My friend just sent an email regarding the email he got from Assemblyman Charles Mainor.

 

This is what he wrote him and his response to my friend. I am posting this so people can comment.

 

"I understand the meeting in Trenton went badly. However, I had written to the committee, using some points of law, and how those points apply to the concerns of a free people.

 

I received an e-mail from one of the committee members asking that I call him so that we can discuss the issues. He is somewhat concerned that he is overlooking something since he got nothing at all cogent from those who attended the meeting, and that he is certainly jaded by the Sandy Hook incident.

 

Anyone care to lend their 2 cents before I go into this. If you do comment, please take into account what I wrote to the committee;

"The government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men."

 

Hysteria, statistics, and certain arguments that are indefensible in law are not going to help. The 2nd Amendment is not an argument for the individuals RKBA. It is a collective right, which encompasses the whole body of the people, but it is also a mandate to which the government has violated the rule of law based on Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15&16.

 

I would appreciate cogent arguments made in law, and how failing to address the law, the assembly violates their oath's of office."

 

Thank you,

Nick

I talked to a police officer that handles the FID cards in 1 town , and I asked him how he feels about the 5 year renewal . He said he would be screwed !

And also said " They need to leave the law abiding people alone" ( from a cop )

 

They need to understand when we do the FID cards and pistol permits We are the good people the bad guys wont do it .

 

So lets make the laws stronger for the bad guys .

Why is this guy now reaching out to firearms owners as if he wants to be friends? I smell some sort of ploy to soften people up. Talk to him but do not give an inch.

 

As for myself I am taking a back seat to contacting him and perhaps talking. I lived in a communist country and had zero rights. So when my rights are threatend I tend to get very defensive and sometimes say the wrong things.

I talked to a police officer that handles the FID cards in 1 town , and I asked him how he feels about the 5 year renewal . He said he would be screwed !

And also said " They need to leave the law abiding people alone" ( from a cop )

 

 

I don't imagine any police department or township that would be happy with this from a manpower and cost perspective. It's more work for them and more cost. Sure, they'd pass some of the cost down to us but you're still taking away an officer's time from other things. That is one of the things we need to hammer away at. They may not care about the rights issue or even the safety one but when it comes to dollars and cents that's when people pay attention.

In the end, one way or another, gun owners will end up paying for the cost of this. The State is strapped for cash and will only be too eager to pass these expenses on to us

one question I didnt persue with Mr Mainor was that if these measures were understood by him, and presumably others on the committee, to ultimately not be effective in stopping the criminals from doing these unthinkable crimes, then why the rush in ramming them thru...........unless they were just trying to sneak it all past the voters......which is the only thing that makes sense.

 

If they were ramming thru a bill to put an armed cop in every school, do they think anyone would seek to delay them on something that would obviously work?

 

hope that helps

Eff him, he's just trying to salvage something out of his mistake. Remember he wanted the vote to go thru WITHOUT any testimony from all the people that came down there.

His and the other libs on that panel were made up from the beginning. The only talking to I want to do with him to tell him not to let the door hit him on his big booty fan on the way out. No more talk, they are the ENEMY, no compromise, no surrender. We take back the state starting NOW!

I think this idiot was reprimanded by his superiors and trying to make us make the mistake in a new open discussion which I feel will be irrelevant, I'm betting on what CC common sense policy will partake . I think he will veto all or most of those nonsense bill issued by those idiots.

I talked to a police officer that handles the FID cards in 1 town , and I asked him how he feels about the 5 year renewal . He said he would be screwed !

My PD said the same thing. He actually thinks it won't pass, because the NJSP will school Christie on the complete unworkability of it. Only concern is that they'll water it down. Right now, it's not a renewal. It's a full reapplication. They might just make it that you have to pay a fee, like at the DMV.

 

And then the fee will go up. And up. And up.

Why is this guy now reaching out to firearms owners as if he wants to be friends? I smell some sort of ploy to soften people up. Talk to him but do not give an inch.

 

As for myself I am taking a back seat to contacting him and perhaps talking. I lived in a communist country and had zero rights. So when my rights are threatend I tend to get very defensive and sometimes say the wrong things.

Don't talk to him in private, where any idiocy will go unseen by anyone but you. Talk to him in public, where he can make a fool of himself.

one question I didnt persue with Mr Mainor was that if these measures were understood by him, and presumably others on the committee, to ultimately not be effective in stopping the criminals from doing these unthinkable crimes, then why the rush in ramming them thru...........unless they were just trying to sneak it all past the voters......which is the only thing that makes sense.

 

If they were ramming thru a bill to put an armed cop in every school, do they think anyone would seek to delay them on something that would obviously work?

 

hope that helps

They're not trying to "sneak it past the voters." They're trying to 1) fully capitalize on the emotions from Sandy Hook. The longer they wait, the greater the risk of legislators coming to their senses. 2) To do it while they will still be portrayed as heros, protecting the children. If it happens a year from now, it will get much less attention.

 

On a less cynical note, I think they truly believe that their constituents "want more gun control." What they don't understand is that when they say "more gun control," it goes without saying that it's "more *effective* gun control." At the SAFE hearing, no one, even the liberals, liked these bills. That's what these guys need to hear. They may get 15 minutes in the sun, until we start educating the public on how ineffectual these bill are, and then people will get pissed at them for not having done anything real.

I think this idiot was reprimanded by his superiors and trying to make us make the mistake in a new open discussion which I feel will be irrelevant, I'm betting on what CC common sense policy will partake . I think he will veto all or most of those nonsense bill issued by those idiots.

Agree. One more reason not to talk to him. It just lets him go back to his superiors and brag what a good job he's doing to "reach out."

