search
top

What’s the Opposite of a Second Amendment Lawsuit?

New Jersey legislators are suing Governor Christie over New Jersey’s loosened concealed carry permit requirements. Note that Christie did not make New Jersey in any way, shape or form shall-issue. He just made it such that someone facing bonafide threats could qualify. That’s more like Maryland’s standard. It’s almost as if they don’t want the peons able to protect themselves at all! From ANJRPC:

“Although 43 states recognize the right to defend yourself with a firearm outside the home, New Jersey remains one of a handful of backward states that apparently prefer their citizens to become victims – except for legislators, who themselves hypocritically enjoy the armed protection of State House security,” said ANJRPC Executive Director Scott Bach.  “Only in the Garden State do lawmakers actively block those facing serious threats from defending themselves. New Jersey’s days denying right to carry to its citizens are numbered.”

Let’s hope they are numbered. Whether the case comes from the Third Circuit or some other, I don’t care.

6 Responses to “What’s the Opposite of a Second Amendment Lawsuit?”

  1. Harry Schell says:

    Liberal bastions in CA are literally “no issue”, absent friends in high places or cubic money.

    Hopefully things get better in NJ.

    “Backward” for these situations, as opposed to “progressive”, is a more accurate summation.

  2. Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

    Certainly would be nice if the courts just did their job.

  3. Ron W says:

    These are slave States! The 1857 SCOTUS Dred Scott decision kept black people as non persons and slaves lest, according to the 2nd Amendment, “they be able to go armed everywhere they went.” The 14th Amendment which, with the 13th Amendment, overturned Dred Scott, to extend Bill of Rights protection to all States. Yet, a few have UNLAWFULLY revert to the days of slavery!

  4. Richard says:

    “states rights” seems to be a popular rallying cry when it works for the crier. When it does not then it seems a little Federal Tyranny is needed.

    Let me talk a bit. I’m a die hard American Liberal. Don’t tell me what Liberals are or what they want. I am one and I know. Keep that BS to yourself.

    I’m a combat veteran, Vietnam, where I was both shot and shot people. I do not own a weapon today. Note I used the term weapon ( firearm is also OK ) and not the goofy term ‘gun’.

    No one want’s to “take your guns away” if you are of sound mind and don’t have a violent criminal background. We don’t want you shooting us though and that’s our beef. We don’t want you to “fear for your life” because we honk a horn at you when you cut us off or play our music too loud. If you’ve got a hard on to shoot someone we don’t want to be that person. That’s where we come from.

    If you want to own an M60 I think that’s OK if I can be certain you won’t wipe out my kids school yard with it. That’s all I care about. You want an M-16..an M4..go for it. But don’t walk around Walmart with it just to get off on spooking people and claim its “your Constitutional right”. The 2nd Amendment doesn’t actually say that but the 21’st says you can buy and drink booze. Yet I’ve seen no one walking around a Walmart with a bottle of Jim Beam talking about the Constitution. Knock that off.

    What “liberal” or “democrat” has proposed legislation to take a lawfully owned weapon away? None. For 8 years you were told “Obama’s going to take your guns away..go buy a stash of guns”. You bought tons of ammunition when Alex Jones told you Obama was “buying up all the ammo”. Now you’ve got a garage full and it’s still on the shelves of every sporting goods store in town. That was Jones, craven politicians and the NRA ( not a Firearms Enthusiasts Organization but a promoter of gun sales ) telling you that. You did it and by golly..Obama’s gone and you still have all your firearms and there’s ammo all over. Obama never voiced a word about taking that away. You ran to the polls to vote for some clown that told you he was going to “protect your gun rights” when they were never threatened. Unfortunately all you got was the rest of his tax cuts for the rich agenda.

    No Liberal wants to take your guns away. We don’t want you to shoot us and we want politicians hustling your votes to stop enacting installation that makes it easier for you to shoot us unjustifiably and walk away. All we want is to know that you are OK to have that weapon. If that’s the case I don’t care if you have to climb over your gun collection to get to the bathroom. Have all you want.

