Pizza Bob's agitating got me thinking...

 

It only takes 24 votes in the Senate and 48 votes in the Assembly to get a constitutional amendment put on the ballot in New Jersey. In the Senate there are 24 Democrats and 16 Republicans. There are 48 Democrats and 32 Republicans in the General Assembly.

 

Why haven't we ever considered the possibility of getting a RKBA amendment put on a ballot measure for New Jersey voters?

 

Remember NJ2AS's idea for an RKBA NJ amendment: "The people have the right to bear arms for defense of self, family, home and state and for hunting and recreational use."

 

Well, if my calculations are right, if we assume all Republicans will vote for the amendment, we would only need to pick up 8 Democrats in the senate and 16 in the house. This might be possible.

 

I'm sure Senators Sweeny and Van Drew would be behind it on the Democratic side. There are a couple of others like Assemblymen Nelson Albano and Matt Milam who would get behind it as well. South Jersey Democrats already defected on pension reform. Maybe its possible to get them to defect on this issue as well?

 

And the idea is somewhat innocuous. We are not asking for anything scary, just a state reflection of a federal right. If anything, it could get people talking, and it would become a linchpin for future court cases.

 

What do you guys think? Why hasn't this approach been tried before?

I have wondered this myself. Really can't answer, lack of funds, people convinced it's a waste of time? who knows.

What happens if it gets on the ballot and we loose? Does that mean we the gun owners/gun rights supporters are permanently screwed?

We're screwed now, what's there to lose??

 

 

I don't think it would mean that wee were screwed. We still have federal protection, although it could embolden politicians to enact more legislation because the vote could be considered a popular referendom on gun rights in general.

 

But hoping things will get better isn't exactly the best recipe for change.

 

George Washington and John Adams were screwed if they lost. I think all we would have to lose is the time we put into the project.

 

Quick edit. I may have to do some math on this one, but I think we could pull it off.

 

Think about it. Senator Sweeny is the real key here, and he wants to be governor, or possibly replace Senators Menendez or Lautenberg one day. If you are a Democrat, you are going to vote for him regardless. If you are a Republican, you may give him a second look if he helped with gun rights.

 

I need to do some math...

The majority of people in New Jersey still believe that firearms are for criminals and psychos and that the 2A was meant for the National Guard and is an obsolete relic. Getting a 2nd Amendment passed in NJ today would be like going back in time to 1962 Alabama and proposing an amendment to their state constitution giving blacks equal rights.

 

In both these cases, enforcement of civil rights through the Federal courts is the only answer.

The majority of people in New Jersey still believe that firearms are for criminals and psychos and that the 2A was meant for the National Guard and is an obsolete relic. Getting a 2nd Amendment passed in NJ today would be like going back in time to 1962 Alabama and proposing an amendment to their state constitution giving blacks equal rights.

 

In both these cases, enforcement of civil rights through the Federal courts is the only answer.

 

I agree with you that NJ is like 1962 Alabama. But we have a couple of things now that we didn't have just a few years ago:

 

* We have Senator Sweeny who has Gubernatorial or federal senate ambitions.

* We have have a Governor who has federal ambitions and needs some kind of pro-2A record.

* We have a Governor and a South Jersey power broker (Norcross) who are working together on this Rowan / Rutgers merger

* We have mass of democratic South Jersey legislators who defected from the party and voted for pension reform

* We have our own Dr. Martin Luther King in Anthony Colandro and Gun For Hire Radio which has national reach.

 

Now as to the question as to whether most NJ residents think that guns are for criminals and psychos... well, maybe not.

 

How many people have you taken to the range who resolved to get their FID, but stopped because the process was just too much of a pain? I personally know a guy who has had his FID application sitting on his kitchen table for 18 months now - he's just doesn't want to be bothered with the paperwork.

 

There may be a silent majority out there who don't own a gun, but think that they could go and buy one if they ever needed to - and they don't even know that they can't without an FID. Heck, back in 2002 when I first applied for my FID, I didn't even know you needed one. I just thought you went to the gunstore and bought a gun. I wasn't anti-gun. I just didn't really think of guns until my house got broken into.

 

In other words, there may be a majority of people out there who have no problem with gun ownership - they just personally don't own one and don't care to do so - but like the idea of being able to buy one.

