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

[EchoMirage 137]

it doesnt make a good god damn bit of difference what you wear or what you say. whether you were in a suit or a t shirt, they didnt listen. whether you spoke with passion from the heart or calmly read facts from a script, they didnt listen. they WERE handed speeches, talking points, papers on our views. IF they got into the hands of the assembly at all, they were promptly shredded or simply thrown out.

 

anyone condemning how we looked, acted, or talked, wasnt there. weinberg LEFT THE ROOM for at least half of our testimonies, and same goes for sweeney. not only did they not listen when they were there, they didnt bother to be in the room for the entire discussion. read a book about body language, then watch them while we talked. that will speak volumes about what how they really feel.

 

all of the heavy hitters; scott bach, frank fiamingo, NRA rep, etc. wore suits or were similarly dressed. the other side gave them the same amount of indifference as they did the guy with the black 'i heard it on dolby surround sound' tshirt.

 

it boils down to the fact that NOTHING said yesterday had the slightest bit of difference. as was said, jesus himself couldnt have changed their minds. THEY spent weeks making these bills. THEY wrote them. THEY are putting the bills through. do you really think anyone, regardless of wearing a damn suit or not, would ever have changed their minds. THEY think they are in the right, 100%.

 

would it matter if an anti wore a suit, a newtown ribbon, or a Gadsden flag shirt while he spoke to you about why we need 10rnd mags? if weinberg sat calmly, wearing her old crone suit and read her bill, would you actually listen to her any more then if she was wrapped in american and POW flags, screaming about the NRA being baby killers?

 

i am FAR from giving up, but it doesnt fing matter WHAT you say, how you say it, what you wear or how you sit on the chair. everyone on the other side is so far removed from actually listening to the people they are supposed to represent, the ONLY thing that will ever get through to them is to vote them out. period. to a person, every single one of them are elitists, arrogant, holier then thou, and believe they are sitting in an ivory castle on a hill, doling out rules and laws THEY think WE need. ive dealt with assholes in positions of power my entire life. once they get past the point of no return, there simply is no getting through to them while they are in position. the one and only thing that will ever get through to them is to remove them from their position of power.

[EchoMirage 137]

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

 

actually, there were 2 people who were escorted out. and they both wore suits.........

 

one was a guy of cuban and i think a former communist european decent. hes also running for some kind of office in central jersey. close to the end of the hearing, he started saying how we were not being listened to, the court is out of order, they will be voted out, and theyve awakened a sleeping giant in NJ gun owners. he was walked out.

 

the other was cut off during his testimony. he raised his voice and said 'i will be heard.' head guy said 'dont yell at me.' other guy said 'i will yell at you and i will be heard.' gavel was hit, was proclaimed out of order, and eventually he was walked out of the room.

[SgtToadette 59]

It doesn't matter if we were going to make any headway or not. We had three choices:

1. We make it better.
   
2. We gain nothing.
   
3. We make it worse.
   

Doing nothing is always better than making it worse.

 

If we went in that room and speaker after speaker was as ridiculously reasonable as possible, the worst case scenario is that we accomplish nothing. What we did instead was go in there, fulfill every conceivable stereotype that people have of gun owners, and embolden our opposition, all while gaining nothing.

 

If people though this meeting was a sham from the beginning, then either stay home or don't speak. Don't make it worse. If people think that people can't be reasoned with, then you've already lost. Don't drag everyone else down with you.

[ruger9 0]

 

If people though this meeting was a sham from the beginning, then either stay home or don't speak. Don't make it worse. If people think that people can't be reasoned with, then you've already lost. Don't drag everyone else down with you.

 

PEOPLE, usually, can be reasoned with. POLITICIANS can not. That has become glaringly clear in NJ over the Assembly and Senate hearings.

[SgtToadette 59]

PEOPLE, usually, can be reasoned with. POLITICIANS can not. That has become glaringly clear in NJ over the Assembly and Senate hearings.