    Our Founders, the guys that wrote the Second Amendment, had one thing they all agreed on. America should be set up so that no faction of it can dictate it’s will over another. If the people of NJ vote to impose the laws they have they should have them. That’s how we do it in America.
    They don’t have to share your values or yield to them if they choose not to. This sentiment is essentially yours in reverse. There is no right and wrong in either. It’s what they want so they should have it.

    No one want’s to “take your guns away”. If you’re a one issue voter you’re just a tool.

    • Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

      Time for a nice fisking…

      No one want’s to “take your guns away” if you are of sound mind and don’t have a violent criminal background.

      Except for all those people who want to take our guns away.

      “If I could’ve gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them — Mr. and Mrs. America turn ’em all in — I would have done it. ” – Senator Diane Feinstein

      That’s just a single person who wants to take our guns away. Anybody talk about assault weapon bans or the “Australian solution” agrees.

      We don’t want you shooting us though and that’s our beef. We don’t want you to “fear for your life” because we honk a horn at you when you cut us off or play our music too loud. If you’ve got a hard on to shoot someone we don’t want to be that person. That’s where we come from.

      Good, because we agree and we don’t want that either. What does that have to do with gun control? Oh you are projecting your fears so you are using excuses for the millions and millions of us who are not like that.

      If you want to own an M60 I think that’s OK if I can be certain you won’t wipe out my kids school yard with it. That’s all I care about.

      Guess what? We agree again! So what are we arguing about?

      What “liberal” or “democrat” has proposed legislation to take a lawfully owned weapon away? None.

      Incorrect. First, seen Feinstein’s quote above. Second, this bill is one of many just proposed:

      “It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a semiautomatic assault weapon.”

      That’s taking away a lawfully owned weapon.

      Third, New York, California, and Connecticut have all passed similar bills.

      Just do some research before spouting off wrong information.

      For 8 years you were told “Obama’s going to take your guns away..go buy a stash of guns”. You bought tons of ammunition when Alex Jones told you Obama was “buying up all the ammo”. Now you’ve got a garage full and it’s still on the shelves of every sporting goods store in town. That was Jones, craven politicians and the NRA ( not a Firearms Enthusiasts Organization but a promoter of gun sales ) telling you that.

      Come on man. We weren’t “told”. We listened to what he and his ilk said. They were going to take it away.

      And FYI, the NRA is a Firearm Enthusiasts Organization. We pay THEM to do our bidding. The promotor of guns sales is the NSSF.

      Again, please do some research.

      You did it and by golly..Obama’s gone and you still have all your firearms and there’s ammo all over.

      Yes we did. You know why? Because we fought him every step of the way.

      Obama never voiced a word about taking that away.

      ” But weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don’t belong on our streets. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced.” – Barack Obama

      Wrong again. He has talked about taking them away.

      You ran to the polls to vote for some clown that told you he was going to “protect your gun rights” when they were never threatened.

      Our gun rights continue to be under assault. Again, please do some research.

      No Liberal wants to take your guns away.

      Proven wrong again and again.

      We don’t want you to shoot us and we want politicians hustling your votes to stop enacting installation that makes it easier for you to shoot us unjustifiably and walk away.

      No legislation has been proposed or enacted to allow unjustifiable shootings occur without punishments. Only legislation that protects justifiable shooters from undue punishment.

      Our Founders, the guys that wrote the Second Amendment, had one thing they all agreed on. America should be set up so that no faction of it can dictate it’s will over another. If the people of NJ vote to impose the laws they have they should have them. That’s how we do it in America.

      And they also set it up so that fundamental rights cannot be violated by the federal government. And then the people decided that the states cannot also violate those fundamental rights, so they passed a constitutional amendment saying so.

      If the people of NJ vote to impose laws affect fundamental rights, they need to be overturned.

      They don’t have to share your values or yield to them if they choose not to. This sentiment is essentially yours in reverse. There is no right and wrong in either. It’s what they want so they should have it.

      Correct but on the issue of fundamental rights NJ must yield.

      No one want’s to “take your guns away”.

      Proven wrong again and again.

    • Sebastian says:

      Bloomberg paying by the word these days? Love the veteran touch. Priceless.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

top