 

And here's why I think we can pull this off:

 

Back in 2011, we had a public question for a constitutional amendment which legalized sports betting. The results were 671,797 for to 379,339 against. We have roughly 1.2 million gun owners in this state. The math is on our side for the public question... the real question is whether we can get it on the ballot.

We have roughly 1.2 million gun owners in this state. The math is on our side for the public question... the real question is whether we can get it on the ballot.

Question: How did you arrive at this number?

And let me toss some other stuff out there... We had a big win just a few months ago by squashing the backdoor ammo ban in committee.

 

I'm reminded about that old story of the monkey and the fire hose. I don't know if its apocryphal, but there is a story about research scientists who put a bunch of bananas at the top of a pole and put a bunch of monkeys in a room with the pole. Whenever a monkey tried to climb the pole to get to the bananas, the scientists sprayed him with a fire hose.

 

Pretty soon, the monkeys stopped trying to climb the poll.

 

When scientists introduced a new monkey into the group, and he tried to climb the poll, the other monkeys tried to keep him off the poll.

 

Then scientists started to slowly remove the old monkeys and introduce new ones, and the monkeys still joined together and prevented each other from climbing the poll, even though the total population of monkeys had never been sprayed. The moral of the story? Maybe we've been beaten down so much that we are like those monkeys and afraid to even try. But what do we lose if we do try? A little bit of time?

 

In both these cases, enforcement of civil rights through the Federal courts is the only answer.

 

I am a die-hard Democrat, but I think I'm turning more and more Libertarian every day. Crossing your fingers and hoping that the Federal government will help hasn't done anything for us and our rights since 1966. Heller and McDonald started locally. Sure, we have Muller (or whatever it is called now), but if going through the courts is bottom-up, maybe we also need a top down legislative approach?

Question: How did you arrive at this number?

 

Firearm ownership in NJ is roughly between 12% and 14%.

 

If you take the high end (and I'm willing to err on the high end because there are plenty of guns that have been passed down or stored in dresser drawers since the 1960's), you get:

 

8,700,000 * 0.14 = 1,218,000

 

That's where I get the number.

Firearm ownership in NJ is roughly between 12% and 14%.

 

Does the paperwork filed since 1966 substantiate this number?

Does the paperwork filed since 1966 substantiate this number?

 

I haven't gone through every single record since 1966, but I don't think I need to.

 

Look at this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/health/interactives/guns/ownership.html

 

and this:

 

http://www.usacarry.com/forums/general-firearm-discussion/9841-percent-firearms-ownership-state.html

 

and this:

 

http://www.vpc.org/press/1110gundeath.htm

 

I'm willing to compromise at 12%, but that still puts our numbers at over 1 million.

I haven't gone through every single record since 1966, but I don't think I need to.

 

Look at this:

http://www.washingto.../ownership.html

 

and this:

 

http://www.usacarry....ship-state.html

 

and this:

 

http://www.vpc.org/p...110gundeath.htm

 

I'm willing to compromise at 12%, but that still puts our numbers at over 1 million.

Yes, I'm familiar with all those links. I just think of the social circles I gravitate in and I have dozens of friends who would never have a firearm in their home. And a handful of friends who have collections that reach into the three-digit mark. If that number is valid, then there are a lot of very silent people in this state.

If that number is valid, then there are a lot of very silent people in this state.

 

I think there are a lot of very silent people. They are called hunters.

 

When I think of New Jersey hunters I'm reminded of what the Cyclops said to Odysseus: "Because you have pleased me, I will eat you last." They will roll over on any gun bill as long as it doesn't effect their shotguns. Notice the carve-outs for 12 and 20 gauge ammo, which you can buy without an FID? Notice how you can drive around with an unloaded shotgun with no specific destination. That stuff has to be in the law so that hunters can actually hunt in NJ.

 

Based on qualitative analysis, I've noticed that some people would never own a gun, and some would consider it, but don't want to do the paperwork.

 

It is certainly possible for a minority of people in the state to pass a ballot measure. Heck - our turnout in this state is pathetic, and that could work to our advantage - and how many people even vote on the ballot question? I think that many don't even read it.

 

But we are getting ahead of ourselves - the real trick is doing the math to get this on the ballot in the first place. I think it can be done. I'm going to have to work up an Excel spread sheet with numbers first, though...

In NJ you have the right to bear arms as long as your not a criminal or psycho and pass a background check proving such, so whats the big deal? Dont commit felony crimes, dont be a bipolar nut job and you can buy as many rifles and shotguns as you want...Would you really feel safe that any idiot with NJ residency could walk into wallmart and buy guns? Have you seen most of the animals in this state??

