Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The problem is, what do you do when they tell you to eff off and dismiss it fully.

 

 

That would be the "Dismiss with prejudice" part they were talking about.  From what I've read, that's a action that often seems to be reserved for fraudulent cases. 

 

Not sure what their game plan is in that case, but they have a plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is, what do you do when they tell you to eff off and dismiss it fully.

I truely believe that it is getting to the point of the judges/politicians being told "Fuck off, if you can't follow the law that gives you power neither will anyone else".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I truely believe that it is getting to the point of the judges/politicians being told "Fuck off, if you can't follow the law that gives you power neither will anyone else".

I sort of agree, but who will be the first, and how many will follow? The issue being that fighting unfair, unconstitutional, or even illegal politically entrenched laws with what it will actually take to fix the problem will constitute major illegal actions. In the end it will not get us what we want but it will cause an even more harsh reaction. When the bad guys are politicians in positions of power, and yes I do recognize judges as politicians, not as impartial jurists, They have what ever force they wish to use against us at their disposal. If there was a way to stop paying taxes for long enough for the state to default you would have an easier time of bringing all the misdeeds of the state to light. But I think it's time to face the fact, that only drastic measures, or a complete write off by enough tax payers will bring about any positive changes to this state. If 30% of the tax base disappeared there would be enough of an impact to rattle the filth in Trenton loose. Although they would plunder as much as they could on their way out. The bottom line is that they just don't care. They don't care about the financials, they don't care about education, they don't care about the constitution, and they certainly couldn't care less about people's safety. They never will either. They only care about their own power and control for personal enrichment. Concealed carry represents a threat to that control, because we will not be dependent on them for what ever protection they allow us. I assure you that there is no sacrifice on our part that is too great for them to make. Protests haven't worked, threats of recall haven't worked, lawsuits haven't worked, the supreme court is not likely to help in any way. Sane, law abiding, good people are simply outnumbered. Funny thing is that many people say, that's just how it is, it's like that no matter where you go. Funny, I never hear that from people who have left for greener pastures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sort of agree, but who will be the first, and how many will follow? The issue being that fighting unfair, unconstitutional, or even illegal politically entrenched laws with what it will actually take to fix the problem will constitute major illegal actions. In the end it will not get us what we want but it will cause an even more harsh reaction. When the bad guys are politicians in positions of power, and yes I do recognize judges as politicians, not as impartial jurists, They have what ever force they wish to use against us at their disposal. If there was a way to stop paying taxes for long enough for the state to default you would have an easier time of bringing all the misdeeds of the state to light. But I think it's time to face the fact, that only drastic measures, or a complete write off by enough tax payers will bring about any positive changes to this state. If 30% of the tax base disappeared there would be enough of an impact to rattle the filth in Trenton loose. Although they would plunder as much as they could on their way out. The bottom line is that they just don't care. They don't care about the financials, they don't care about education, they don't care about the constitution, and they certainly couldn't care less about people's safety. They never will either. They only care about their own power and control for personal enrichment. Concealed carry represents a threat to that control, because we will not be dependent on them for what ever protection they allow us. I assure you that there is no sacrifice on our part that is too great for them to make. Protests haven't worked, threats of recall haven't worked, lawsuits haven't worked, the supreme court is not likely to help in any way. Sane, law abiding, good people are simply outnumbered. Funny thing is that many people say, that's just how it is, it's like that no matter where you go. Funny, I never hear that from people who have left for greener pastures.