 

It was a public forum and the audience was not limited to only politicians. It was bad PR plain and simple. Again, if people believed that the hearings were predetermined, fine, they're entitled to that belief. However, it is in no way productive to make an ass out of the community. It's making a bad situation worse.

[ruger9 0]

I'm just saying that politicians have made up their mind... no speech, testimony, evidence, or showing of pro-2A people is going to matter... not in this state anyway. The only recourse is to replace them, which of course won't happen in this state either. I'm afraid NJ is down the shithole with regards to 2A. I think it's a runaway train that can't be stopped. I'm not saying give up, I'm saying don't be surprised that despite your best efforts the result will be like you made no effort at all.

[pjd832 146]

I'm just saying that politicians have made up their mind... no speech, testimony, evidence, or showing of pro-2A people is going to matter... not in this state anyway. The only recourse is to replace them, which of course won't happen in this state either. I'm afraid NJ is down the shithole with regards to 2A. I think it's a runaway train that can't be stopped. I'm not saying give up, I'm saying don't be surprised that despite your best efforts the result will be like you made no effort at all.

Agree on all points...as many of the other have said no matter how you're dressed if you speak in proper kings English .... As soon as they see you are not going to thank them for being Devine rulers they check out....all the lost wages to attend meetings donations to groups that are little better than the politicians would be better spent buying guns ammo supplies and TRAINING (for those who have only punched paper) ......

[matty 810]

Meh, again. The reasoning and trying to work with the politicians had been tried and failed. It was certainly worth trying, and as valid of an approach as dressing like Natty Bumppo. Onward, and upward. Time to get more political clout on our side, that's how the NRA does it

[matty 810]

Their approach was as valid as any, just because you disagree does not mean they harmed the cause at all. Eventually, after seeing politicians of all parties do this multiple times despite your best efforts at educating them and trying to be 'reasonable', in about 10-20 years or so, you'll be up there doing the same.

 

If we went in that room and speaker after speaker was as ridiculously reasonable as possible, the worst case scenario is that we accomplish nothing. What we did instead was go in there, fulfill every conceivable stereotype that people have of gun owners, and embolden our opposition, all while gaining nothing.

 

If people though this meeting was a sham from the beginning, then either stay home or don't speak. Don't make it worse. If people think that people can't be reasoned with, then you've already lost. Don't drag everyone else down with you.

 

 

It was a public forum and the audience was not limited to only politicians. It was bad PR plain and simple. Again, if people believed that the hearings were predetermined, fine, they're entitled to that belief. However, it is in no way productive to make an ass out of the community. It's making a bad situation worse.

[DirtyDigz 1,810]

Pain.

 

For the TL;DR, attention deficient out there, here's the meat:

 

If you are interested in becoming involved in our campaign to inflict some REAL damage upon the campaigns of our opponents throughout New Jersey's government, please send a email to [email protected] with the subject "PAIN" and let our Volunteer coordinator know that you wish to become a soldier on the front lines of the political WAR against tyranny. We will help organize you into a serious political force to be dealt with. I would use the cliche "No More Mister Nice Guy", But I think you all get the idea. With your help, Trenton be FINALLY begin to understand what the consequences are for ignoring the LEGITIMATE will of the people.

 

Full email:

 

 

As I am sure you are aware, The New Jersey Second Amendment Society (NJ2AS) has been stridently fighting with the Legislative and the Executive branch of New Jersey government to prevent any further Gun Ownership Rights Violations. In spite of the faxes, the phone calls, the letters, the constant visits back and forth into Trenton to meet with legislators and the Rallies, our legislators and (so far) the governor have ignored our demands that they cease and desist from committing EVEN MORE of these gun ownership right violations. The time has come to retrench, regroup and rethink or goals and strategy.

 

Since one of the best definitions of insanity is "doing the same things over and over again, but expecting different results", the leadership of the NJ2AS has decided to postpone or cancel the planned Rally for May 11, 2013. I realize that some of you may not agree with our decision. That is your right of course, but I ask you to trust that we have VERY carefully considered the likelihood of achieving anything further by expending our resources appealing to the deaf, and have come to what we believe is the undeniable conclusion that it is indeed a waste of TIME, MONEY, MAN and WOMAN POWER.