Yes, I'm familiar with all those links. I just think of the social circles I gravitate in and I have dozens of friends who would never have a firearm in their home. And a handful of friends who have collections that reach into the three-digit mark. If that number is valid, then there are a lot of very silent people in this state.

 

There ARE a lot of very silent people in this state. I know a lot of people who own guns who wouldn't tell 99.999% of people about them, and would never bring it up in conversation on a general social level. You wouldn't know unless you were in their home regularly, treated like immediate family, AND guns came up in conversation. Sometimes even then not unless a little drinking had been going on to get them talkative.

 

This state is historically hostile to a lot of categories of people, not just gun owners.

In NJ you have the right to bear arms as long as your not a criminal or psycho and pass a background check proving such, so whats the big deal?

 

You are a little new here, so I can understand your statement. Welcome to the forum. From your previous posts, it also seems like you are in Law Enforcement. Thank you for your service.

 

None of us have the right to keep and bear arms in this state. There is no right to bear arms in our state's constitution. If I had a right to bear arms, I would not have to ask permission from my police department. All guns are banned in New Jersey unless you are exempted from the ban. That little card exempts you from the ban, but that card is issued out by the whim of the municipality or the state police. If you have to ask for something, it is not a right.

 

Maybe I wouldn't feel this way if the FID process was uniformly applied and only took 30 days, but it doesn't. And remember what Martin Luther King said: "A right delayed is a right denied?"

 

The way I see it, that is the one thing holding us back. There is no amendment for a judge to show a lawyer and say: "See, it's right there."

 

Would you really feel safe that any idiot with NJ residency could walk into wallmart and buy guns?

 

Theoretically, any idiot can do that now as long as he has the patients to go through the FID process. But you are using an emotional argument rather than a constitutional one. I'm sure people in Alabama said to their kids: "Would you really feel safe going to school with black children?"

 

The Constitution is not a buffet we don't get to pick and choose the laws we want. I'm sure your job as a police office would be a lot easier if we didn't have the 4th Amendment and you could search anybody you wanted on a whim or a mild suspicion. But I'm not sure anyone would want to give that up, including you.

 

Have you seen most of the animals in this state?

 

No, but I have seen citizens who treasure their freedom.

You are a little new here, so I can understand your statement. Welcome to the forum. From your previous posts, it also seems like you are in Law Enforcement. Thank you for your service.

 

None of us have the right to keep and bear arms in this state. There is no right to bear arms in our state's constitution. If I had a right to bear arms, I would not have to ask permission from my police department. All guns are banned in New Jersey unless you are exempted from the ban. That little card exempts you from the ban, but that card is issued out by the whim of the municipality or the state police. If you have to ask for something, it is not a right.

 

Maybe I wouldn't feel this way if the FID process was uniformly applied and only took 30 days, but it doesn't. And remember what Martin Luther King said: "A right delayed is a right denied?"

 

The way I see it, that is the one thing holding us back. There is no amendment for a judge to show a lawyer and say: "See, it's right there."

 

[/font][/color]

 

Theoretically, any idiot can do that now as long as he has the patients to go through the FID process. But you are using an emotional argument rather than a constitutional one. I'm sure people in Alabama said to their kids: "Would you really feel safe going to school with black children?"

 

The Constitution is not a buffet we don't get to pick and choose the laws we want. I'm sure your job as a police office would be a lot easier if we didn't have the 4th Amendment and you could search anybody you wanted on a whim or a mild suspicion. But I'm not sure anyone would want to give that up, including you.

 

 

 

No, but I have seen citizens who treasure their freedom.

 

The way we were taught in police academy many years ago is that the NJ State constitution or AG guidelines may be more stringent than the US constitution but not more relaxed. So therefore you do have the "right" to bear arms under certain "restrictions" set forth by the more stringent NJ guidelines. The argument could be beaten to death, but a perfect example would be interpreting the US constitution 4th amendment then applying the more "stringent" NJ guidelines towards search and seizure which are some of the most strict in the United States when it comes to determining reasonable suspicion and probable cause for a search.

 

Perhaps my opinion is skewed cause I deal with the worst humanity has to offer on a daily basis, the people that people like you choose not to want to deal with. I can assure you if they relaxed the gun laws in NJ and anyone and everyone was able to purchase firearms, we would have big time issues. Im content jumping through hoops to get my guns knowing that the entire process is enough to deter most people who probably should NOT have access to firearms from obtaining them...