Its already happening. Its just gonna get worse and worse until BANG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sort of agree, but who will be the first, and how many will follow? The issue being that fighting unfair, unconstitutional, or even illegal politically entrenched laws with what it will actually take to fix the problem will constitute major illegal actions. In the end it will not get us what we want but it will cause an even more harsh reaction. When the bad guys are politicians in positions of power, and yes I do recognize judges as politicians, not as impartial jurists, They have what ever force they wish to use against us at their disposal. If there was a way to stop paying taxes for long enough for the state to default you would have an easier time of bringing all the misdeeds of the state to light. But I think it's time to face the fact, that only drastic measures, or a complete write off by enough tax payers will bring about any positive changes to this state. If 30% of the tax base disappeared there would be enough of an impact to rattle the filth in Trenton loose. Although they would plunder as much as they could on their way out. The bottom line is that they just don't care. They don't care about the financials, they don't care about education, they don't care about the constitution, and they certainly couldn't care less about people's safety. They never will either. They only care about their own power and control for personal enrichment. Concealed carry represents a threat to that control, because we will not be dependent on them for what ever protection they allow us. I assure you that there is no sacrifice on our part that is too great for them to make. Protests haven't worked, threats of recall haven't worked, lawsuits haven't worked, the supreme court is not likely to help in any way. Sane, law abiding, good people are simply outnumbered. Funny thing is that many people say, that's just how it is, it's like that no matter where you go. Funny, I never hear that from people who have left for greener pastures.

Its already happening. Its just gonna get worse and worse until BANG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The issue being that fighting unfair, unconstitutional, or even illegal politically entrenched laws with what it will actually take to fix the problem will constitute major illegal actions. In the end it will not get us what we want but it will cause an even more harsh reaction.

 

From bzer1's post above.

 

The bolded part sounds like a quote from someone living in Communist China or North Korea.  But it's not.  When a gov't uses it's power to silence opposition, you have tyranny.   If that's where we are... or where we are headed, we have a problem.

 

We are talking about a State Gov't and not the Federal Gov't.  Which means in a country where justice still prevails, the Federal Gov't would have the power to act against a state violating federal laws. So there's some legal recourse.  But with a Federal Gov't not inclined to fight.. (the RINOs).... or inclined to actually prefer tyranny...(the Dems)... whatever recourse citizens would have would be in their own hands.  Literally.

 

It's a little easier for people without a lot to lose to take risks.  Rioters that we've seen probably meet that description.  It's not so easy for someone who has a lot to lose to make a decision to put it all at risk.  The question becomes when does a gov't go too far in denying normally civil people their rights to the point that they refuse to allow it to continue?

 

The tyrants are aware of this dilemma, so they operate in incremental fashion... slowly boiling the public to death.. a degree at a time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From bzer1's post above.

 

The bolded part sounds like a quote from someone living in Communist China or North Korea.  But it's not.  When a gov't uses it's power to silence opposition, you have tyranny.   If that's where we are... or where we are headed, we have a problem.

 

We are talking about a State Gov't and not the Federal Gov't.  Which means in a country where justice still prevails, the Federal Gov't would have the power to act against a state violating federal laws. So there's some legal recourse.  But with a Federal Gov't not inclined to fight.. (the RINOs).... or inclined to actually prefer tyranny...(the Dems)... whatever recourse citizens would have would be in their own hands.  Literally.

 

It's a little easier for people without a lot to lose to take risks.  Rioters that we've seen probably meet that description.  It's not so easy for someone who has a lot to lose to make a decision to put it all at risk.  The question becomes when does a gov't go too far in denying normally civil people their rights to the point that they refuse to allow it to continue?

 

The tyrants are aware of this dilemma, so they operate in incremental fashion... slowly boiling the public to death.. a degree at a time.

The truth is, I think violence is exactly what they want. It's a calculated risk on their part, and since they are always protected it's not themselves that they are risking. If we react to their tyranny with a well deserved punch to the throat, it will be cast as a riot/insurgency/ pick you derogatory term. They have their propaganda wing ready to print the stories about the gun nuts attacking the government for wanting safe schools or what ever they choose to convey. No I think the very best path is to do exactly what these sacks of human excrement would do. Overload, and ultimately crash the system. I think SAPPA has the right idea. I just think that it should be done on a massive scale. To the point where it can not be ignored. To the point where it so detrimentally impacts the daily workings of the state government, that they are all ready to quit. Or a mass migration out of the state, followed by a massive social media campaign blaming the 10 most powerful dems in the state. Each one needs to be specifically targeted by name, in a "Reverend Al" like fashion. Until something massive, with a lasting detrimental impact takes place, nothing will change. Unfortunately I don't see our side willing to use their own tactics against them. it's just easier to leave a few at a time.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The truth is, I think violence is exactly what they want. It's a calculated risk on their part, and since they are always protected it's not themselves that they are risking. If we react to their tyranny with a well deserved punch to the throat, it will be cast as a riot/insurgency/ pick you derogatory term. They have their propaganda wing ready to print the stories about the gun nuts attacking the government for wanting safe schools or what ever they choose to convey. No I think the very best path is to do exactly what these sacks of human excrement would do. Overload, and ultimately crash the system. I think SAPPA has the right idea. I just think that it should be done on a massive scale. To the point where it can not be ignored. To the point where it so detrimentally impacts the daily workings of the state government, that they are all ready to quit. Or a mass migration out of the state, followed by a massive social media campaign blaming the 10 most powerful dems in the state. Each one needs to be specifically targeted by name, in a "Reverend Al" like fashion. Until something massive, with a lasting detrimental impact takes place, nothing will change. Unfortunately I don't see our side willing to use their own tactics against them. it's just easier to leave a few at a time.   