 

So, at least for the present, we will NOT be organizing any further Rallies with the intention of "appealing" to Trenton. They don't appeal to us (at all), so why so we appeal to them? Instead, we plan to use the resources we might have wasted on Trenton and will apply them to support a more structured approach to cause our opposition in the Senate and Assembly AS MUCH POLITICAL PAIN AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE. Since they do not understand our RIGHTS nor hear our JUST GRIEVANCES, political pain may be the only means that WE THE PEOPLE have at our disposal to accomplish our goals.

 

If you are interested in becoming involved in our campaign to inflict some REAL damage upon the campaigns of our opponents throughout New Jersey's government, please send a email to [email protected] with the subject "PAIN" and let our Volunteer coordinator know that you wish to become a soldier on the front lines of the political WAR against tyranny. We will help organize you into a serious political force to be dealt with. I would use the cliche "No More Mister Nice Guy", But I think you all get the idea. With your help, Trenton be FINALLY begin to understand what the consequences are for ignoring the LEGITIMATE will of the people.

 

Thank you for your continued trust and support. If you have prepaid for a seat on one of our buses, you will be offered an opportunity of receiving a refund, making a donation or applying it to your account toward your future membership dues. Just reply to the email we will send, and we will act accordingly. Please wait to receive that specific email and do not reply to this email intended specifically for that purpose, or your request may be lost.

 

Thank you once again,

 

Frank Jack Fiamingo

President - NJ2AS

[67gtonut 847]

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

 

Agreed..... Time for a different approach

[PDM 91]

The only possibility of change is from the ground up. It's been said before on this forum and it is the truth. As long as a majority of NJ voters are either outright anti-gun or have deluded themselves into believing that all of these measures are just "common sense" we will not make headway. Also, political change is simply not realistic in many districts. For example, last election, in my District 37 (Bergen county towns including Teaneck, Fort Lee, etc) Weinberg is our Senator, and Gordon Johnson and Valerie Huttle are the assemblyman. Every member of the town council of Teaneck is a Democrat. The town rammed through resolutions supporting these bs bills and paid no attention to the few people (very few) who showed up to speak against them. Last election, despite very credible Republican candidates that mounted a good campaign, Weinberg and the rest won by a margin of 3 or 4 to 1. Even with a massive infusion of money to fund a campaign, I doubt a Republican can win. So, I think we need to focus on Districts where wins are possible; continue to introduce as many people to shooting sports and try to win people over one at a time; launch an informational PR campaign focused on common sense highlighting how ridiculous, unfair and ineffective most NJ gun laws are rather than focusing on rights and extreme libertarian politics.

[mikelets456 78]

The only possibility of change is from the ground up. It's been said before on this forum and it is the truth. As long as a majority of NJ voters are either outright anti-gun or have deluded themselves into believing that all of these measures are just "common sense" we will not make headway. Also, political change is simply not realistic in many districts. For example, last election, in my District 37 (Bergen county towns including Teaneck, Fort Lee, etc) Weinberg is our Senator, and Gordon Johnson and Valerie Huttle are the assemblyman. Every member of the town council of Teaneck is a Democrat. The town rammed through resolutions supporting these bs bills and paid no attention to the few people (very few) who showed up to speak against them. Last election, despite very credible Republican candidates that mounted a good campaign, Weinberg and the rest won by a margin of 3 or 4 to 1. Even with a massive infusion of money to fund a campaign, I doubt a Republican can win. So, I think we need to focus on Districts where wins are possible; continue to introduce as many people to shooting sports and try to win people over one at a time; launch an informational PR campaign focused on common sense highlighting how ridiculous, unfair and ineffective most NJ gun laws are rather than focusing on rights and extreme libertarian politics.

 

Run as a flaming liberal promising everything for everyone. Slander and lie about all these politicians then when you get into office and take the oath to defend the Constitution, do it!