 

It is an argument one could make for both sides, but I am sure we will agree that the handgun and rifle restrictions that they place in NJ are silly...You can only buy one handgun per permit, but you can buy as many high power rifles and shotguns as you want and they aren't registered by the NJSP.

Nice post, mcbethr

 

While I certainly can understand your position, Jules, (my father being a NYC police officer for more than 30 years) any "animal" in this state that wants a gun gets one. They just don't go through the trouble citizens do to obtain one lawfully. If we completely banned private gun ownership in NJ, does anyone really think that gun crime would stop? Of course not. Even if all the "loopholes" that the anti's crow about were closed, bad guys would still get their guns.

 

I don't think anyone on this forum is in favor of "anyone" being able to obtain a gun. The NICS check is certainly reasonable when buying a gun.

I think there are a lot of very silent people. They are called hunters.

 

When I think of New Jersey hunters I'm reminded of what the Cyclops said to Odysseus: "Because you have pleased me, I will eat you last." They will roll over on any gun bill as long as it doesn't effect their shotguns. Notice the carve-outs for 12 and 20 gauge ammo, which you can buy without an FID? Notice how you can drive around with an unloaded shotgun with no specific destination. That stuff has to be in the law so that hunters can actually hunt in NJ.

 

Based on qualitative analysis, I've noticed that some people would never own a gun, and some would consider it, but don't want to do the paperwork.

 

It is certainly possible for a minority of people in the state to pass a ballot measure. Heck - our turnout in this state is pathetic, and that could work to our advantage - and how many people even vote on the ballot question? I think that many don't even read it.

 

But we are getting ahead of ourselves - the real trick is doing the math to get this on the ballot in the first place. I think it can be done. I'm going to have to work up an Excel spread sheet with numbers first, though...

I'm a hunter. Have been for for 46 years now. Last I checked if I buy 12 ga. slugs with a big dimple in the nose of the Forster slug or sabots with a hollowpoint those cheesy local retail stores ask me for my FID card. I competed in Bullseye competition for a dozen years shooting in both NJ & NY state. And I am a certified NRA Rifle Instructor who taught Boy Scouts for a number of years until they closed the town ranges up by me. (Lead bans and new town ordinances negated anyone under the age of 18 entering.) I wouldn't bash the hunters. They are not the entire problem. Tell them they can't hunt deer or bear and they become real vocal though. But their outlets represent big income for all associated in the State AND represent a solution to a management problem the State can't handle on their own. They are the only and largest VISIBLE group in numbers that tote firearms around. They should be an ally, but at times they are not.

 

And I agree with Raz-O, there are a lot of silent people. I have a number of friends who are pharmacists, doctors, dentists, and town councilmen who would never let word leak that they are firearm owners for fear their standing in the community and/or their businesses would be effected. (None of them are hunters, but they agree that others have the right to hunt.) Two of them happily trudge up to NH each year to take a course at Sigarms and one is on a first name speaking basis with Mr. Ayoob. Yet they all are silent. Stealth-shooters?

Nice post, mcbethr

 

While I certainly can understand your position, Jules, (my father being a NYC police officer for more than 30 years) any "animal" in this state that wants a gun gets one. They just don't go through the trouble citizens do to obtain one lawfully. If we completely banned private gun ownership in NJ, does anyone really think that gun crime would stop? Of course not. Even if all the "loopholes" that the anti's crow about were closed, bad guys would still get their guns.

 

I don't think anyone on this forum is in favor of "anyone" being able to obtain a gun. The NICS check is certainly reasonable when buying a gun.

 

Oh I 100% agree with you on that. Look at Mexico, gun ownership is completely illegal for citizens, yet they have some of the worst gun violence in the world. I do however understand the state's position on wanting to limit or keep track of gun ownership. NJ is a fairly densely populated state.

Oh I 100% agree with you on that. Look at Mexico, gun ownership is completely illegal for citizens, yet they have some of the worst gun violence in the world. I do however understand the state's position on wanting to limit or keep track of gun ownership. NJ is a fairly densely populated state.

Private gun ownership is not illegal in Mexico. It is simply heavily restricted and run by the Mexican government (hmm, has a familiar ring to it.) You can buy firearms legally in only one location, Mexico City, from the Mexican military.

http://www.azcentral...nstore0401.html

Back to the original question. How do we get RKBA NJ amendment on the ballot?

