http://www.njsp.org/...2011/index.html

 

Found some good info there.

 

Number of murders in NJ in 2011 by:

 

rifle: 1

Shotgun: 5

Cutting instument: 51

Handgun: 264

 

Plenty more goodies in there. I will update after I have a chance to go through it all.

 

I'd be wary of citing this since it will simply divert their attention to banning handguns.

 

Remember that the FBI stats show a decrease in ALL gun related murders from 2006 to 2010 of 14%. And we know that firearm sales are rising. I'd equate the two and mention that if this were any other "pblic health" issue (heart attacks, say), this decrease would be seen as a HUGE victory.

 

best

G

I agree

I'd be wary of citing this since it will simply divert their attention to banning handguns.

 

I agree, although a ban on handguns is patently illegal as per McDonald and Heller.

 

The committee started zoning out as soon as people started preaching about 2A. It even happened to me after the first few sentences. When I said "I will not be scapegoated for the actions of a madman two states away," I saw the committee collectively zone out. When I told them that I had an specific idea to help solve out problems that's when they became engaged.

 

If we go there with concrete actions that the committee can recommend then they will listen. If we go and lecture them about 2A issues, they won't.

I'd be wary of citing this since it will simply divert their attention to banning handguns.

 

Remember that the FBI stats show a decrease in ALL gun related murders from 2006 to 2010 of 14%. And we know that firearm sales are rising. I'd equate the two and mention that if this were any other "pblic health" issue (heart attacks, say), this decrease would be seen as a HUGE victory.

 

best

G

 

At which time they'd say, " Thanks, our super strict laws here in NJ had everything to do with the lower gun crime and if we enact more we can reduce it further!" Politicians love to spin things.

 

As Mcbethr and others have said, these guys aren't there to be lectured on the 2nd amendment and they'll just zone out if that's what your plan is. They're interested in ideas that people will support, whether pro or anti and that's probably the best way to approach it.

The proposed 5 round magazine limit is a ban on semi-automatic handguns.

 

 

At which time they'd say, " Thanks, our super strict laws here in NJ had everything to do with the lower gun crime and if we enact more we can reduce it further!" Politicians love to spin things.

 

I'm still attempting to locate statistics for gang murders and percentage of illegally possessed firearms used in 2011. I'm assuming it's somewhere around 98-99.99% illegal firearms. Basically I will show how it's a gang problem, and that passing further legislation will achieve absolutely nothing aside from punishing those that actually follow the law.

here's Blue Jersey's take on the whole thing........

 

http://www.bluejersey.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=22506

They speak the language of emotions, we try to use facts, its oil and water folks, your common sense falls on deaf ears, they love big, controlling government, where do you think that leaves you? A cardboard cut out of an assault weapon held over your head with you proclaiming "from my cold dead hands!" Would have got their attention and spoke theirlanguage, and it would take less than three minutes. Yes the media would use it, who cares? I get the kiss their ass suggestions, hell we could also be on our knees when giving our comments, that would show even more respect to those who show no respect for our rights. Either we shake them up or we do the lemming march to the sea.

I've written 2 sets of remarks and am not sure, after reading these threads, that I want to present either of them. I'm afraid of doing more harm than good.

 

Crud.

here's Blue Jersey's take on the whole thing........

 

http://www.bluejerse...o?diaryId=22506

 

 

In addition to Senator Norcross, Assemblyman Angel Fuentes (D-Camden) and Assemblywoman Pamela Lampitt (D-Cherry Hill) addressed the group. While politicians often talk in platitudes, Lampitt's remarks made the most sense - she called for a holistic approach that includes not only an examination of gun laws, but restoring funding for mental health programs that have been victims of the governor's veto pen.

 

Throwing money at a problem makes politicians feel good but it almost never solves any problems. There needs to be the will to stop criminals and the mentally ill who are a danger to others as well as themselves. Unfortunately, there isn't.

 

 

Most are sane and rational, but they unfortunately have bought into the NRA and gun manufacturers' propaganda. Some, like John Snively, blame video games - ignoring the fact that countries like Japan which have as many if not more gamers, have significantly lower gun crime.