[PDM 91]

_{Run as a flaming liberal promising everything for everyone. Slander and lie about all these politicians then when you get into office and take the oath to defend the Constitution, do it!}

_{problem is, they've got the system locked up. Weinberg is a political boss and runs a political machine just like tamany hall. I know a guy on the town council who is a businessman in Teaneck and connected with the Dems. When there was an opening for assembly she basically offered it to him. She gets to decide who's in or out. I don't know enough about politics to know just how one goes about breaking that stranglehold but I do no it will take 1) an exceptionally charismatic candidate and 2) lots and lots of money.}

[EchoMirage 137]

if we went in that room and speaker after speaker was as ridiculously reasonable as possible, the worst case scenario is that we accomplish nothing. What we did instead was go in there, fulfill every conceivable stereotype that people have of gun owners, and embolden our opposition, all while gaining nothing.

 

If people though this meeting was a sham from the beginning, then either stay home or don't speak. Don't make it worse. If people think that people can't be reasoned with, then you've already lost. Don't drag everyone else down with you.

 

 

listen kid, in no way am i ever 'dragging everyone down with me'. showing up as we did, did NOT move us 'backward' at all. NOT showing at all would have moved backwards. doing NOTHING would have moved backwards. the fact that we vastly outnumbered the antis, both days, sent a message. the fact that we had more hard facts on our side sent a message. since YOURE the one with the problem towards what we're doing and how we are responding, then YOU should stop attending and complaining, because YOU are a negative energy that is dragging people down.

[matty 810]

At the end of the day, we have some extraordinary luck here in NJ, at this point. If you want to call it that. If Jon Corzine was still governor (why isn't he in prison?) we all KNOW that there would have been a race to the bottom for gun control in NJ, and it all would have been rammed thru. 5 round magazines, registration of existing rifles, handgun bans (it was tried in NJ by whatsisname around the time of Florio) I don't believe anything that comes out of Christie's mouth, and we will see if he vetoes anything that comes his way, but if his bulk was not at the top of state gov't at this time, we would be sunk. I believe the pressure put up by 2A supporters thru all this did make a difference, and still will. Now to actually GET the power, to take over state gov't, or at least a piece of it.

[222 3]

It was a public forum and the audience was not limited to only politicians. It was bad PR plain and simple. Again, if people believed that the hearings were predetermined, fine, they're entitled to that belief. However, it is in no way productive to make an ass out of the community. It's making a bad situation worse.

 

I hear what you are saying, and I understand why you are saying it. And you are right about PR and spin and effectiveness of communication, sculpting the message and all that.

 

But at a very basic, fundamental level, big picture, I think you may be off base.

 

"the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances."

 

Don't focus so much on 2nd Amendment so much, you forget about the 1st.

 

We may have overlapping interests, but me going up to talk doesn't represent you, any more than you represent me.

 

When Scott or Frank goes up to talk, them represents me. And for that I give them some latitude to best represent the common interests, and I think they did very well.

 

"Redress of grievances" every bit as important as "keep and bear arms." It is "I'm upset, and I'm gonna tell you why", not preconditioned on scripted, sculpted, spinned message.

[maintenanceguy 510]

Being at the hearings was not wasted energy.

 

Looking at these bills, they thought they had come up with some smoke and mirror tricks. The were trying to look tough on guns to the anti's while not pissing us off too much. I think the bills stink but they were carefully written to minimize the damage to us.

 

The .50 cal ban effects only a handful of gun owners. Moving the FID to the drivers license accomplishes nothing but really doesn't hurt anyone either. Stopping internet ammo sales just makes us shop local which isn't a bad idea anyway.

 

Don't misunderstand - I don't like any of these bills but in Senator Sweeney's mind, these were safe bills. He gets a photo-op with the Newtown families, gets air-time for being tough on gun violence and we weren't really supposed to care about these little, insignificant changes to the law.

