Now, you may call me a defeatist or any other snarky name you like, but the REALITY Politically in NJ is that we dont have the voting power as a block to be considered relevant as gun owners. the NJ2AS team along with NJRPC have tried and will continue to try to change this, but as a group we are too Fractured, and too many groups are willing to throw other groups under the bus to make sure "Their" type of shooting isnt affected. The ONLY time we have had any type of Positive action legislatively is when the legislature reneged on it's agreement with the hunters on the .50 cal ban. The original text banned every rifled firearm .50 cal and greater....EVERY, including Muzzleloaders, Rifles Shotgun Bbls, and the .50BMG/.50SW guns that the lawmakers said they were "Targeting" (pun intended). The Lawmakers promised that they would amend the new statute to exempt hunting firearms, and the hunters and their minions backed off...and the the legislature stuck it up their collective a$$es, by submitting the bill in it's original form. As SOON as the text was published the shooting community acted together and got the ban voted down. Problem is that when it comes to Handguns, or CCW, or EBR's, or tactical-shotguns, or Ect, Ect, Ect, Joe Hunter who is happy with his Muzzleloader, or shotgun, or Bow, or Jim Clays with his O/U Double or whatever those guys use, just doesnt CARE..after all THEIR guns aren't on the chopping block. Again, unless, and Until Firearms owners AS A GROUP can come together and unify, nothing will change in NJ short of a SCOTUS decision, and probably an AG getting charged with Contempt of SCOTUS for ignoring a decision.

 

I agree with this statement in part, as most hunters didn't really know how much this would impact them had it been implemented. It was the NRA waking up and getting involved, it was Scott Bach being vocal, but it was also the efforts of the NJOA's Anthony Mauro & council members from the NJSFSC who whispered in Mr. Sweeney's ear which subsequently trickled down to other Senate members, that to implement such a drastic measure would derail the state's hunting, most notably negatively impacting that $100 million in dollars spent in pursuit of such. The almighty $$$$$$$ is what gets a politician's attention.

 

And you are right on the divisiveness of so many groups, if you talk to the NJOA's Anthony Mauro, he is first and foremost a proponent of preserving wildlife and hunting opportunities in the state. And he has both Christie's and Sweeney's ear. Yet despite having a strong and large forum behind him in conjunction with the NJSFSC, he will not broach or discuss the subject of firearms rights in the state. That would only cloud the issue and purpose of what he is trying to achieve. Thus is the conundrum.

While your statement that the Bill of Rights initially only applied to the Federal government, that is now incorrect. Most (8 out of 10 I believe) of the Bill of Rights have explicitly been held to apply to the states as well through the 14th amendment. Heller explicitly established that the 2nd amendment guarantees an individual right and McDonald explicitly applies the 2nd amendment to the states.

 

This part

2nd Amendment was Incorporated as Binding to the states (Under the 14th Ammendment) through the McDonald Case's Decision by SCOTUS[/color]]

 

Addressed the point you were making. It takes a SCOTUS decision for Incorporation of a US Constitutional Protection to apply to the Individual States....it is not Automatic, and It did not exist until McDonald.

I agree with this statement in part, as most hunters didn't really know how much this would impact them had it been implemented. It was the NRA waking up and getting involved, it was Scott Bach being vocal, but it was also the efforts of the NJOA's Anthony Mauro & council members from the NJSFSC who whispered in Mr. Sweeney's ear which subsequently trickled down to other Senate members, that to implement such a drastic measure would derail the state's hunting, most notably negatively impacting that $100 million in dollars spent in pursuit of such. The almighty $$$$$$$ is what gets a politician's attention.

 

And you are right on the divisiveness of so many groups, if you talk to the NJOA's Anthony Mauro, he is first and foremost a proponent of preserving wildlife and hunting opportunities in the state. And he has both Christie's and Sweeney's ear. Yet despite having a strong and large forum behind him in conjunction with the NJSFSC, he will not broach or discuss the subject of firearms rights in the state. That would only cloud the issue and purpose of what he is trying to achieve. Thus is the conundrum.

 

I didnt want to name names..but he's one of the ones I immediately thought of.....he was utterly Silent when it came to OGAM, even though he had spearheaded a HUGE victory for NJ Firearm Owners with the Defeat of the .50 Ban.... He is the Textbook definition of a "Fudd"..someone who will toss away YOUR rights as long has his are not affected.

It's a shame so many have a different agenda.