I do however understand the state's position on wanting to limit or keep track of gun ownership.

 

There used to be some German fellas who started doing the same thing. Turned pretty ugly, especially if you were Jewish.

 

I do admit before I got into shooting I never saw a problem to gun registration. I mean afterall if the people aren't using the guns to do bad things who cares if the govt has a log of what we have and what our addresses are. Then I did some more reading about history. It really opened my eyes to some things. I now oppose mandatory gun registration.

Jules -- I fully support background checks, as I believe most gun owners do. I also support some training requirements and permitting for concealed carry, which some but not all on this forum agree with. Problem is, the laws in the state go way beyond background checks for purchase of a firearm and no one, no matter how well trained or responsible, can obtain a carry permit (other than retired LEO and a few connected politicians and judges). What possible benefit is there to requiring someone to go down to the PD to drop off an application (which usually can only be done during very limited hours), get fingerprinted, wait anywhere from 6 weeks to a year despite the 30 day requirement in the statute, etc., etc. etc?

 

How can you, as a police officer, support a system that wastes countless precious police man hours on pointless and redundant paperwork? Why isn't the NICS check good enough or at least a system where you get one permit, one time, within 30 days, and don't need to repeatedly go back for pistol permits? If you object to the possibility of untrained people carrying in public, what would be the problem with allowing anyone who 1) passes a background and mental health check and 2) passes the same qualification course as retired LEO to carry? Curious as to your answers to those questions.

 

 

and this:

 

http://www.vpc.org/p...110gundeath.htm

 

 

 

seriously? a link to the VPC? Might as well of asked the landscapers pool cleaner...

In NJ you have the right to bear arms as long as your not a criminal or psycho and pass a background check proving such, so whats the big deal? Dont commit felony crimes, dont be a bipolar nut job and you can buy as many rifles and shotguns as you want...Would you really feel safe that any idiot with NJ residency could walk into wallmart and buy guns? Have you seen most of the animals in this state??

 

Haha, for a cop, you're pretty naive. Pot, Heroine, cocaine, and extasy are all illegal, but people get their hands on that stuff all the time.

 

Also, it's sort of troubling that you would call the people you're supposed to serve and protect "animals". Furthermore the issue is that the state makes it a hurdle to exercise your rights, and does a fantastic job pissing away money while they do it. You do realize that the FID system is paper-based, and that our tax dollars are "at work" to run these background checks. Of course, having background checks is a good idea. Except that your FID background check is only up to date at the point at which the card is issued. There already is a federal system in place called NICS, which runs an instant, up-to-date background check at the time of purchase, which renders the FID system useless, as we already have a more up-to-date system that is cheaper, more efficient, and doesn't obstruct the rights of the individual.

 

Granted, you may be biased because, as a police officer, the FID system provides employment to other police. However, I would rather have those police doing things like going after the person who broke into my house who was never caught, or stopping the people who have been breaking into cars, or otherwise getting illegal guns, those which are purchased by felons on the very real black market, off the street.

Back to the original question. How do we get RKBA NJ amendment on the ballot?

 

Theoretically easy. We get an Assemblyman or Senator to propose one and then they vote on it. A proposed amendment can be passed by simple majority in two separate legislative sessions, or by a 60% supermajority vote of one session. Then it's on the ballot for the people to propose.

 

There are three balot measures that could be up for voting in 2012.

 

One is a Judaical Pay referendum.

The other changes laws on bail.

The third is a veto referendum on gay marriage.

seriously? a link to the VPC? Might as well of asked the landscapers pool cleaner...

 

Well, their numbers were within a few percentage points of the other numbers. So I'm inclined to believe that it is about right, although I'm willing to go with 14% as my baseline since I think ownership is trending up in general.

 

I suppose we could commission a telephone poll to get better numbers, but that would take at least $1,500 and I would need to clear it with my wife.

The " animals" he is referring to are the ones that we must protect the general public from. We keep the sheep safe from the wolves. I also agree that there are people who probably people who can get firearms that still shouldn't have them but that is not my place to decide that. I will also agree that the system is flawed. The NICS should be enough if the initial check for the FID is stringent enough. One every thirty doesn't do anything but hurt the economy. Dealers should be responsible for permits if permits are required on handguns. That keeps local towns and the staties from needless extra work and put on the streets where we belong.