Opinion: Governor Christie was right to veto gun magazine bill

By Scott St. Clair

Scott St. Clair1Gov. Christie was absolutely correct in vetoing the Legislature’s magazine-limit bill, despite Sandy Hook-parent Hugo Rojas’ protestations to the contrary. The bill was not only trivial, but it was cynical to boot since it did nothing but regurgitate the long-standing agenda of gun control advocates in New Jersey without addressing what really was at the heart of the Newtown, CT tragedy: defenseless children and teachers left at the mercy of a deranged individual who should have been locked up.

If you want to solve problems, the first key is correctly identifying them, not trotting out tired, politically correct memes that pander to sentimentality. It’s obvious that a big problem at Sandy Hook – a problem lawmakers in New Jersey ignore and perpetuate today – is defenseless schools.

Another problem is the hands-off attitude taken by local and state officials and law enforcement against mentally ill people who, like Adam Lanza, have a long, documented and scary track record of violent behavior yet are allowed to walk the streets.

Ignoring the real problems in favor of political pandering is what the Legislature did with the magazine-limit bill. Gov. Christie was right to veto it, and Mr. Rojas’ is mistaken in his criticism.


Posted: July 14th, 2014 | Author: | Filed under: Gun Control, Gun Rights, Guns, Opinion, Sandy Hook Elementary School | Tags: , , , , , , , | 20 Comments »

20 Comments on “Opinion: Governor Christie was right to veto gun magazine bill”

  1. Jeff said at 1:10 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Thank you! I am sure someone will call you names, but I am extremely please someone else saw right through the idiocy of the bill. This is nothing more pathetic as the assault weapons ban that’s being started in Illinois after the July 4th shootings all over Chicago. These shootings were all handguns and still no one can accurately define if they were even legally owned or not. .. No life is worthless, but we can not allow that mentality to take away intimate objects from law abiding citizens of the USA in the name of saving lives when its not the underlying cause.

  2. Kathy Baratta said at 2:25 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Only someone incapable of critical thinking would make this an either or debate.

    The fact is we need mental health reform AND no one needs an assault rifle unless they are wearing a military uniform because, you know, they’re in the military.

    BTW, a diaphragm is an intimate object. A gun is a weapon. And not for nothing but, who is this overwrought individual who wrote this drivel?

  3. Kathy Baratta said at 2:28 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    P.S. As for calling for armed men patrolling school halls/grounds?!?!?? Talk about mentally ill!

    What’s next? The Purge?

  4. The Death is a Nearer said at 2:48 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Kathy, an automobile is also a weapon. Most people have at least one, some have more than one. Odds are that you’ll repeatedly be within inches of your near instant death thousands of times today alone as automobiles pass you or are passed by you. Fortunately for you, the majority of the people operating those weapons are sane people licensed by the state and only vague, rarely enforced laws prevent you from being killed. For example, nothing physically prevents the other drivers from driving head on into you on your side of the road other than the vague threat of an arbitrary, monetary fine. And no one is really physically forcing those cars to stop at a red light so you can cross the street. Someone might even just high-speed bump you out of their way as you hog the left lane doing only 80.

    Fortunately for you, welcome to the modern, civilized world where adults have unlimited opportunity to commit murder with powerful weapons, but instead choose to live peacefully and obey the laws. There may be a few accidents a year involving some weapons, but overall, weapons aren’t so scarey when they are in the hands of responsible people.

    PS, I bet you’ll also be within feet of dangerous chemicals that can be used as a weapon; think gasoline, bleach, rodent and insect poisons, or otherwise readily available cleaning products and drugs. You might even eat a restaurant today where any of those could be easily put in your food as dosages enough to kill you and everyone else eating next to you. You’ll also be within stabbing distance of people with knives and other penetrating objects; think pocket knives, letter openers, gardening and construction tools. And this all assuming that someone even needs a weapon to harm you, you could be beaten to death or choked! How have you survived such a dangerous world all of these years?

  5. Mark Levy said at 2:55 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Kathy what is an “assault” rifle? Assault is an action, not an object. I challenge you to define what you mean without using the propagandized “weapons of war”, “military style”, or if regurgitating the list of “evil features”-what precisely each feature does that makes it any more lethal than a .22 bolt action rifle. As far as what anyone “needs”-that’s none of your business. The manner in which either myself or my wife protect MY family is none of your concern-and quite frankly: how DARE you dictate what we “need”. If you CHOOSE to not have the means to defend yourself, that’s your choice to make. But do NOT impose your bigoted, firearms ignorant opinions on us.
    As far as armed guard in schools: how are those “gun free zone” signs working out? Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
    And it’s typical of intolerant individuals such as yourself to propagate straw man arguments-wrought with ad hominems to push victim compliance and erroneous delegation of responsibility.
    You can’t have it both ways-you can’t demand that “the police will protect you”, while either ignoring, or obfuscating this fact of NJ:

    N.J.S.A. 59:5-4. Failure to provide police protection. Neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to provide police protection service or, if police protection service is provided, for failure to provide sufficient police protection service.

