Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ogfarmer

April NJ2AS Meeting @ Newton VFW Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 7:00 PM

Recommended Posts

Reminder: the April meeting of the NJ2AS will be held on Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 7:00 PM, at the VFW, 85 Mill St., Newton, NJ 07860. Invited speakers include Sussex County Freeholder, Gail Phoebus, District 24 Senator Steven Oroho, Assemblywoman Alison McHose and Assemblyman Parker Space. Meeting is free and open to the public. Registration is encouraged at www.nj2as.com/events

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good meeting glad I went. It was nice putting names to faces. Nice meeting everyone tonight.

 

I only saw this post today otherwise I might have been able to make it. Let me know next one, maybe I can go with you next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The meeting was very well attended, SRO. Several women spoke eloquently on various issues.

 

I had to correct Mr. Roubian on two points. The first was that Sen. Sweeney was "vulnerable." In fact he won his last election 54% to 45%, with a plurality of 6,100 votes. I have identified at least 15 democrat legislators who lost by much smaller margins.

 

The second point was on the matter of replacing Sweeney and all its ramifications. Roubian stated that the entire process would take three months (if I mis-remembered someone please correct). I pointed out, by explaining the process (see my previous post on the sequence of events) that it would take at least eight months, possibly more.

 

I spoke for an inordinate amount of time, probably more than anyone except for Roubian and his colleague. I also felt compelled to interrupt Roubian twice on the above-mentioned points. I probably should have raised my hand instead but I have no tolerance for B.S., intentional or not.

 

A highlight for me was meeting two forum contributors and Mr. Almeida.  

 

Roubian is young, smart, dynamic, personable, and dedicated to the 2nd Amendment cause. You could do a lot worse than to support his organization. I will probably re-join, if for no other reason than to throw a few bucks his way.

 

Nevertheless I have huge problems with how NJ2AS and other organizations focus their resources. That did not change last night.

 

My next post consists of a statement I had prepared but did not have the opportunity to deliver. I provided Mr. Roubian with a copy as I was leaving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I handed Roubian on my way out the door last night:

 

I would like first of all to thank you for holding a meeting just a few blocks from my home. Newton is in the geographic center of Sussex County, one of the most gun-friendly counties in New Jersey. I can even walk here, but my arthritis makes it difficult to walk back up the hill to my home. Anyway, thanks.

 

I also thank you for your efforts to improve the lot of NJ gun owners. But, as well-intentioned as those efforts may be, I believe they have done more harm than good. By the way I am not singling you out. The NRA, ANJRPC, and the national Second Amendment Society have also got this thing wrong. As former NY Giants’ coach Dan Reeves used to say, “bad wrong.”

 

Efforts to recall Senator Sweeney, for example, are ill advised. I have laid out my case on the New Jersey Gun Forums, which everyone here is welcome to read. I can provide the internet address if anyone is interested.

 

Virtually no outcome of that recall will result in a better environment for New Jersey gun owners. Most will be disastrous. The road to recall is treacherous, expensive, and lengthy. Should your efforts succeed there is no reason to think that Mr. Sweeney’s putative replacement would be any better. By no means will he go gently into that good night of political obscurity. He will, at least, continue to pull strings.

 

Changing the party affiliation of the NJ legislature requires winning 14 seats from incumbent Democrats. Once Sweeney is gone you have thirteen seats to go. Do you seriously plan to spend the next ten years or more recalling other legislators? To me this effort is based on little more than spite.

 

The Almeida case is particularly troubling for me. The National 2A society is basically groveling before the corrupt New Jersey judiciary to prove that this man, who supposedly owns ATMs in bad neighborhoods, deserves a carry license. I have no animosity towards Mr. Almeida, none whatsoever, but all you are doing in this case is validating New Jersey’s ridiculous “justifiable need” requirement. Mr. Almeida’s life is worth not a farthing more than mine, regardless of what he does for a living.

 

If Almeida loses, which I sincerely hope he does, the case will have been nothing more than a typical day at the office for all the lawyers concerned. If he wins, the NJ judiciary can point to the case for the next thirty years as evidence that “justifiable need” indeed works in this state. Meanwhile average New Jersey gun owners like me get nothing.

