Jump to content
sure shot

Do we have a count down for Christie?

Recommended Posts

But what changes could possibly be made to them that they would be acceptable(to us that is)?....it's like having a bowl of shit set in front of you and told its chocolate pudding and to eat it.... When we balk... They stir it up and sprinkle jimmies on it ...and expect that since its better than what he had well accept it and eat up.... Well sad thing is and what has us where we are is people have done just that for so long... It's the new standard ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what would you say if Christie conditionally vetoed the Sweeney FID bill, with the condition being that "Justifiable Need" was removed from 2C:38 and 2C:58 ?

How's that for a bowl of shite labeled as chocolate pudding with a big dollop of real whipped cream on top??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what changes could possibly be made to them that they would be acceptable(to us that is)?....it's like having a bowl of shit set in front of you and told its chocolate pudding and to eat it.... When we balk... They stir it up and sprinkle jimmies on it ...and expect that since its better than what he had well accept it and eat up.... Well sad thing is and what has us where we are is people have done just that for so long... It's the new standard ...

 

 

I think this buys him time and cover... in hopes the election will distract from it and deal with it next year? Either way, this lard of Rino poop is anti 2A as they get. I thought he'd veto all but the .50 Cal and School safety bills....boy was I wrong. I'm convinced the D and the R are the same with the R giving us the illusion of choice to keep us with the illusion of "hope". It keeps us from "getting unruly".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buys time and muddies the waters. The more complicated the process the more excuses for the results. Could even poison pill it. Or pretend poison pill it, maybe the legislature doesn't care anymore at this point. If he does it, we will probably never really know and it doesn't really matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
Presidential aspirations hamstring Christie on controversial gun bills, analyst says

August 15, 2013

By Emma Jacoibs @ecjacobs

 

Gov. Chris Christie has signed a package of gun bills into law, but he's left the three most controversial measures sitting on his desk. They're the least popular with gun rights advocates.

 

Prominent New Jersey politicians, including fellow Republican and former Gov. Christine Todd Whitman, have called on Christie to sign the remaining measures, which include a ban on 50-caliber rifles, a requirement to report guns used in crimes to a federal database, and an overhaul of how gun permits are issued.

 

But analysts say the issue must be filtered through the aura that surrounds everything that Chris Christie does these days -- that Chris Christie wants to run for president.

 

So while New Jerseyans on the whole would support these measures, there's a second calculation to be made, says Patrick Murray, director of Monmouth University Polling Institute.

 

"He can't upset New Jersey voters. But he also can't upset Republican voters who are going to go out, these very conservative bases in these primaries in Iowa and New Hampshire and so forth," Murray explained. "So he's trying to figure out how the best to deal with these."

 

Murray says the governor has one political out -- to conditionally veto the bills and send them back to the Legislature with requested changes.

 

That's about what we've been saying here for the last few months. (Maybe Murray is reading the NJ Gun Forum!)

 

I'd feel better if the source was someone closer to the big guy.  

 

(Any proposed changes in the bills don't need to be acceptable to us. They just need to be unacceptable to Buono and the rest of the NJ Assembly and Senate gun grabbers.)

 

As long as it's easier for a Trenton gangster to obtain a PA driver's license than it is for any of us to get a NJ FPID and P2P this is all a waste of time and an example of "feel good" legislation at its worst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"14.  (a) When a bill has finally passed both houses, the house in which final action was taken to complete its passage shall cause it to be presented to the Governor before the close of the calendar day next following the date of the session at which such final action was taken.

     (b)  A passed bill presented to the Governor shall become law:

     (1)  if the Governor approves and signs it within the period allowed for his consideration; or,

     (2)  if the Governor does not return it to the house of origin, with a statement of his objections, before the expiration of the period allowed for his consideration; or,

     (3)  if, upon reconsideration of a bill objected to by the Governor, two-thirds of all the members of each house agree to pass the bill.

   ©  The period allowed for the Governor's consideration of a passed bill shall be from the date of presentation until noon of the forty-fifth day next following or, if the house of origin be in temporary adjournment on that day, the first day subsequent upon which the house reconvenes; except that:

     (1)  if on the said forty-fifth day the Legislature is in adjournment sine die, any bill then pending the Governor's approval shall be returned, if he objects to it, at a special session held pursuant to subparagraph (d) of this paragraph;

     (2)  any bill passed between the forty-fifth day and the tenth day preceding the expiration of the second legislative year shall be returned by the Governor, if he objects to it, not later than noon of the day next preceding the expiration of the second legislative year;

     (3)  any bill passed within 10 days preceding the expiration of the second legislative year shall become law only if the Governor signs it prior to noon of the seventh day following such expiration, or the Governor returns it to the House of origin, with a statement of his objections, and two-thirds of all members of each House agree to pass the bill prior to such expiration.