  6. Kathy Baratta said at 3:07 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    That was so stupid I’m embarrassed for you and I don’t even know you. The bill is window dressing and your argument is sophistry.

    People have been able to kill each other since the first spear was sharpened. So what’s your point?

    A car is a mode of conveyance developed for transportation. A gun is a weapon developed for killing. You do get there is a difference?

    I could get hit and killed by a car tomorrow; either deliberately or accidentally. That doesn’t change the fact that that is not what the car was intended for. Now a gun on the other hand…

  7. Kathy Baratta said at 3:21 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Mark Levy,

    You and your wife want to spray the house with bullets from an assault rifle to protect your family, go for it. Me? I’ll take a good shotgun any old time. More of a chance to hit the bad guy and not have your kids falling all over the house.

    And not for nothing but you do realize you’re making my mental health argument for me.

  8. Frank Jack Fiamingo said at 3:55 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Kathy Baratta

    What *IS* this “assault rifle” you speak of. Can you describe it to us. When you use the phrase “spray bullets”, I know that you are completely ignorant on the subject of firearms. Thus, your opinion is damaged by a complete lack of either facts or knowledge. It is difficult to give your comments much consideration.

    You like to call other people stupid, but although, as you so astutely noted, a gun may be designed for killing, there is a vast difference between a homeowner defending his or her family with a firearm and a criminal who uses a gun to intimidate, rob, rape or murder someone. Or do you in your infinite wisdom believe those two situation to be morally equivalent?

  9. aase said at 4:10 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Frank Jack, your response to Kathy Baratta is ridiculous. You may disagree with her but if you want to know what an “assault rifle”i s, you have to accept the State Legislature’s definition or no one can even discuss the subject because we won’t be talking about the same thing.

    Many people use the figure of speech “spraying bullets” etc. It doesn’t mean they are ignorant. I’ve been shooting and been a member of gun clubs since I was a teen and I’m well past 65 now. Have heard many enthusiasts and experts use that term when talking about automatic weapons.

    I don’t know who’s coming after you real or imaginary but good luck in defending yourself.

  10. Kathy Baratta said at 4:14 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    I clicked on Frank Jack’s name and was not surprised at what I found.

    I try not to engage the lunatic fringe so, – what “Aase” said.

  11. Airplane is a "mode of conveyance" said at 4:19 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    An airplane is a “mode of conveyance”, is it not also a weapon that we spend billions of dollars and sacrifice our liberties and right to operate in an effort to reduce the number of deaths caused by them?

    The only thing embarrassing in this discussion is that you think there is a difference between being “dead” and being “less dead”. Your lack of care and concern for how tens of thousands of people end up dead shows the kind of morally devoid person you are inside.

    How about (statistically speaking) you go tell tens of thousands of parents each year that their teenage son is “less dead” due to a crazy person failing to properly operate their automobile. See if that is any easier than (statistically speaking) telling hundreds of parents that their teenage son is “more dead” due to a firearm being used by a crazy person.

  12. Kathy Baratta said at 4:44 pm on July 14th, 2014:


    Now THAT is what I meant by “lunatic fringe.” Represent!

    But, I’ll play.

    There’s been these transients that cut through mah yard. I’m vurry afraid. They definitely look to be up to no good and ah just knows that one of these here days, one of them thar is gwina try and sneak into my window and steal mah virtue and prolly try and kill me.

    So, ah been thinking ’bout layin’ some land mines about the yard. Hell, it’s mah property and as an Amurrican, ah should be allowed to protect me and mines any ol’ how – right?

  13. Kathy the Gun Grabber said at 5:04 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Keeping showing yourself to be a racist bigot, Kathy, you’re doing great! You are proving to be just another stereotypical gun-grabber who thinks any one who owns a firearm is uneducated and illiterate.

    I’ll play your game too, Kathy. I bet as the morally devoid, racist bigot that you are, if you were looking out your window at a girl being raped park side, you’d go back to your day-time soaps and assume “the police will handle it!”.

    Kathy, suppose there really were such transients on your property. What are YOU personally going to do about it, today and every day after? You might know a family member who can baby sit your property for you to try to put an end to this, that family member has a badge and a firearm.