 

Right.  I don't think we should be beating the crap out of the politicians.  I'd like to.... but... that's not a game plan.   Make them believe you will take away their power and you will have their full attention.  But personally speaking, I'd rather destroy their political careers rather than make them compliant.  They'd be like that zombie that just keeps getting up off the ground trying to eat you unless they're sent packing.

 

What ever would be done would need to be overwhelming.  A little of this.. and a little of that.... is like trying to repair a sand castle with the tide coming in.  Money would be required.  Truck loads of it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the court-issued documents as well. It seems that the plaintiff lacked standing because he had not been denied a permit. That makes sense. I haven't read all the SAPPA docs but it also seems from what the judge wrote that the points made therein were mostly irrelevant to the case.

 

Am I over-simplifying or could we be reading a different story had he applied and been denied? Is there some basis for re-igniting the "apply to be denied" effort that seems to have itself died many months ago?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right.  I don't think we should be beating the crap out of the politicians.  I'd like to.... but... that's not a game plan.   Make them believe you will take away their power and you will have their full attention.  But personally speaking, I'd rather destroy their political careers rather than make them compliant.  They'd be like that zombie that just keeps getting up off the ground trying to eat you unless they're sent packing.

 

What ever would be done would need to be overwhelming.  A little of this.. and a little of that.... is like trying to repair a sand castle with the tide coming in.  Money would be required.  Truck loads of it.

The sand castle analogy is perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the court-issued documents as well. It seems that the plaintiff lacked standing because he had not been denied a permit. That makes sense. I haven't read all the SAPPA docs but it also seems from what the judge wrote that the points made therein were mostly irrelevant to the case.

 

Am I over-simplifying or could we be reading a different story had he applied and been denied? Is there some basis for re-igniting the "apply to be denied" effort that seems to have itself died many months ago?

 

As far as we know, he has not ever applied for a carry permit in NJ.  I didn't understand it, but they said their case had nothing to do with requiring standing on the issue of permit denial.

 

Maybe.. on the Apply-to-be-Denied effort.  I think we'd need thousands and thousands of people applying, or it will get lost in the noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as we know, he has not ever applied for a carry permit in NJ. I didn't understand it, but they said their case had nothing to do with requiring standing on the issue of permit denial.

 

Maybe.. on the Apply-to-be-Denied effort. I think we'd need thousands and thousands of people applying, or it will get lost in the noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but perhaps a class action lawsuit would have more impact?

Point is that 100 denials out of 100 would probably suffice. Not a lawyer here. I kindof take literally that stuff about "shall not be infringed."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any plans to reach out to any tv, paper, news or radio media outlet that will listen and run this sickening corruption story ? People get national attention for far less important issues. Maybe throw in that a baker refuses a ccw permit holder a cake and they will run it on prime time.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point is that 100 denials out of 100 would probably suffice. Not a lawyer here. I kindof take literally that stuff about "shall not be infringed."

Sure100/100 certainly shows a pattern. but 19,995 out of 20,000 with everyone suing brings scale to the level of corruption. A big problem deserves big attention. 100 people can be swept under the carpet, or spun, but 20,000 or more not as easy. And in desperate times they could issue to a handful to make a suit go away. They won't even consider issuing 20,000 or more to make the suit go away. If they do, then just keep upping the number with subsequent suits until everyone has their carry permit. They need to be trampled under foot.