 

Even your defense of Shaneen Allen, a humanitarian case if ever there was one, ended in a ridiculous legal conclusion: Pennsylvania concealed carry license holders get off scot free for getting caught in NJ, while New Jersey residents remain subject to draconian, out of date, spiteful laws that carry ten-year prison sentences.

 

I have, also on the NJ Gun Forums, suggested bring-out-the-vote strategies for winning back enough seats to make a difference. I have demonstrated mathematically, based on the number of NJ gun owners, voter participation, and the vulnerability of at least a dozen legislators, how easily we could easily achieve this. Again, you can refer to my posts there for the details.

 

But instead your organization continues to focus on one-off, isolated victories for individuals that bring zero relief to the majority of law-abiding New Jersey gun owners. Your predecessor at the NJ2AS, for example, emailed me about initiatives to support jury nullification. At best JN gets just one person off – assuming you can convince a jury of its merits. In practice most judges will cite anyone within 3 miles of the trial for contempt merely for mentioning those two words. Is this strategy where your organization should direct its limited resources?

 

In my opinion you and the state/national gun organizations don’t understand the seriousness of what faces each and every person in this room. The window of opportunity, narrow as it is, closes when the next governor of New Jersey, overwhelmingly likely to be a democrat, is sworn in in a couple of years. Governor Sweeney will not forget your attempts to ruin his career. By the time he’s sworn in your chance to reach some accommodation with the inevitable will be over.

 

You may win your skirmishes with (Shaneen, Almeida, and on behalf of all the ATM operators and early-retired LEOs in the state). You may force Mr. Sweeney into early campaigning for governor. Congratulations. But in so doing you’ll have done nothing for rank and file gun owners.

 

Thank you.

 

(Sorry the editor in me forced me to change the punctuation slightly in the last full paragraph)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's been said a few times in threads. Recalling him sets a precedent that we are aiming for -you-... , (...and any others).

If successful, the next jamoke will possibly have 2nd thoughts. IF we fail or not, Sweeney can and will be vindictive anyway. He will do his damnedest to be the biggest hardon in office that hates 2A... Which will put him higher on the pedestal for all antis to clap for. Either way, he will have his way. The effort to recall may just be a shot in the dark, but it's better than nothing.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the standards of most sane people I'm a pessimist, but IMO "realist" is more appropriate.

 

You'll understand better if you read the intro to John Derbyshire's excellent book, We Are Doomed. Psychologists say that pessimism is unhealthy but at least we're rarely disappointed.

 

 

I sincerely hope all you optimists are right and I am wrong. I will support you whenever I feel it's productive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Books by people are usually just their opinions which I'm not a fan of. Everybody is an expert. Classic example is that jackarse Dr. Oz....

 

But I do believe action is better than just words and when complete, the proof either will be or won't be in the pudding.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...I have, also on the NJ Gun Forums, suggested bring-out-the-vote strategies for winning back enough seats to make a difference. I have demonstrated mathematically, based on the number of NJ gun owners, voter participation, and the vulnerability of at least a dozen legislators, how easily we could easily achieve this. Again, you can refer to my posts there for the details...

 

I've read your comments for a long time and heard you talk about a winnable strategy to swing NJ away from being a blue state.  I see some issues with this.

  1. It's not only NJ's democrats that hate guns. 
  2. A victory would have to be won every election to keep NJ from ever going blue again.
  3. If your strategy works, nothing stops the other side from steeling it.  There are vulnerable republicans too.

I'm not suggesting that "recall Sweeney", "apply to be denied", "jury nullification", "get out the vote", busing people to Trenton, supporting Almeida, SAPPA, or any of the other ideas are sure wins.  In fact, I've got some sort of reservation about every single one of these.  I share many of your concerns about each of these projects.

 

However, I am glad that I was able to fill an entire line of this post with the various projects that are happening in NJ.  I'm glad that someone in NJ decided to stand up and start these projects and that there are people who are trying to accomplish each one of these.  This was not the case 3 or 4 years ago when nobody was doing anything to restore our rights.