 

 

That's just silly. Japan is an island with an unusually homogeneous population and has few if any privately owned guns, so it has virtually NO gun crime. It has a a homicide rate of 0.4/100,000 versus 4.8/100,000 in the US. HOWEVER, Japan also has an annual suicide rate of 21.9/100,000 versus 12.0/100,000 in the US.

 

Japan's intentional death rate (homicide + suicide) is 33% higher than the US, which would argue against the way they do things being exemplary.

here's Blue Jersey's take on the whole thing........ http://www.bluejersey.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=22506

 

While not surprising, it is pretty nauseating..

Here is the view from NJ.com

 

http://www.nj.com/camden/index.ssf/2013/02/nj_safe_task_force_holds_first.html

The Blue NJ article is pretty much BS. There were 2 people that were pro gun control out of the 100 or so people, 6-1 is a complete fabrication. I also didn't hear much in the way of regurgitated NRA talking points, more common sense and facts and personal experience than NRA talking points.

Thats why I said to tape yourselves and put it on youtube otherwise the only story people who weren't there get is that sort of liberal tripe.

The guy's email address is: [email protected]

 

Maybe we can set him straight? Or hell, invite him shooting.

The guy's email address is: [email protected]

 

Maybe we can set him straight? Or hell, invite him shooting.

 

don't waste your time....

 

.....read his blog....you'll understand.....

 

http://www.deciminyan.org/

Please also check my info from attending:

 

http://njgunforums.c...-tuesday-night/

 

Ignore the Blue Jersey trash! It wasn't how the meeting went down as others have said. They are obviously aggitated because it didn't fall in line like they hoped. They wanted something more like went down in Trenton the other week. Please, anyone attending the next meetings read this great thread, jump over to mine, jump over to the one in the Bucket and go prepared.

don't waste your time....

 

.....read his blog....you'll understand.....

 

http://www.deciminyan.org/

 

I need a shower.

Not being able to make it to those meetings myself (and 2nd Amendment argument aside).

 

I would have liked someone to have stated that one of the reasons we are against NEW firearms laws is because of the existing laws. NJ firearms laws are purposefully vague and a person is deemed guilty by default unless they meet an exemption. CCW is next to impossible to obtain, transporting a firearm is so ambiguous that we cover the topic day in and day out on the forums. Even LEO's have differing views. One mis-interpretation by a well meaning citizen could turn them into a felon, this is not right. Current laws need to be corrected before we'll even consider listening to new ones.

So I just came back from the Brooksdale meeting. I think there where 80-100 people there, and I'm guessing about 40 spoke.

 

Of the 40 speakers, 1 was a school administrator to threw in it a "oh yeah and we oppose assault weapons and hi-cap mags", 1 was a pastor from Asbury Park complaining about gun fire in his town from "50 caliber pistol machines, grenades and AK-47s" although he wasn't explicitly anti-gun, one was from the Million Mom March and while everyone knew she was anti gun she only spent about 1/3 of her time doing her guns are evil dance, and one was a complete kook speaking about Gandi, Karma and re-incarnation.

 

Everyone else was either pro-gun or didn't cover that at all. There where some very heartfelt statements from a couple of parents of people with mental problems, and a one from an actual person with mental issues.

 

Here is my take on the pro-gun statements made:

 

1) Some people booed the MMM lady. That was really uncalled for and in poor taste and makes us all look bad. Don't do that crap.

2) The panel seemed to listen a lot more carefully when women were speaking.

3) Some pro-gun people brought up some very bad ideas. One is the increase penalty for gun crimes which sounds good in theory until you remember that gun owners in NJ are operating at their own peril and damn near everything is a crime. The other bad one was suggesting more gun buy backs for stolen guns which to me sounds like an easy way for a criminal to get rid of a hot gun with no questions asked and get some extra cash for it.

4) In my opinion, the people that came across least effectively where the "shall not be infringed" folks.

4) In my opinion, the people that came across least effectively where the "shall not be infringed" folks.

 

people in NJ need to realize that NJ is a constitution free zone.....the powers that be firmly believe that the government 'grants' rights, not 'recognizes' rights.....so when talking about one's 'God given rights', you naturallty sound like a freak.......

2) The panel seemed to listen a lot more carefully when women were speaking.

 

+1 It was the exact same last night in Camden!