 

 

When I tell my friends from free America what it's like here they don't believe me. After sending one a bunch of articles about the nutty gun laws, and the out of control corruption, he told me he thought I was making it up. After a couple of days he called me back and said..."You have to get the hell out of there".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure100/100 certainly shows a pattern. but 19,995 out of 20,000 with everyone suing brings scale to the level of corruption. A big problem deserves big attention. 100 people can be swept under the carpet, or spun, but 20,000 or more not as easy. And in desperate times they could issue to a handful to make a suit go away. They won't even consider issuing 20,000 or more to make the suit go away. If they do, then just keep upping the number with subsequent suits until everyone has their carry permit. They need to be trampled under foot.

 

 

When I tell my friends from free America what it's like here they don't believe me. After sending one a bunch of articles about the nutty gun laws, and the out of control corruption, he told me he thought I was making it up. After a couple of days he called me back and said..."You have to get the hell out of there".

20,000 people? You're dreaming. Even if possible, they'd figure out some way around any lawsuit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any plans to reach out to any tv, paper, news or radio media outlet that will listen and run this sickening corruption story ? People get national attention for far less important issues. Maybe throw in that a baker refuses a ccw permit holder a cake and they will run it on prime time.....

96% of newspaper reporters are liberal. Good luck getting sympathy (or even interest) from them. And the citizens of this state don't give a shit about your 2nd Amendment rights. This has been amply demonstrated numerous times. If anyone but us cared the laws would have been changed decades ago.

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.



  • olight.jpg

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

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Similar Content

    • By 124gr9mm
      Received this last night.
      Sent a message to all the contact names on the list they provided at the link:
       
       HONEST GUN OWNERS TREATED
      THE SAME AS MURDERERS FOR
      INADVERTENT, TECHNICAL LAW VIOLATIONS   No Violent Crime Required Rot in Jail for Years While Awaiting “Trial”
      Tell Lawmakers to Fix or Oppose This Poorly-Crafted Bill
      On Monday, March 14 at 1:00 p.m., the New Jersey Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee is scheduled to consider A2426 – an apparently well-intentioned but badly botched piece of legislation whose intended purpose appears to be to throw the book at violent gun criminals – which law-abiding gun owners actually support.
        But as written, the bill does not distinguish between violent criminal behavior and innocent technical infractions for the draconian presumption against bail to apply.  Law-abiding gun owners who inadvertently violate NJ’s thicket of hyper-technical firearms possession laws would be treated exactly the same as murderers—thrown in jail to rot for years without bail while they await trial someday for their “crimes.”
      This is not an imagined concern, as the Garden State has a well-documented track record of throwing the book at honest gun owners for innocent technical infractions.  As written, this bill adds insult to injury and would throw honest gun owners in the gulag for years while they await trial for “infractions” like:
      -Stopping for food, fuel, going to the bathroom, or medical treatment on the way to or from the target range.
      -Transporting firearms to or from one’s place of business, a gun store, hunting, fishing, target shooting competitions, target ranges, re-enactments, gun buyback events, vacation homes or other destinations.
      -Widows or widowers turning in firearms of their deceased spouses.
      -Possession of antique and black powder firearms (even these firearms could trigger the draconian penalties under this bill).
      PLEASE IMMEDIATELY CLICK HERE TO EMAIL EVERY ASSEMBLY MEMBER AND TELL THEM TO EITHER FIX OR OPPOSE A2426.  The law should distinguish between MERE POSSESSION of firearms by honest gun owners, vs. MISUSE of firearms by violent gun criminals, and draconian penalties like presumptive denial of bail should only apply to violent criminals who misuse firearms, and not to innocent mistakes of honest gun owners like technical possessory infractions where no violent misconduct is present.  Honest gun owners should not be treated the same as murderers!  Throw the book at the bad guys but take extreme care not to lump the good guys in with the bad.  The bill can easily be amended to make it clear that its penalties apply only to persons accused of violent criminal behavior.
       