 

Instead of trying to work with him, maybe we need to bring out the stick and let it be known that we're going after him and Cryan with every financial resource we've got.

Don't talk to him in private, where any idiocy will go unseen by anyone but you. Talk to him in public, where he can make a fool of himself.

 

Quite the opposite. Talk to him in private, where he is more inclined to say salacious things. Just record it.

 

None of them are going to let their guard down at some public event or hearing. That's not where you will get them

My friend just sent an email regarding the email he got from Assemblyman Charles Mainor.

 

This is what he wrote him and his response to my friend. I am posting this so people can comment.

 

"I understand the meeting in Trenton went badly. However, I had written to the committee, using some points of law, and how those points apply to the concerns of a free people.

 

I received an e-mail from one of the committee members asking that I call him so that we can discuss the issues. He is somewhat concerned that he is overlooking something since he got nothing at all cogent from those who attended the meeting, and that he is certainly jaded by the Sandy Hook incident.

 

Anyone care to lend their 2 cents before I go into this. If you do comment, please take into account what I wrote to the committee;

"The government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men."

 

Hysteria, statistics, and certain arguments that are indefensible in law are not going to help. The 2nd Amendment is not an argument for the individuals RKBA. It is a collective right, which encompasses the whole body of the people, but it is also a mandate to which the government has violated the rule of law based on Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15&16.

 

I would appreciate cogent arguments made in law, and how failing to address the law, the assembly violates their oath's of office."

 

Thank you,

Nick

 

Who said this? Your friend or Mainor? Somebody needs to be schooled on the recent SCOTUS rulings.

Quite the opposite. Talk to him in private, where he is more inclined to say salacious things. Just record it.

 

None of them are going to let their guard down at some public event or hearing. That's not where you will get them

Does anyone know the best way to "wear a wire?"

Frankly, I'd be nervous to do it with an armed, somewhat erratic detective.

Why wear a wire? Just shove a digital recorder in your coat pocket. No law against having one.

 

Does anyone know the best way to "wear a wire?"

Frankly, I'd be nervous to do it with an armed, somewhat erratic detective.

 

 

Sent from John's iPad 2 via Tapatalk HD

Typos courtesy Apple...

Why wear a wire? Just shove a digital recorder in your coat pocket. No law against having one.

 

 

 

 

Sent from John's iPad 2 via Tapatalk HD

Typos courtesy Apple...

 

Exactly, this is nothing more than having a conversation with someone ego is supposed to represent YOU. He is a public servant. It may be best to notify him when you turn on the recorder, that he it's being recorded. Although, I believe you are covered under the patriot act as far as recording without consent.

Don't tell him jack.... Just kick it and drill away...

 

 

Exactly, this is nothing more than having a conversation with someone ego is supposed to represent YOU. He is a public servant. It may be best to notify him when you turn on the recorder, that he it's being recorded. Although, I believe you are covered under the patriot act as far as recording without consent.

 

 

Sent from John's iPad 2 via Tapatalk HD

Typos courtesy Apple...

Maybe you should suggest that he meet with the ANJRPC members and NJ2AS.

Does anyone know the best way to "wear a wire?"

 

Not discussing it on a public forum would be a good start... If you carry a smartphone, you may be able to find an app that can do this.

 

 

It's not a problem...

 

New Jersey Recording Law

 

Note: This page covers information specific to New Jersey. For general information concerning the use of recording devices see the Recording Phone Calls, Conversations, Meetings and Hearings section of this guide.

New Jersey Wiretapping Law

 

New Jersey's wiretapping law is a "one-party consent" law. New Jersey makes it a crime to intercept or record an in-person or telephone conversation unless one party to the conversation consents. N.J. Stat. §§ 2A:156A-3, -4. (link is to the entire code; you need to click through to Title 2A, Article 156A, and then locate the specific provisions). Thus, if you operate in New Jersey, you may record a conversation or phone call if you are a party to the conversation or you get permission from one party to the conversation in advance. That said, if you intend to record conversations involving people located in more than one state, you should play it safe and get the consent of all parties.

In addition to subjecting you to criminal prosecution, violating the New Jersey wiretapping law can expose you to a civil lawsuit for damages by an injured party.

Consult the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press's Can We Tape?: New Jersey for more information on New Jersey wiretapping law.

will a pocket recorder pick up a conversation? Think you need something closer to the source.

I think you're right. Don't discuss on public forum. Does someone know a lot about this subject, and maybe people meeting with him can discuss over PM?

Can't make it any clearer than the law I posted. You are part of the conversation. It's ok. Further more, a pocket recorder will be fine. I used them in investigations and never had a problem with the audio... Legal or not, IF you tell him you are recording him, he will balk from answers you want to hear.

IF you tell him you are recording him, he will balk from answers you want to hear.

 

He already did. Again, this is a well known public forum and chances are both parties are following this discussion.

Maybe you should suggest that he meet with the ANJRPC members and NJ2AS.

 

^^ This ^^

 

Whether he is sincere or not when he reaches out to individuals, I can see it as an opportunity.. If an representative of ANJRPC/NJ2AS sent something along the lines of "We understand you have been reaching out to some of our members since the meeting last week. We applaud your willingness to become better educated on the matter and would like to set up a meeting between our two groups."

 

If he is sincere then perhaps the organizations can help sway him more then the individuals. If he is not, then the organizations can spin the PR to a wider audience then the individuals could.

So what... everyone is using an alias here. There are several maybe more that have be told they could have a personal chat. As many that may talk with him, I doubt they'd know who is or isn't. It may not even matter at all and will he would be totally on the defensive and not say anything we want to hear. So it's moot. Just do it, chat and see what turns out. He'd be perfectly within his rights.

 

He already did. Again, this is a well known public forum and chances are both parties are following this discussion.