 

4) In my opinion, the people that came across least effectively where the "shall not be infringed" folks.

 

+1 Committee would check out each time that was cited, and there is a good reason. This won't sound popular, and I personally do not agree with it, but we've already, historically, allowed it to be "infringed" when the citizens of the US accepted the Supreme Court's decision allowing "regulation" of firearms by States. That's standing precedent.

I don't think I saw this in the forum, but from an email I received from the NRA-ILA it says that if you can't make it to any of the 3 meetings, you can email your comments to [email protected].

Not being able to make it to those meetings myself (and 2nd Amendment argument aside).

 

I would have liked someone to have stated that one of the reasons we are against NEW firearms laws is because of the existing laws. NJ firearms laws are purposefully vague and a person is deemed guilty by default unless they meet an exemption. CCW is next to impossible to obtain, transporting a firearm is so ambiguous that we cover the topic day in and day out on the forums. Even LEO's have differing views. One mis-interpretation by a well meaning citizen could turn them into a felon, this is not right. Current laws need to be corrected before we'll even consider listening to new ones.

 

This was brought up, in large part, by one of the more polished pro-gun speakers in Camden last night.

This was brought up, in large part, by one of the more polished pro-gun speakers in Camden last night.

 

Good to know. Thanks.

I hope the panel took it into consideration.

[/size]

 

Yeah, it needed to be said...

 

 

Regarding this, someone should say "Can you imagine the outrage if there was a panel on diversity made up of all white guys? This is unacceptable."

I don't think I saw this in the forum, but from an email I received from the NRA-ILA it says that if you can't make it to any of the 3 meetings, you can email your comments to [email protected].

 

We have it posted, but no harm in repeating! Those who spoke and want to say more than alloted time allowed, write them to do so! I sent in just a few moments ago the full breadth of what I would have liked to say versus what i could cover.

Argh, it didn't grab the part above about asking if the panel had any firearms experience.

2) The panel seemed to listen a lot more carefully when women were speaking.

Damn-wish I could attend one of these, and have my wife speak. She was indifferent to my ownership of firearms until recently. Now she's applying for her FID, a P2P, and has taken up the cause to try and educate as many of the ignorant non-gun owners as possible. She too had no idea the concept of what made up an "assault weapon" until I explained it to her, and now she's wildly dismayed she can't own one. Being in healthcare, she's seen firsthand the ruin that is our mental health care system.

But I am going to Trenton on Friday, snow or not, and bringing her Dad with me.

1) Some people booed the MMM lady. That was really uncalled for and in poor taste and makes us all look bad. Don't do that crap.

2) The panel seemed to listen a lot more carefully when women were speaking.

3) Some pro-gun people brought up some very bad ideas. One is the increase penalty for gun crimes which sounds good in theory until you remember that gun owners in NJ are operating at their own peril and damn near everything is a crime. The other bad one was suggesting more gun buy backs for stolen guns which to me sounds like an easy way for a criminal to get rid of a hot gun with no questions asked and get some extra cash for it.

4) In my opinion, the people that came across least effectively where the "shall not be infringed" folks.

I was at the meeting with Vlad and he's pretty much got this spot on. I actually followed the woman into the hall, introduced myself, and told her that while I disagree with her completely, I was sorry that she was heckled. The reporter from News 12 saw and heard this and followed me back into the meeting and asked if I was willing to be interviewed. I declined.

 

Another notable change is that we were limited to 2 minutes, not 3.

I was at the meeting with Vlad and he's pretty much got this spot on. I actually followed the woman into the hall, introduced myself, and told her that while I disagree with her completely, I was sorry that she was heckled. The reporter from News 12 saw and heard this and followed me back into the meeting and asked if I was willing to be interviewed. I declined.

 

Another notable change is that we were limited to 2 minutes, not 3.

 

Any reason you declined? I feel like you being civil to an Anti, and all that would really have been good for Gun-rights. Not to mention that you could have been (likely the only) pro-2A person the news would have aired.

Any reason you declined? I feel like you being civil to an Anti, and all that would really have been good for Gun-rights. Not to mention that you could have been (likely the only) pro-2A person the news would have aired.

The truth told I was concerned about being ambushed and the last thing any of us need would be for me to say the wrong thing and have it plastered all over Channel 12.