 

If you believe that you have a better way - do it.  You can present your data here, convince a group that it makes sense and maybe you'll be the one to achieve success.  There are enough gun owners in NJ to support many, many of these projects and maybe yours will spark an interest in some of those who aren't currently involved and get them involved.

 

I would prefer that NJ2AS was focusing on my favorite project instead of Recall Sweeney.  In fact, I've still got a bitter taste in my mouth from when I was told I could no longer participate in NJ2AS business.  But I just signed up to be a member again last week and plan to be in district 1 knocking on doors - if the new management team will allow it. 

 

I see only two choices:  fight or don't fight.   If you're inclined to fight, you'll have to either join somebody else's fight or start your own fight.  If you're not inclined to fight, tearing down those who are trying to make a difference - even if it's not the "right way" - is not helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  1. It's not only NJ's democrats that hate guns. 
  2. A victory would have to be won every election to keep NJ from ever going blue again.
  3. If your strategy works, nothing stops the other side from steeling it.  There are vulnerable republicans too.

If you believe that you have a better way - do it.  You can present your data here, convince a group that it makes sense and maybe you'll be the one to achieve success.  

 

I see only two choices:  fight or don't fight.   If you're inclined to fight, you'll have to either join somebody else's fight or start your own fight.  If you're not inclined to fight, tearing down those who are trying to make a difference - even if it's not the "right way" - is not helpful.

Good points.

 

1. If by some miracle republicans were to take over the state house, and they passed significant legislation, it would be tough to get that genie back into the bottle. We'll already have had a history of success by the time restrictive legislation reaches the desk of the governor, be they D or R. "Dear Governor X, In the 18 months since XXX passed we have not had a single incident of XXX involving individuals stopping for food on their way home from the range..."

 

2. I have presented my ideas many times and nobody is interested. I have not received a single positive or on-issue response. I'm willing to work and spend money on get-out-the-vote but I'm not doing it by myself. I have a career and a family.

 

3. I'm not tearing anyone down, just asking people to think about what they're doing, how they expend their resources. The feeling last night at the VFW was similar to what I read on these forums, namely if we succeed at a bunch of little things the effects will be additive. Problem is that +2 and -4 do not add up to +6, they add up to -2. That's what people don't understand. The adage, "Watch what you wish for -- you may get it" comes to mind.

 

For example nobody in these forums has ever explained, in a rational way, how Mr. Almeida obtaining a carry permit would benefit gun rights in this state. What would that "victory" add to, and to what next step would that amalgamation lead us? Would we all have to work on ATMs in Newark late at night? Move to dangerous neighborhoods?

 

I'll send his legal fund $100 today if you can convince me. 

 

Repeat: It's ironic how posters in a 2nd Amendment forum could have such little regard for the 1st Amendment. This is supposed to be an open forum but half the responses I get accuse me of tearing people down, being negative, etc. I don't call anyone names. I'm for the most part respectful and thoughtful in my criticisms. If you think I'm a troll then stop feeding me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Newtonian, it was very nice meeting you last night. I believe everything you've said is absolutely accurate. Also when you were speaking the one politician there was completely agreeing with everything you were conveying to all of us, about getting out the vote. That's definitely something we all need to do and be a part of.

 

With that said, if you listened to what Gale was saying, about once we have a recall even started (which Alexander has done already) Sweeney becomes "toxic" to the rest of his party. They (the Dems) will not put him up as the nominee. Due to the stigma of having said recall filed upon him. It's as if he has "the cooties" at that point and none of the other kids on the playground want anything to do with him. So I believe that's a good thing.

 

I myself have some first hand knowledge of how campaigns work, I come from a political family. My stepmother was a Senate aid to a Passaic County senator my entire childhood. by the time I got to highschool she was the president of the township council in Wayne, by my freshman year of college she became the inturn mayor for a couple years, when the current mayor stepped down mid way through his term (because of professional obligations that would no longer allow him to preform his duties). I've witnessed first hand how quickly someone in a position of power that feels untouchable by anyone can loose the support of their party. This will hopefully be that catalyst for Sweeney. Even if the recall dosent work, it will still be a success in that aspect.