    To be fair, you should answer, and Frank Jack should also answer.

    If you’re curious how I’d handle it, well clearly I’d just drive my car full speed into them because that makes them “less dead” which is more acceptable, right?

  14. Kathy Baratta said at 5:45 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Jim Croce reminded us years ago to not “spit in the wind.” For me, debating you would be as stupidly futile a gesture on my part as would jumping from the roof flapping my arms expecting a smooth landing.

    In fact, unless you’ve got the ‘nads to post under your own name, I’m not giving you the time of day from here on.

    I believe I’ve made my thoughts known so, arrivederci, kids.

    Although, (FYI), if I looked out the window and saw a girl being raped, me and my 20 gauge would probably beat the cops to the scene even though I had already called them.

  15. Chicken said at 6:10 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Kathy, you’re a fool. You won’t “debate” me further because you’ve already run out of talking points from the list that your gun-grabbing friends gave you.

    To make your misguided views appear even worse for yourself, now you suggest that it is acceptable to be “less dead” if the murder happens with a 20g shotgun (or a car or airplane), just as long as it’s not done with an “assault rifle”. Your lack of consistency in the matter is lacking even more than your understanding of the issue of Constitutional rights as well as self-defense.

    PS. You reference Jim Croce because you’re an inconsistent, morally devoid, racist bigot who believes it is acceptable that the man is “less dead” due to a physically debilitated pilot using a “mode of conveyance” to murder him!

  16. Kathy Baratta said at 7:24 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    One hears about the ravings of a lunatic but so rarely gets to experience them firsthand.

  17. JEFF said at 7:39 pm on July 14th, 2014:

    Dear Kathy, You need to comprehend a few things,
    First, the Term “Assault Rifle”
    According to the state, it has a detachable magazine, a flash hider, a pistol grip and has an adjustable stock. All of these “features”, are cosmetic. Until there is a standardized method of describing a weapon that does something different from modern hunting rifles and you can positively identify the “plethora” of “assault Rifles” used in violent crimes, you should probably focus your efforts on the Heroine epidemic we have in New Jersey. The bottom line here is that the 15 down to 10 was an arbitrary number that wont reduce violent crime, it wont reverse or would not have stopped any of the 60 plus shooting in Chicago over the 4th of July weekend. (75+% with illegally owned hand guns) Hand guns are not Assault weapons. What is an assult weapon really? Its an original M16 or AK47.. Not the variants available to the public today. I suggest you learn the differences. Then once you have done a little research, find the report on the Newtown killings, take a good close look at how many magazines that sick kid dropped that were half full. Utopia is a wonderful place, but it does not exist anyplace in the world.

  18. Kathy is a poopy head said at 9:42 am on July 15th, 2014:

    Kathy is a stupid head, and a dum dum

  19. Jim Cooper said at 9:54 am on July 15th, 2014:

    Oh, Kathy. It’s you and the people like you in this state with your progressive voting habits that have made this state the true mess that it is. You and your ilk are so intolerant of others points of view, that you can only deride and attack those with differing opinions (without using a single fact or study I should point out). Once again, a typical progressive tactic. I thank God every day for the “lunatic fringe” as you called us, for still believing in what this country was founded upon. We’re here, we will be heard, and quite frankly, you will just have to deal with it. Keep propagating the progressive agenda, as we see how well it’s working in this country day by day, scandal by scandal, crisis by crisis.

  20. Mark Levy said at 10:57 am on July 15th, 2014:

    Interesting and adorable. I notice how none of the questions posed have been answered.
    Accordingly, that shotgun you claim is “all you need” is in fact considered an “assault firearm” if it’s a semi-automatic (ya know-requires a single trigger pull, to “spray” all those lead pellets) with a pistol grip or an adjustable stock.
    And relying on the legislature to define what makes a weapon of the “assault” variety: the same legislature that when debating their reclassification of a “destructive device”-would have in fact banned ALL shotguns since their bore is of greater caliber than the legislature feels anyone “needs”.

    Yep, brilliant. The typical valid mental disorder as defined in the DSM is in full force by the bigots: it’s called projection. Simply because YOU lack the mental self control, it is simply impossible for anyone else to exhibit such self control with a firearm. It’s completely obvious that the ones who are the lunatics and in desperate mental health care are the civil rights oppressors-with their usual hateful invective and angry vitriol.
    But the good news is that it’s become glaringly obvious to the majority of people that those who wish to violate others’ natural rights of self defense are more and more wrong every day-and their narrow minded hate speech is showing them for the people they truly are. We are winning.