 

But we ruined the plan. 300 or more of us showed up and argued. I don't have a .50 BMG and I've never ordered ammo online. so, I wasn't supposed to care about any of this and I was supposed to just stay home. But I didn't stay home. I'm sure we surprised them all. Now they know that somebody really does care.

 

Sweeney especially needs to play it safe with gun owners. He is from my neck of the woods. If you've read any of my posts, you know I shoot in my back yard and so does everyone else here. Everyone I know owns guns, hunts, and target shoots. On a nice day, I hear gunfire in the distance constantly. He needs the pro-gun vote more than any other Senator in NJ and his voters showed up to yell at him when he thought he had come up with bills that were week enough to be safe.

 

We ruined his plans. It was important that we showed up. I'm sure he left that meeting wondering if he had made a mistake. He did and he certainly realizes that now.

[71ragtopgoat 23]

The only hope for us is on Judicial appointees. We know the legislature hates independent minded people. So we have to go to court and fight it out. We need to be more active on this front. Pressure Christie and pressure our senators on there picks and recommendations. Protests pickets you name it. It will help change things over time. Not right away but over time.

We are not a majority so we need to be a very vocal minority when it comes to judicial appointments.

The other good it will do is most of these type judges we want are also anti welfare state types. Its a double double !!

[SgtToadette 59]

listen kid, in no way am i ever 'dragging everyone down with me'. showing up as we did, did NOT move us 'backward' at all. NOT showing at all would have moved backwards. doing NOTHING would have moved backwards. the fact that we vastly outnumbered the antis, both days, sent a message. the fact that we had more hard facts on our side sent a message. since YOURE the one with the problem towards what we're doing and how we are responding, then YOU should stop attending and complaining, because YOU are a negative energy that is dragging people down.

 

Your attitude is indicative of the problem I'm trying to diagnose.

 

It also seems to be unfounded, since despite the numbers, all the bills went through committee. In my book, that's not moving forward. It's likely that you, along with several others here, counter that premise with the idea that nothing we did mattered anyway. You're free to believe that, but when you look at the media reaction to the events, it was not favorable. So then the media is against us. I get it. It doesn't change that instead of making the politicians look disconnected from the populace, we make them look courageous in the face of a vocal minority.

 

I also don't think we're on the same page when we use the word 'nothing'. I use it to refer to the neutral position in the trichotomoy of gain, net zero, and loss. When you state that doing nothing would have moved us backwards, it's clear we are not on the same page.

 

If you read my posts, you'll find that I have always advocated the communication of facts. If you comprehended otherwise, I would recommend re-reading my comments. While I certainly agree that our side has more facts on our side, I didn't see said facts presented by many speakers for our side. There's an old law axiom that goes something along the lines of:

 

"If the law is on your side, pound the law. If the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If neither the facts nor the law are on your side, pound the table."

 

I saw a lot of people from our court pounding the table (both metaphorically and literally), and that kind of behavior isn't conducive to a positive public image. It's also important to realize that preaching about a perspective on the Second Amendment isn't a fact.

 

I agree that we need to take a different approach, and if I had to recommend a specific approach, I would recommend an inclusive grassroots approach. If voting people out of office is what we determine to be the most effective strategy, then it makes sense to increase our constituency base as much as possible. This includes, but is by no means limited to, crossing party lines and taking the anti-gun people in our lives out to the range and trying to turn them into gun owners. Turning a typical democratic voter into a voter who is willing to cross party lines on the issue of guns is a net 2 votes gain for us, and should consequently be seen as incredibly valuable.

 

I hear people say over and over again that anti-gun people cannot be convinced, and I always argue against that premise because I am a reformed anti-gun proponent and I am willing to cross party lines to vote for someone based on that issue alone, especially on a local level. Having that experience, I can say with confidence that the type of behavior I saw at the hearing is not persuasive and not productive in the long-term, at least within the confines of my recommended approach.

