry about #2.

This has been said before, but making the technical points is the ONLY thing that will have any impact. Police departments being short-handed because of new Firearms ID paperwork requirements, extra state expenses because of proposed new laws, complaining constituents, lawsuits over poorly worded laws. All of these are hassles and headaches that politicians want to avoid. Unless they are crusading ideologues (and there are some of them), these hassles will give them more pause than any more bloviating on our part, no matter how many people we can get to dress up as Colonial era frontiersmen.

[ogfarmer 138]

maintenance guy only 4 people voted and sen bateman ® was the only one who voted no an abstained from 1

[voyager9 3,434]

Where can I find the final votes for Tuesday? I know that all but 1 bill passed the committee but I'm not sure if everyone on the committee voted yes. I'm writing my letters and I want to accuse or thank everyone appropriately. I don't suppose I get to thank anyone do I?

 

I know there was a "live feed" article on nj.com that had the votes in the comments soon after they were tallied. Not sure what happened to it.

 

Oh, and to save you time: all the dems supported everything and the only rep voted against a few things, but I forget the specifics now.