   (d)  For the purpose of permitting the return of bills pursuant to this paragraph, a special session of the Legislature shall convene, without petition or call, for the sole purpose of acting upon bills returned by the Governor, on the forty-fifth day next following adjournment sine die of the regular session; or, if the second legislative year of a 2-year Legislature will expire before said forty-fifth day, then the day next preceding the expiration of the legislative year.

   (e)  Upon receiving from the Governor a bill returned by him with his objections, the house in which it originated shall enter the objections at large in its journal or minutes and proceed to reconsider it. If, upon reconsideration, on or after the third day following its return, or the first day of a special session convened for the sole purpose of acting on such bills, two-thirds of all the members of the house of origin agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections of the Governor, to the other house; and if, upon reconsideration, it is approved by two-thirds of all the members of the house, it shall become a law. In all such cases the votes of each house shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journal or minutes of each house.

   (f)  The Governor, in returning with his objections a bill for reconsideration at any general or special session of the Legislature, may recommend that an amendment or amendments specified by him be made in the bill, and in such case the Legislature may amend and reenact the bill. If a bill be so amended and reenacted, it shall be presented again to the Governor, but shall become a law only if he shall sign it within 10 days after presentation, except that any bill amended and reenacted within 10 days preceding the expiration of the second legislative year shall become law only if the Governor signs it prior to noon of the seventh day following such expiration. No bill shall be returned by the Governor a second time. No bill need be read three times and no emergency resolution need be adopted for the reenactment of any bill at a special session of the Legislature.

     Article V, Section I, paragraph 14 amended effective December 8, 1983.

   15.  If any bill presented to the Governor shall contain one or more items of appropriation of money, he may object in whole or in part to any such item or items while approving the other portions of the bill.  In such case he shall append to the bill, at the time of signing it, a statement of each item or part thereof to which he objects, and each item or part so objected to shall not take effect.  A copy of such statement shall be transmitted by him to the house in which the bill originated, and each item or part thereof objected to shall be separately reconsidered.  If upon reconsideration, on or after the third day following said transmittal, one or more of such items or parts thereof be approved by two-thirds of all the members of each house, the same shall become a part of the law, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor.  All the provisions of the preceding paragraph in relation to bills not approved by the Governor shall apply to cases in which he shall withhold his approval from any item or items or parts thereof contained in a bill appropriating money."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks njJoni, Assuming we are dealing with section F I guess my real question is what would be the difference between an outright veto or a conditonal veto besides the fact that it would show his willingness to sign it, what are the odds that the bill falls apart again in the legislature? Would there still be a fools hope here?

 

   (f)  The Governor, in returning with his objections a bill for reconsideration at any general or special session of the Legislature, may recommend that an amendment or amendments specified by him be made in the bill, and in such case the Legislature may amend and reenact the bill. If a bill be so amended and reenacted, it shall be presented again to the Governor, but shall become a law only if he shall sign it within 10 days after presentation, except that any bill amended and reenacted within 10 days preceding the expiration of the second legislative year shall become law only if the Governor signs it prior to noon of the seventh day following such expiration. No bill shall be returned by the Governor a second time. No bill need be read three times and no emergency resolution need be adopted for the reenactment of any bill at a special session of the Legislature.t

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm aware, but seeing how the machine gun bit appeared in the bill and the circumstances surrounding it, signing it was a mistake at best. 

 

This.

 

Wanna see Charlie Rangel's tyranny at work?

Here you go:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6Mx2UcSEvQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanna see Charlie Rangel's tyranny at work?

Here you go:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6Mx2UcSEvQ

Thanks Brian. I've seen it before and can't stomach watching it again.

 

I'm lost, I can see the Hughes amendment failed the vote, so how did Charlie get it to go through

"Charlie Rangel's tyranny at work"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't understand what happened in the footage, would someone be able to give me the play by play

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_Owners_Protection_Act

 

 

In the morning hours of April 10, 1986, the House held recorded votes on three amendments to FOPA in Record Vote No's 72, 73, and 74. Recorded Vote 72 was on H.AMDT. 776, an amendment to H.AMDT 770 involving the interstate sale of handguns; while Recorded Vote 74 was on H.AMDT 770, involving primarily the easing of interstate sales and the safe passage provision. Recorded Vote 74 was the controversial Hughes Amendment that called for the banning of machine guns. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), at the time presiding as Chairman over the proceedings, claimed that the "amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended, was agreed to." However, after the voice vote on the Hughes Amendment, Rangel ignored a plea to take a recorded vote and moved on to Recorded Vote 74 where the Hughes Amendment failed.[6][7] The bill, H.R. 4332, as a whole passed in Record Vote No: 75 on a motion to recommit. Despite the controversial amendment, the Senate, in S.B. 49, adopted H.R. 4332 as an amendment to the final bill. The bill was subsequently passed and signed on May 19, 1986 by President Ronald Reagan to become Public Law 99-308, the Firearms Owners' Protection Act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From NJ.com:

"Gov. Chris Christie has agreed to give chronically ill children easier access to medical marijuana.

