Skip to comments.Will He or Won't He? N.J. Magazine Ban Heading to Christie's Desk
Posted on 05/18/2014 3:31:19 PM PDT by servo1969
Gun control supporters appear poised to force New Jersey's Republican governor, Chris Christie, often discussed as a potential presidential candidate in 2016, to show where he stands on the Second Amendment. On Monday, the state's Senate passed A2006, legislation to lower the state's magazine-capacity limit from 15 rounds to 10 rounds, by a vote of 22-17, mostly along party lines. The bill will be sent to Christie for signature or veto after the Assembly, which previously approved it by a vote of 46-31, approves technical changes made to the bill by the Senate. Once the bill reaches Christie's desk, he will have 45 days to make his decision.
Some Second Amendment supporters believe that Christie's presidential aspirations hinge on what he does with A2006. One commentator suggested that "New Jersey's absurd citizen control fetish doesn't play well in New Hampshire, Iowa, Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri, Utah, Nevada, South Carolina, North Carolina, Arizona, or Michigan. Any candidate that doesn't do well in these early primaries can kiss their (sic) presidential aspirations goodbye, and one of the fastest ways to sink a Republican nomination in the current political environment is to be seen as a champion of gun control."
Central to the political battle over the legislation, gun control supporters and opponents disagree on the ability of a 10-round limit to prevent murders. The Star-Ledger reported that the new ban's supporters claim that "in the case of mass shooters, the few seconds it takes to change a magazine could provide bystanders a chance to stop the shooter."
Similarly, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that "Supporters of the legislation say forcing shooters to reload more frequently could give potential victims a chance to escape." However, the paper noted, "Sen. Mike Doherty (R., Warren), an Army veteran, countered 'Changing a magazine is about the simplest thing you can do. It takes a couple seconds.'"
Sen. Doherty's point was made previously on page 74 of the official report on the terrible shootings at Virginia Tech University in 2007. The report stated, "The (investigating) panel concluded that 10-round magazines that were legal would have not made much difference in the incident. Even pistols with rapid loaders could have been about as deadly in this situation."
Gun control supporters' focus on mass shootings may be good for grabbing headlines and ramming restrictions into place, but cannot possibly be so good for reducing the number of murders in general. Mass shootings account for a small percentage of victims killed with guns, and fewer victims than are accounted for by murders not involving firearms of any sort.
Setting those facts aside for the sake of discussion, however, a limit on magazine capacity will necessarily have less impact upon perpetrators of mass shootings than upon people targeted by those crimes' perpetrators. That is due to the simple fact, underscored by Sen. Doherty's comment and the assessment of the Virginia Tech panel, that a criminal can carry as many magazines as he wants, but an innocent person carrying a firearm for self-defense will often carry only the magazine inserted into the firearm. In such instances, the difference between 15 and 10 rounds might be the difference between life and death.
That, by itself, is sufficient reason for Gov. Christie to veto A2006.
I hope I'm wrong for New Jersey Freepers' sakes but I have no doubt he will sign it.
Because I think he's a North Eastern city-boy jackass who doesn't know from nothing about firearms.
Christie is weak on the 2nd Amendment. That and some other rino tendencies makes him unacceptable to me as a candidate. There are only a few issues where I am totally inflexible. The 2nd Amendment and all the other provisions listed in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, for that matter, are non-negotiable.
I don’t have much faith that he’ll veto this bill, but he may. I’ve resigned myself that this will ultimately happen once another donk is in Trenton, so if not now, in 2016.
As a larger issue, the article makes a point that is true, but is misleading.
>>Sen. Doherty’s point was made previously on page 74 of the official report on the terrible shootings at Virginia Tech University in 2007. The report stated, “The (investigating) panel concluded that 10-round magazines that were legal would have not made much difference in the incident.<<
10 round magazines would not have made much difference? No, it wouldn’t have made ANY difference because Cho used 10 round magazines.
Christie might think he’s banning the New Jersey magazine..”
When I first glanced at the headline I thought maybe he was taking on the porno magazine industry - seriously!
You will NEVER EVER vote then. The ENTIRETY of the fed welfare state is clearly, openly, obviously ,blatantly unconstitutional, and no republican has ever said so.
Its surprising and sad how many FReepers will sell out on guns for a “win”.
The fat-ass oaf should just join the dem party and get it over with.
We all know this ends in blood.
I pray to God that it does.
He knows enough about guns to know he wants the public disarmed.
Go ahead fat man, drive that nail in your presidential aspirations coffin.
Let him sign it. Then let him try to run for a national office again.
I hope he signs it. It will boost his rino reputation and kill his presidential campaign.
Sorry NJ patriots. But at this time, NJ as a whole, no longer advances the cause of liberty.
He's a damned rino and anyone that can't see that is a fool.
It'll be a cold day in hell before he gets my vote, and I don't give a damn who else is running.
Yeah, this country is so effed up I half expected this article to be about banning magazines because they waste paper and trees.
Fat boi won’t sell outside Jersey. He’s toast.
Good point. I guess we, as a country, have been compromising since before I was born. I suppose what I am trying to say is “no more”. We can’t fix it over night. The only way to do it is start to roll things back a little at a time.