 

But yes sir, we need to do more! I fully agree with that!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was at the meeting last night, and I thought it was really good.  Tough to beat lively discussion and cheap beer afterward!  Alexander Roubian brings a great passion and energy to our cause, and others there seemed equally enthusiastic about defending our 2A rights.   i had the pleasure of meeting several forum members there in "real life," something I always enjoy.

 

I can say that Newtonian expressed his ideas clearly and firmly, and mostly quite civilly.  (Perhaps excpet for once or twice when he interrupted Roubian.)   I believe the battling man from Newton managed to convince many that a get-out-the-vote effort would be a worthy cause.  I've always agreed with him on that, and I believe Roubian saw the merit in it as well.  

 

What I believe N-man may be overlooking are the benefits of attempting to recall Sweeney.  Roubian pointed out that since the successful recall in Colorado, no new anti-gun bills have been proposed, and in fact, the legislature is beginning to move in the opposite direction of restoring gun rights. 

Roubian and many of the rest of us believe that a recall effort, especially a successful one, will send a message to the legislature that defenders of

2A are a powerful group that they need to respect.  

 

Do we have a lot to lose with an unsuccessful recall?  Probably, but not nearly as much as our founding fathers did when they took up their cause.

The worst that can happen to us is further restrictions on our gun rights.  But at least we'll be around to tell about it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Roubian pointed out that since the successful recall in Colorado, no new anti-gun bills have been proposed, and in fact, the legislature is beginning to move in the opposite direction of restoring gun rights. 

Nice to meet you as well, and Deerslayer.

 

Huge difference between Colorado and here. We do not really have a gun culture, they do. The politicians out there know that even democrats have guns and will vote on that issue. We have close to the lowest percentage of gun ownership, and in this state even republicans are anti-gun.

 

I don't believe what the lady said about toxicity. Recall is so rare and the data is so sparse you can't really draw conclusions.

 

Plus this is NJ, the most corrupt state in the union. Besides the only thing political parties care about is winning. I wonder how Torricelli was polling just before he dropped out. I'll bet that even with him under indictment it was a close race.

 

Were Sweeney to be recalled he'd still win the gubernatorial election in 2017 if he ran against your typical NJ Republican. 

 

Thought on recalls in general: As I've mentioned Sweeney won by 6100 votes in 2013. A successful recall will require "6101" people to change their votes. Why would this be easier within the context of a recall than in a general election? Answer: It wouldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Thought on recalls in general: As I've mentioned Sweeney won by 6100 votes in 2013. A successful recall will require "6101" people to change their votes. Why would this be easier within the context of a recall than in a general election? Answer: It wouldn't.

It's a distinct possibly that he pissed off 6101 of the people that DID actually vote for him in his last election by lying to them. This may be their opportunity for retribution they're waiting for. Either way we're going to find out, the ball is already in motion. I will do my part to see it through to the end, even though I didn't start the ball. We all need to be united Reguardless of success or failure. There's not much to loose at this point.

 

The only other thing I can think of at this point, is to begin the secession process of Sussex County leaving NJ to join PA.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...Huge difference between Colorado and here. We do not really have a gun culture, they do. The politicians out there know that even democrats have guns and will vote on that issue. We have close to the lowest percentage of gun ownership, and in this state even republicans are anti-gun....

 

Some counties still do.  2/3 of Sweeney's district has a gun culture.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm certainly not a political strategist, but it seems to me that we would need to turn far fewer than 6101 voters to recall Sweeney.  I would be willing to bet that turnout in a recall election is far lower than it is in a general election.  Plus, people that passionately oppose Sweeney would probably come out in far greater numbers than would his supporters, who would likely be less motivated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...Huge difference between Colorado and here. We do not really have a gun culture, they do. The politicians out there know that even democrats have guns and will vote on that issue. We have close to the lowest percentage of gun ownership, and in this state even republicans are anti-gun....

 

Some counties still do.  2/3 of Sweeney's district has a gun culture.

 

 

Then we're seriously misunderstanding the relationship between guns, conservatism, even guns and people who oppose them. If you're right then maybe there is a chance to recall him, and  maybe it will be the beginning of something wonderful. I hope youze guys are right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...