New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie Vetoes Gun Confiscation Bill

Send to Kindle
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. (Photo: Gage Skidmore)

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. (Photo: Gage Skidmore/Wiki Commons)

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Monday vetoed the second iteration of a bill that would formalize the confiscation of weapons from those accused of domestic violence.

Christie called the measure “identical to legislation I conditionally vetoed last session” and said the bill contains “redundant restrictions on firearms ownership while ignoring the larger problem of domestic violence, which in most cases does not involve a firearm.”

Christie said that current rules already require officers to seize a person’s weapons when there is probable cause to believe the person has committed domestic violence.

The bill would (among other things) require those accused of domestic violence to surrender their guns while a restraining order is in effect, and would suspend their firearms purchaser identification card and handgun permits during that same period, according to NJ.com.

It would also, according to Philly.com, require courts that issue restraining orders to arrange for immediate surrender of firearms, cards and permits to a law enforcement officer.

Opponents of the bill argue that it would unfairly restrict the Second Amendment rights of those that have not committed—and even those who have not been accused of committing—violent acts.

“Seizure and forfeiture of guns, and loss of gun rights, should not apply where there is no violent act,” the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs wrote in a position paper objecting to the legislation.

Under the legislation, an argument or a harassment accusation could result in the forfeiture of weapons.

NJ.com reports that Gov. Christie proposed a rewrite of the bill that would expedite the permit process for domestic abuse victims seeking access to a gun for their own protection. The proposal comes on the heels of a set of executive orders designed to make it easier for New Jersey residents to acquire concealed carry permits.

Christie cited as his motivation for those executive orders the death of Carol Browne, who was stabbed to death by her ex-boyfriend while awaiting a concealed carry permit.

Anti-gun members of New Jersey’s legislature have sought to overturn Christie’s orders while promoting bills like the one the governor just vetoed. Doing so would deny women like Browne access to a means of self-defense while going after individuals like Browne’s boyfriend, who do not need a gun to perpetuate tragedy.

The last attempt by anti-gunners to overturn Christie’s veto fell short by five votes, but Assemblywoman Gabriela Mosquera (D-Gloucester) said lawmakers would “continue this fight.”

{ 15 comments… add one }
  • Paul August 29, 2016, 6:06 pm

    I hope to God, for EVERY FREE MAN’S SAKE, you will vote against Hillary Clinton in November. The entire future of this once great nation is at stake, and has never before been so close to being lost to a subversive group. Long live freedom and capitalism!

  • Chuck May 27, 2016, 8:00 pm

    I was born and raised in New Jersey and lived there for 56 miserable years, but moved to Maine 3 years ago and finally found Freedom. Constitutional carry, I now own suppressors, could own full auto, shoot on my own property whenever I so choose, plus they have a very easy going medicinal cannabis system and will probably legalize recreational in November. And it’s no police state like Jersey either. My advice to any freedom loving person now living in the People’s Republic of New Jersey is to get out now while you still can, as it’s going to get a lot worse when they put another Democrat in as Givernor in 2017…

  • Fred May 27, 2016, 6:22 pm

    Carole Bowne was waiting for a permit to JUST PURCHASE A FIREARM…Citizens do not get Carry permits in New Jersey…He name is Bowne not Browne…..

  • Leighton Cavendish May 27, 2016, 10:39 am

    My problem is with the taking of guns…and ONLY guns…from people in these instances.
    OK to have knives…bats…golf clubs…chainsaws…swords…etc etc etc …just not guns…even if/when a gun was NOT used during the incident/crime.
    Sort of like taking away your car because you were caught riding your bicycle/lawnmower under the influence.

    • Ivan0000013 May 28, 2016, 10:25 am

      They may not take your car but if you’re caught drunk using a riding lawn mower, bicycles, or even a boat, they will take your drivers license. Just sayin.

  • Mike May 27, 2016, 10:14 am

    I certainly hope the people of New Jersey are smart enough to realize this toads maneuver is only for political gain. I hope they remember the picture of him hugging the devil and end this toads political career next election

    • Vagrant May 27, 2016, 11:43 am

      Toad? Who are you calling toad?

    • Keith May 27, 2016, 4:29 pm

      I agree. Chris Christie is against liberty and the Constitution. He is a Progressive trying to wear conservative clothing.

  • joe May 27, 2016, 9:04 am

    When the last American leaves New Jersey please flush the toilet on your way out.

  • Rip May 27, 2016, 7:36 am

    How about a list of the mutts that proposed that bill so we can vote them out of office.

  • Chip May 27, 2016, 7:36 am

    Correction. Carol Browne was not waiting for her Concealed Carry Permit. It is, basically, impossible to get a concealed carry permit in NJ. She was just waiting for her permit to purchase a handgun. While the law says permits to purchase should take, no longer, than 30 days, it’s not unusual for police departments to take several months if not longer just to issue a permit to buy a handgun in NJ, or to get your Firearm’s ID, which gives you the right to buy ammo and long guns. If the democrats had their way in NJ, they would outlaw private ownership of guns period.

    • Ivan0000013 May 28, 2016, 10:27 am

      Mine took all of 2 weeks once the paperwork and initial prints were done. Local police is much quicker then state police.

  • Marvin Cohn May 27, 2016, 5:33 am

    This is a problem not just for the left, but also for the right. They propose laws in order to pander to their constituents; but those laws are already on the books. If there are slight differences between a new redundant law and the old one, on which one are the courts supposed to base its decision? No redundant new law should be passed until the old one is rescinded or just amended.

    • John May 27, 2016, 11:53 am

      Marvin Cohn in Illinois we had out of state anti-gunners come in and want to pass a law that every employee at gun stores had to have a background check.
      What these stupid turds didn’t know is that without a FOID card you can not legally TOUCH a gun in Illinois! Which means that anyone working in a gun store HAS to have a FOID card….which means they ALL have already had a background check.
      WHY do anti-gunners always talk about something they know nothing about!?!? Grrr

      • Keith May 27, 2016, 4:34 pm

        It’s all about one law on top of the other. They say you can own a registered gun in New York City but then they won’t let you register it. The want to make it so hard to legally own a gun that it is nearly impossible. Next thing you know you are like Australia. Gun disassembled locked in two different safes with the ammo in a third locked safe. You can own it but effectively legislated out of ever using it.

        Do not forget either that Missus Crooked Clinton said she wanted Australia gun laws here in America.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend