Currently Browsing: Politics
Mar 11, 2014
Yeah, I pretty much feel the same way:
I want to like Rand Paul but he just makes me nervous. It’s hard to shake the feeling that if you just scratch the surface enough his dad’s craziness will be there.
Absent Paul, Bitter and I kind of like Scott Walker, but I have no idea whether he’d be a strong candidate for President. But I’m willing give either Paul or Walker real consideration. Most of the candidates I like never make it all the way to Pennsylvania anyway.
Mar 10, 2014
GUN BAN / MAG BAN
& TRANSPORTATION BILL
AT ASSEMBLY HEARING THURSDAY
Hearing Time Changed to 1:00 p.m.
Gun Owners and Sportsmen Need to Pour it On
Between Now and Thursday!
The rescheduled hearing of the Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee that was cancelled due to winter storm Titan will take place on Thursday, March 13. The hearing time has been changed to 1:00 p.m. Please plan to attend and testify in person if you are able.
The hearing is scheduled to take place in the State House Annex, 125 West State Street, Trenton, New Jersey 08608, in
committee room 12 on the 4th floor. The committee room is subject to change without notice (please inquire when you arrive).
Between now and Thursday, it is extremely important that gun owners sustain their efforts to urge members of the committee to oppose A2006 (gun ban / magazine ban), and to amend A2777 (transportation of firearms) to make a one-word amendment to restore judicial discretion on reasonable deviations in transport. Contact information for committee members is at the bottom of this alert.
Committee members have already been overwhelmed with calls and correspondence from gun owners over the past two weeks, and that needs to continue throughout this and every upcoming phase in the life of this legislation. Legislators who won’t see the light need to feel the heat. (Note: one legislator, Assemblyman David Rible (R-30), has responded to each of the thousands of gun owners who have contacted him, indicating his opposition to the A2006 gun ban/mag ban. We will have a further update on those who support the Second Amendment after the hearing).
A2006 IS A GUN BAN
Mar 3, 2014
Emily Miller notes they are at it again:
Thus, the experts found that at least 43 common rifles would suddenly be considered a prohibited “assault firearm,” such as the .22 caliber Marlin Model 60, Remington Nylon 66 and Winchester 190.
When New Jersey instituted its original Assault Weapons Ban back in the 90s during the Florio Administration, the Model 60 had a 17 round tube magazine standard. There were tons of these weapons in the hands of New Jersey gun owners, with their owners completely unaware they had an assault rifle that had to be registered. You still hear stories every once in a while of some poor fool getting pinched for having an unregistered early Model 60.
Marlin modified the rifle to only hold 15 rounds, but now it appears all those people who have compliant guns would be forced to register them as assault weapons, which most won’t because they would never imagine they own an “assault firearm” as they are classified in New Jersey Law. This will instantly create more felons, which is probably the idea.
If we can’t get a veto out of Christie for this, he might as well just decide not to run for President right now.
Feb 26, 2014
I’m surprised by how many people think a sellout by Chris Christie is preordained. Remember that he vetoed the worst of the post-Newtown package, including the 50 caliber ban. He did sign a bill regarding the terrorist watch list that turns out can’t be implemented, however. While I don’t exactly trust Christie on the gun issue, it does seem to me that there’s at least reasonable hope that with sufficient pressure from the gun community, you might be able to muster another veto out of him. If Jerry Brown can veto a few gun control bills, so can Chris Christie.
Feb 24, 2014
The Democrats have reached a deal that would reduce from 15 to 10 the number of rounds a magazine may legally hold in New Jersey:
Democratic lawmakers in both house of the legislature have struck a deal that would allow passage of a measure restricting gun owners to a 10-round
magazine, down from the current limit of 15, two sources with knowledge of the
deal said today.
In exchange, the legislature will shepherd through a gun-owner championed bill that would define what are known in the gun world as “reasonable deviations” to the law governing transport of a firearm.
Currently a gun owner may only transport an unloaded, stored weapon straight to the destination, be it on a hunting trip or to a gun range. Under the law, a gun owner may detour from the route only for deviations that are “reasonable.”
So in exchange for something that they should just give us, because it’s a right, you know, they go from 15 to 10? No deal. Kill it with fire. I believe the purpose of this is to tempt Chris Christie to ruin his own national ambitions. The Democrats probably feel they have nothing to lose. If Christie signs the bill, he’ll create the same problems with the base that McCain and Romney had. If he vetoes, Democrats in New Jersey believe gun control wins elections, so they will make an issue out of it in the next Governor’s race. The Dems believe they have everything to gain and Christie everything to lose. But will he be dumb enough to sign it if he wants to run for the GOP nod for 2016?
Feb 18, 2014
It looks like the problem of having anti-gun language tied on to a nullification bill in Missouri may now be resolved with a few phone calls from unhappy voters.
Feb 12, 2014
If you haven’t read Liberal Fascism, I’d highly recommend it. It’s not real fire breathing stuff, but is rather an in-depth exploration of the intellectual roots of modern liberalism. In this article he mentions something on the same topic, in regards to guns:
Consider gun rights. Yes, conservatives believe in second amendment rights because they are in the Constitution. But they also value a culture of self-sufficiency, self-defense and a traditional understanding of individual sovereignty. (Relatedly, I think it’s fair to say that hunting culture is inherently conservative and, very broadly speaking, anathema to much of liberal culture). Liberals dislike gun rights, because they detest gun culture (their Constitutional arguments in this regard have always struck me as nearest-weapon-to-hand debating points and rationalizations given their general disdain for Constitutional literalism in nearly every other regard) and see gun violence as a kind of public health issue, which means the State should have an unlimited license to deal with it. The right of armed self-defense also offends the State’s monopoly on violence, and liberalism is a jealous guardian of State power.
One might wince at the two dimensional political spectrum, but this is quoted somewhat out of context. He goes on to explain why he thinks conservatism is more libertarian leaning than liberalism.
I appreciate well-thought-out philosophical political constructs, but I don’t think real people fall neatly into them in most cases. Most people either don’t put that much thought into their political philosophy, or have strongly held beliefs that move across the spectrum of liberal-conservative-libertarian-authoritarian. There are also many legitimate pragmatists out there, or people like me who value philosophical political constructs, but have a strong pragmatic streak as well.
Feb 12, 2014
I have to agree with Glenn Reynolds that perhaps the greatest “achievement” of this Administration is making crazy conspiracy theories seem less crazy. This begs the question: what the US government needs 600,000 AK-47 magazines for? As Clayton notes, that seems awful excessive if your intention is only to arm Syrian rebels. Clayton speculates that perhaps the goal is to dry up the civilian supply to make them more expensive. Previously I’d say that was tin-foil hat territory, but with this crowd, I’m not so sure.
Feb 3, 2014
Apparently he stands accused of kleptoing himself about $267 bucks worth of shooting supplies from Caleba’s. But get this:
“Carvounis said he was on the governor’s security detail,” Tilden Township Police Chief William J. McEllroy told New Jersey Watchdog. “He said he makes $140,000 a year, and he’s afraid of losing his job.”
140 large a year? I’m in the wrong line of work! I’d say he likely has a compulsion he could use some help with. Apparently he tried to get some “professional courtesy” out of the local constabulary, but to their credit they didn’t take him up on it. I’d be OK with ARDing him if he gets some help with his problem, though.
Feb 3, 2014
I’ll be honest, I’d personally be fine compromise in theory, but I suspect it’s bad politics for the GOP:
“Illegal immigrants, assuming they have lived here for a decent period of time and have not committed a felony, can have amnesty, but they can NEVER be allowed to vote. They can do anything else that is legal, but if they want to vote — or run for office or practice law in our country, as just happened in California — they must return home and go through the normal immigrant application process, however long that may take until they have citizenship.”
I’ve posted on this before. Most of the arguments against this idea were the slippery slope, namely if we give them a limited amnesty now, they’ll just vote in a full one next chance they get. I believe in slippery slopes, and agree it’s no fallacy. Gun control is absolutely a slippery slope. Here’s what I look at:
- Is the interest pushing for half the cake now in hopes of getting the whole cake later. Well, the Democrats certainly want them to have the vote, because they want a more solid majority, but it’s less clear the Hispanic community honestly cares all that much about the vote, and polling also shows they care about border security too. The political elites and activists are likely to keep pushing for the vote, so I think this plays in favor of the slippery slope.
- Does the half cake strengthen our opponents hand any, or make their arguments better? I don’t really think this changes the rhetoric at all. In contrast to say, accepting the NICS system under Brady, which I think weakened our hand in arguing that expansion is a bad idea. I’m not sure this plays as well with the slippery slope. If anything, I think this would weaken their hand to the near future.
- Does the half cake take people out of the issue in terms of fighting further encroachments. Absolutely. I think a lot of people will walk away from the GOP if they push through a half-cake amnesty bill. This would make it much easier for the Democrats to pass the rest of the cake when they get back into power.
So while I think the deal, in theory at least, would be acceptable to me, I think it would only contribute to the further destruction of the GOP at the cost of the Democrats winning several more election cycles. I’m not convinced anyway, that amnesty is the key to winning the latino vote. I think Republicans are pushing for limited amnesty largely because business interests want it, and because they have K street consulting firms whispering in their ear that this will allow them to win the latino vote.