       
    • By NJGF
      Judge Kavanaugh and the Second Amendment
      http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/07/judge-kavanaugh-and-the-second-amendment/
      "....Kennedy sided with his more conservative colleagues in finding a Second Amendment right to have a handgun in the home, and there is no reason to believe that Judge Brett Kavanaugh, if confirmed, is likely to disagree"
      "....We know from his recorded dissents from the denial of review that Thomas would vote to review and overturn some existing gun laws, and we know that Gorsuch – at least to some extent – agrees with him. But it takes four votes to grant review in a case, and we do not know whether Roberts and Alito also agree with Thomas but have opted not to say so publicly, or whether they instead are content to leave the court’s gun-rights jurisprudence as it is."
      ".... just this week, the 9th Circuit struck down Hawaii’s ban on carrying weapons openly outside of the home; even if the case goes to the full 9th Circuit, the losing party is almost certain to ask the Supreme Court to weigh in."
    • By NJGF
      Second Amendment challenge to New York state stun gun ban
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/12/07/second-amendment-challenge-to-new-york-state-stun-gun-ban/?utm_term=.8affecbeea72&wpisrc=nl_volokh&wpmm=1
       
      A law suit was filed that challenges New York's stun gun ban based on second amendment issues.
       
      The filing is here:
      http://14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/New-York-sued-in-federal-court-over-Taser-ban.pdf
       
      The suit cites Heller, McDonald, and the more recent Caetano v. Massachusetts decision.
       
      If NY falls then maybe NJ will be next.
       
    • By NJGF
      Don Kates, the father of the modern Second Amendment revival, has died
       
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/11/04/don-kates-the-father-of-the-modern-second-amendment-revival-has-died/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_term=.c54f683896c7
       
      Don wrote “Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment,” 82 Mich. L. Rev. 204 (1983), the first modern article in a major law review arguing for the individual-rights view of the Second Amendment.
       
    • By JibbaJabba
      http://www.gunssavelife.com/?p=11186
       
       
      Gun confiscation is one step closer in Connecticut. The mainstream media spins it as “one more chance” for non-compliant gun owners who failed to register their scary guns before the January 1 deadline.
       
      In reality, these letters - 106 to rifle owners, and 108 more to residents with standard capacity magazines – are the first step in the Connecticut State Police beginning to round up guns arbitrarily made illegal last year in that state. These guns include America’s favorite rifle, the AR-15 and magazines over 10 rounds, which include the standard capacity magazines made for that America’s favorite rifle.
       
      Failure to register is now a felony now in Connecticut.
       
      How long will it be before there is bloodshed over this law? We’re not sure, but we’re confident it is coming unless the law is rescinded or struck down by the courts.
       
      Mike Vanderboegh of the edgy Sipsey Street Irregulars released an open letter a couple of weeks ago, warning of what’s coming to Connecticut. The Connecticut State Police aren’t listening. Yet.
       
      We suspect attitudes may change after the first few rounds of bloodshed.
       
      As it stands right now, the best estimates are that 4% of newly-regulated guns and magazines in The Nutmeg State have been registered, leaving a hundred thousand or more newly classified potential felons looking over their shoulder.
       
      Editor’s note: We’re not going to link to the article because they are hiding most of the content behind a paywall and we won’t drive thousands of readers to their website.
       
      One more chance for gun owners
       
      Posted: Monday, February 24, 2014 3:35 pm | Updated: 3:36 pm, Mon Feb 24, 2014.
       
      Manchester, CT (Journal Inquirer) – When state officials decided to accept some gun registrations and magazine declarations that arrived after a Jan. 4 deadline, they also had to deal with those applications that didn’t make the cut.
       
      The state now holds signed and notarized letters saying those late applicants own rifles and magazines illegally.
       
      But rather than turn that information over to prosecutors, state officials are giving the gun owners a chance to get rid of the weapons and magazines.
       
      This entry was posted on February 24, 2014 at 5:55 pm and is filed under Blog. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
       
      -------------------------------
      100 letters don't seem like much, but it might be their strategy to tackle a little at a time when it comes to the overall 100k non-compliant gun owners. I'm giving strong consideration to the idea of making future purchases outside state lines.
  • Posts

×
×
  • Create New...