However, the governor conditionally vetoed a bill on the issue because it goes further than he was willing to go.

"As I have repeatedly noted, I believe that parents, and not government regulators, are best suited to decide how to care for their children," Christie said in a statement. "Protection of our children remains my utmost concern, and my heart goes out to those children and their families who are suffering with serious illnesses. Today, I am making commonsense recommendations to this legislation to ensure sick children receive the treatment their parents prefer, while maintaining appropriate safeguards. I am calling on the Legislature to reconvene quickly and address these issues so that children in need can get the treatment they need."

Christie agreed to allow production of ingestible forms of pot at state-approved dispensaries and to allow dispensaries to grow more than three strains of the drug.

But he wants to leave a requirement that a psychiatrist and pediatrician sign off before children are allowed medical marijuana.

They would still need a third doctor's recommendation if one of the others is not registered in the program.

The bill was being pushed by parents of children with severe seizure disorders who say that children elsewhere have benefited from certain strains of marijuana.

It now goes back to the state Legislature."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing yet on NJ.com

 

Someone please copy and paste the FB post here

 

Part of the Governor's statement:

 

Focusing on Common-Sense Solutions to Violence, Not In Name Only Proposals (A-3659): The bill passed by the legislature seeks to ban a firearm that has reportedly never been used in a crime in New Jersey. It imposes criminal liabilities on all current owners of these firearms, including those who believed that they had properly registered their guns with law enforcement. This bill purports to curb gun violence, when in reality the overly broad classification of firearms it calls for banning are lawfully used by competitive marksmen for long-range precision shooting and are not used by criminal interests because of their size and cost, which averages over $10,000 per firearm. The Governor, the former chief federal prosecutor in New Jersey, favors proposals designed to provide real solutions to violence, so he is calling on the legislature to act on the dozens of proposals he put forward aimed at truly deterring criminals.

 

 

Edit: This is coming from Michael Carroll, an assemblyman from Willingboro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From ANJRPC:

 

GOVERNOR CHRISTIE 

VETOES FINAL GUN BILLS!
 

FIFTY CALIBER BAN - DEAD!

SWEENEY F.I.D. BILL - DEAD!

TRACE DATA BREACH - DEAD!
 

Sweeney and Trace Data Bills Conditionally Vetoed
 

Please Thank Governor Christie for Vetoing these

Measures That Targeted Only Gun Rights

And Ignored Criminal Behavior!

 

In a huge blow to anti-gun politicians and the gun ban lobby, today Governor Christie flat-out vetoed the fifty caliber ban (A3659) and conditionally vetoed two other bills - Senate President Stephen Sweeney's "kitchen sink" F.I.D. card bill (S2723), and a bill that that would have forced the State Police to breach confidentiality of protected gun trace data in violation of federal law (A3797). A fourth bill creating a task force to study school security issues was signed by the Governor (A3583).

 

A "conditional veto" means that the legislation is dead, unless the legislature reconvenes to resurrect it through amendments that meet strict conditions imposed by the Governor. Whether anti-gun Democrats have the stomach to swallow those conditions (see details below) remains to be seen. Alternatively, the legislature could try to override any veto (conditional or otherwise) by a 2/3 vote of both houses, which is highly unlikely given the current composition of the legislature.

 

"After 7 months of intense battle over misguided legislation that won't stop another crime or prevent another tragedy, we are grateful that Governor Christie has finally ended the discussion on the worst of the bills by tossing them onto the scrap heap where they belong," said ANJRPC Executive Director Scott Bach. "These vetoes put gun-banning politicians on notice that exploiting tragedy to advance an agenda against legal gun owners, instead of punishing violent criminals, will not be entertained."

 

Today's actions come in the wake of last week's signing of ten gun bills by Governor Christie (two helped gun owners, two were opposed by gun owners, and six were neutralized based on gun owner input but are appropriately very tough on violent criminals). New Jersey already has some of the strictest and most extreme gun laws in the nation.