 

There is a potential gold mine for the gun rights movement within the younger generation as a result of the recent popularity of the pro-rights/libertarian school of thought. There is also a large segment of gamers who enjoy playing First Person Shooters who would be more inclined than many to be interested in our hobby. By continuing to associate gun rights as being packaged with dying political movements like anti-gay marriage, we do nothing but jeopardize the future of gun rights.

[SgtToadette 59]

I hear what you are saying, and I understand why you are saying it. And you are right about PR and spin and effectiveness of communication, sculpting the message and all that.

 

But at a very basic, fundamental level, big picture, I think you may be off base.

 

"the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances."

 

Don't focus so much on 2nd Amendment so much, you forget about the 1st.

 

We may have overlapping interests, but me going up to talk doesn't represent you, any more than you represent me.

 

When Scott or Frank goes up to talk, them represents me. And for that I give them some latitude to best represent the common interests, and I think they did very well.

 

"Redress of grievances" every bit as important as "keep and bear arms." It is "I'm upset, and I'm gonna tell you why", not preconditioned on scripted, sculpted, spinned message.

 

I understand what you're saying, and I want to make it clear that I do not advocate people simply not showing up. What I intended to convey (and which may have gotten diluted in the heat of the moment) was as many people as possible should show up, but if they were to speak, they should have been prepared, poignant, and on topic. If they insisted to not do the latter, it would be at that point that I would recommend they stay home.

[raz-0 1,259]

I think you all missed it.

 

The assembly committee had some true believers. They tried to argue with us.

 

The senate bills aren't about conviction, they are about politics.

 

Sweeney rolled a bunch of stuff up into one giant expensive bill that takes five years to take effect. He left as soon as he saw we were pissed probably because he is in between a rock and a hard place (I.e. his constituents and his party). It can die in budget committee, it can die on Christie's desk, heck he can even work at both. He can also say he did something for the party on the issue.

 

The host of dems passed everything. They want to make it Christie's problem. If they were true believers a handful of those bills would be dead or full of poison amendments.

 

 

[222 3]

The assembly committee had some true believers.

 

Weinberg is definitely one of those true believers.

 

On Thursday she basically said she was actively trying to dump on all NJ gun owners because NRA cut CDC research funding 20 years ago.

 

At that point I knew she is basically nuts. NJ politics as payback for what happened nationally 2 decades ago? Nevermind Kellerman's complicity putting out crap science. But she's got a 20 year old stick up her butt and we are her whipping post.

[wooly bugger 1]

 

Your attitude is indicative of the problem I'm trying to diagnose.

 

It also seems to be unfounded, since despite the numbers, all the bills went through committee. In my book, that's not moving forward. It's likely that you, along with several others here, counter that premise with the idea that nothing we did mattered anyway. You're free to believe that, but when you look at the media reaction to the events, it was not favorable. So then the media is against us. I get it. It doesn't change that instead of making the politicians look disconnected from the populace, we make them look courageous in the face of a vocal minority.

 

I also don't think we're on the same page when we use the word 'nothing'. I use it to refer to the neutral position in the trichotomoy of gain, net zero, and loss. When you state that doing nothing would have moved us backwards, it's clear we are not on the same page.

 

If you read my posts, you'll find that I have always advocated the communication of facts. If you comprehended otherwise, I would recommend re-reading my comments. While I certainly agree that our side has more facts on our side, I didn't see said facts presented by many speakers for our side. There's an old law axiom that goes something along the lines of:

 

"If the law is on your side, pound the law. If the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If neither the facts nor the law are on your side, pound the table."

 

I saw a lot of people from our court pounding the table (both metaphorically and literally), and that kind of behavior isn't conducive to a positive public image. It's also important to realize that preaching about a perspective on the Second Amendment isn't a fact.

 

I agree that we need to take a different approach, and if I had to recommend a specific approach, I would recommend an inclusive grassroots approach. If voting people out of office is what we determine to be the most effective strategy, then it makes sense to increase our constituency base as much as possible. This includes, but is by no means limited to, crossing party lines and taking the anti-gun people in our lives out to the range and trying to turn them into gun owners. Turning a typical democratic voter into a voter who is willing to cross party lines on the issue of guns is a net 2 votes gain for us, and should consequently be seen as incredibly valuable.