 

The bill flat-out vetoed by Governor Christie today was:

 

A3659 - the fifty caliber gun ban that would have: prohibited high muzzle-energy guns of any caliber; blocked heirlooms from family members; held grandfathered owners civilly liable for damages if their firearms were ever used in a crime; and forfeited the pending purchase orders of licensed gun owners for these $10,000+ firearms. 

 

The notion that banning any particular tool makes society safer is demonstrably false, and ignores the obvious reality that someone intent on doing evil will not be stopped or deterred if one particular tool becomes unavailable. "If box cutters could take down the World Trade Center, does anyone really believe that banning box cutters will stop the next terrorist?" commented Bach. "The same is true of firearms - banning the fifty caliber or any other firearm will not stop someone bent on doing evil."

 

The Governor's statement on A3659 criticizes the scope of the ban, notes drafting errors that would defeat grandfathering, and observes that rather than combating crime and terror, the bill only serves to threaten law-abiding gun owners with imprisonment for lawful recreation.

 

The two bills conditionally vetoed by Governor Christie today are:

 

S2723 - Senate President Stephen Sweeney's "kitchen sink" FID card bill, a 42-page monstrosity universally despised by gun owners and sportsmen. The bill, touted by Democrats as the "centerpiece" of their gun bill package and a "national model," would have: thrown out existing FID cards and replaced them with a privacy-invading driver license endorsement or other form of ID; suspended Second Amendment rights without proof of firearms training; ended firearms sales directly between background-checked licensed gun owners; and had numerous other impacts.

 

Under Governor Christie's conditional veto, S2723 could only be resurrected if both houses of the legislature agreed to the following conditions:

 

   -    Remove all provisions that would have created a new electronic FID card (keeps the existing permitting system in place);

 

   -    Remove all provisions that would have suspended Second Amendment rights without proof of firearms training;

 

   -    Remove all provisions that would have ended firearms sales directly between background-checked licensed gun owners; and

 

   -    Add a provision requiring the State Police to develop and promulgate literature regarding safe firearms storage and ownership.

 

It is unknown whether Democratic legislative leadership would accept these conditions. While doing so would salvage what is left of their "centerpiece," the final bill would be a gutted version, stripped of the most blatant attacks on legal gun owners, and very likely an embarrassment to Democrats.

 

If Democrats decided to swallow that bitter pill, other key provisions of the Sweeney bill that would be retained would include: requiring an FID card or other permit for all ammunition purchases; limiting shipment of online ammunition purchases to the address on the FID card; making it a 4th degree crime if injury or death results from the failure to properly secure firearms; making it a 4th degree crime for someone prohibited from possessing firearms to possess ammunition; requiring mental health screeners to inquire about firearms ownership of those being considered for involuntary commitment for mental health reasons; and revocation of NJ concealed carry permits upon conviction of a crime of the 4th degree or higher.

 

The Governor's statement accompanying his conditional veto expressed support in principle for some of these provisions, yet also criticized the legislature as "shortsighted" for focusing on gun control instead of comprehensive violence solutions. The statement also noted the bill's failure "to directly combat violence," and the current unavailability of the technology that would be required to implement the digitized FID card.

 

 

A3797 - conditionally vetoed because of one section that required the State Police to breach confidentiality of federal gun trace data in direct violation of federal law that limits the data to law enforcement only. This was an attempt by frustrated gun banners to circumvent that federal law, so that idiosyncrasies of the ATF's trace system could be exploited and manipulated to falsely suggest that law abiding citizens are a source of "crime guns." ATF has opposed similar efforts to circumvent confidentiality, which could compromise ongoing investigations. If the legislature amends the bill to remove this illegal provision, the amended bill would then return to the Governor's desk.

 

 

PLEASE THANK GOVERNOR CHRISTIE TODAY!

 

Please thank Governor Christie today for his actions on the fifty caliber ban, the Sweeney bill, and the trace data confidentiality bill. You can call the Governor's office at 609-292-6000, write him at P.O. Box 001, Trenton, N.J. 08625, or send an email using the online contact form (select "law and public safety" from the drop-down menu, then pick any sub-topic).

 

And thank YOU for weathering this 7-month-long storm of the worst attacks on gun owners in state history along with us. It is because of YOUR actions, YOUR calls and letters, YOUR attendance at hearings, and YOUR refusal to give up no matter what the odds, that today's outcome was possible.

 

Although today's action marks the end of a long and very arduous battle, the fight is far from over. The most oft-repeated statement by anti-gun legislators at hearings over the past 7 months was "these bills are only the beginning." They will be back after the November elections, and will continue their relentless attacks on legal gun ownership - and it will be up to gun owners to continue to defend freedom.

 

Please watch for future alerts and updates!

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

   

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...