 

I hear people say over and over again that anti-gun people cannot be convinced, and I always argue against that premise because I am a reformed anti-gun proponent and I am willing to cross party lines to vote for someone based on that issue alone, especially on a local level. Having that experience, I can say with confidence that the type of behavior I saw at the hearing is not persuasive and not productive in the long-term, at least within the confines of my recommended approach.

 

There is a potential gold mine for the gun rights movement within the younger generation as a result of the recent popularity of the pro-rights/libertarian school of thought. There is also a large segment of gamers who enjoy playing First Person Shooters who would be more inclined than many to be interested in our hobby. By continuing to associate gun rights as being packaged with dying political movements like anti-gay marriage, we do nothing but jeopardize the future of gun rights.

This is the best reasoned post I've read in awhile. I wonder if the recent NJ2AS pullback on public events has to do with similar thinking that we're just hurting ourselves.

 

I've made it my mission to take as many friends as possible shooting. Doesn't matter if they're antis or not. The goal is to get more gun owners and to break down stereotypes.

 

And when it comes to talking to antis, I've made it a goal to start by saying, "we'll never agree on opinion if we dont agree on the facts. So I won't express any of my opinions. Just verifiable facts."

[ryan_j 0]

The only hope for us is on Judicial appointees. We know the legislature hates independent minded people. So we have to go to court and fight it out. We need to be more active on this front. Pressure Christie and pressure our senators on there picks and recommendations. Protests pickets you name it. It will help change things over time. Not right away but over time.

We are not a majority so we need to be a very vocal minority when it comes to judicial appointments.

The other good it will do is most of these type judges we want are also anti welfare state types. Its a double double !!

Too late for that. Christie has been picking anti-gun judges and his anti-gun AG has repeatedly slapped us in the face. 

[222 3]

Just as a general legislative follow-up, listening to the Budget and Appropriations meeting today, and really happy with the efforts of NJ2AS and ANJRPC.

 

NJ2AS pointed out that S2467 would not just prohibit investments in manufacturers, but also importers and sellers like the Cabelas and the Walmarts. Since that represents a bigger impact upon investment fund discretion, the bill was amended to strike out words importer and seller. Not so much a win, as much as a good faith effort to align legislative intent with legislative bill text.

 

ANJRPC pointed out that S2468 would impound vehicle for simple weapons possessions charge, which given NJ's laws commonly ensnares law abiding citizens. Bill was amended to clarify that vehicle impounding only applies if illegal weapon possession was coupled with separate crime of 1st to 4th degree.

 

ANJRPC also pointed out the lack of 'adjudicated' language in S2492, the NICS records submission bill. Request to amendment to add language was denied.

[ogfarmer 138]

anyone got the added launguage added to the 2723 bill today

 

I found it never mind http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/54686-s2723-revises-firearm-purchaser-id-and-handgun-purchase-permits-sweeney-norcross-weinberg/page-3#entry711155

[222 3]

Moved back to 2nd reading and Amended

S2485 Terrorist watchlist

S2552 FID records abolish right of access

S2723 Embedded Firearm ID

S2178 50 cal ban

S2467 Investments in firearm companies

 

Passes Senate

S2430 Study Commission on Violence

Yea 22 Nay 10

 

S2468 car impoundment

Yea 36 Nay 0

 

S2942 NICS records

Yea 36 Nay 1

 

S2715 Media violence

Yea 36 Nay 0

 

S2718 Report firearm info

Yea 25 Nay 13

 

S2719 anti-trafficking

Yea 36 Nay 0

 

S2720 180 day window

Yea 26 Nay 10

 

S2724 School task force

Yea 38 Nay 0

 

S2725 Air gun 3rd degree

Yea 37 Nay 0

[ogfarmer 138]

I believe a few other were moved back also because thats not the complete list

[222 3]

I was only tracking gun bills. Did I miss some?