If you haven’t been following Garden State politics — and really, why would you unless you live there? — New Jersey will be electing a new governor in November. The two major party candidates are Democrat Phil Murphy and Republican Kim Guadagno. But even if the GOP lieutenant governor manages to pull off an upset, Jerseyite gun owners probably shouldn’t get their hopes up for much relief from the state’s famously restrictive gun control laws.

There is another option, however. Matt Riccardi is also running as the Constitution Party candidate. We got an email from his communications director, Val Sommerville, letting us know that, as far as gun rights go, Riccardi would be a breath of fresh air.

I am writing to you in hope of opening a discussion about Gun Rights in NJ. I am the communications Director for Matt Riccardi for Governor. He is running as an Independent representing the Constitution Party.

I believe his position is unique and will pave the path for the Second Amendment to be restored across the country.

Mr. Riccardi when sworn into office will instruct his Attorney General to not enforce any GUN Restrictive laws on NJ books as they are unconstitutional. He expects a lawsuit to immediately follow. He expects to possibly be jailed and will appeal to the US Supreme Court to finally address the Rights of Americans to own a firearm as the Governor of NJ this will give attention to the problem and become a huge Nationwide fight for our rights.

You can learn more about him at his website r4nj.org and listen to an interview he did on gun rights on the Stacey Marie radio show here:

31 Responses to NJ Gov Candidate Matt Riccardi: I Won’t Enforce Any Gun Control Laws

  1. Nice, not thrilling but nice. The question is, is he getting ANY exposure in the NJ media? Likely not which means snowball meet hell.

  2. The average Fox News watcher will briefly bitch about “gun control” then pull the Republican lever, Because after all, we can’t have the Democrats getting into office. The thing is, in New Jersey, you have nothing to lose. Therefore, we have no one to blame but ourselves. At best, we’ll always be playing defense with this mentality. Maybe it’s the best we can hope for now.

    • I remember a liberal coworker many years ago asking why I’m a Republican. I corrected her and pointed out that I belong to no party, but do consistently vote Republican. She still persisted in wanting to know why: “Because,” I replied, “the Republican party promises to do what I want them to – and every once in a while, they actually do. The democrats, on the other hand, promise to do the exact opposite of what I want – and they keep their promise.”

      • There’s a world of truth in your comment. I like it. A LOT! Alas, there isn’t a “LIKE” button. I’ve come to realize I am in the same boat as you.

        • You liked the comment and explained why. The world doesn’t need more “like” buttons, it needs more actual communication.
          Good job, even if it was accidental.

  3. The Governor doesn’t tell the police or the local DA which laws to enforce and which ones not to. The police chiefs will still slow walk gun purchase permits and deny carry permits. The (locally elected) DAs will continue to enforce the laws on the books. And the state legislature will continue to shun any law that carries a whiff of freedom. Because the state is dominated by large democratic majorities, he has no chance of being elected; and because the legislature is dominated by large democratic majorities, he has no chance of effectuating change even if elected.

    • Sadly, you’re absolutely right. Due to the mindless Democrat-voting majority, we will get Phil Murphy and every hair-brained anti-gun proposal floated in the last eight years will become law.

    • Actually you are wrong. In New jersey, prosecutors and police departments are issued the New Jersey Administrative Code. Which is effectively the administrative interpretation of state statute and is used as an enforcement and conduct guideline. This is issued by the executive branch and is affected by whoever is governor.

      An example of what that means:

      NJ magazine law limits to 15 rounds. When passed the NJAC said blocking was OK. Under Corzine the governor effectively issued an addendum saying blocked mags are not ok and to arrest people with blocked mags.

      So…

      • You are mixing apples and oranges. Guidance as to interpretation of the law is one thing, telling elected officials and police chiefs to not enforce the law is another thing altogether. The latter the governor cannot do. A law that restricts magazine capacity to ten rounds, for example, cannot be “interpreted” to permit people with 17 round mags to get off scot-free. The NJ ban on HP ammo except in the home and at the range cannot be administratively “interpreted” to allow (the select few) ccw holders to load up with HP ammo outside the home. And no “administrative guidance” is going to motivate the local pd to start issuing purchase permits within 30 days, despite a state law that specifically mandates that they do so, or to require those chiefs to exercise their discretion in favor of issuance of ccws rather than denial. The Governor cannot direct how an elected official exercises his official discretion, and that includes the prosecutorial discretion in bringing or dropping criminal charges.

        • “The latter the governor cannot do.”

          Neither can the president.
          Legality, meet DACA.
          In politics, it’s a truism that anything can happen. Whether it’s legal or not.

          On TTAG, it’s a truism that clicking on “Notify me of follow-up comments by email.” won’t do anything. Still. And no explanation of why.

    • Mark, that is a gross oversimplification. First off, NJ uses County Prosecutors, not DAs, as a county’s top prosecutor. Moreover, NJ is one of only two states where such top prosecutors are appointed, by the Governor, and not elected. A guy who owes his job to the Governor is apt to do his bidding, or he wouldn’t have been appointed in the first place. I know, appointees sometimes disappoint. Not usually, though. For a sea change in approach to firearms law? Expect that only died in the wool true believers need apply.

      DAs, wherever they are, can be removed from office, too. It’s not easy or at the Governor’s whim, but it can be done. A popular governor can grease those wheels.

      Then there are the innumerable other ways a Governor persuades people. There is budget control. There is veto and line item veto control. There is control of other appointments. There is overt campaigning for/against someone. There is fund-raising prowess. And on and on and on….

      All of these political powers interplay.
      If this guy ever actually got elected, he could make a lot of things happen within and beyond his formal authority and despite some othet people’s formal authority.

  4. “I won’t enforce X”

    That’s great but, while the option to enforce it is still on the table I’m just going to have to hope you don’t wake up pissed off one day and change your mind.

  5. Sounds great but he wont get elected dog catcher. They loves their gun control over there. Makes um feel all cuddly and warm knowing how safe they all are as a result.

    I think they’re stupid, but what do I know.

  6. IF he has this authority, he is no better than democrats who don’t enforce existing immigration laws–just happens not to be enforcing something I don’t like. This is good only in a superficial, emotional way. It is a protest of unconstitutional law. The real issue is changing the laws.

    • Since the laws he would be refusing to enforce are unconstitutional there is a big difference compared to democrats ignoring immigration laws, which are completely legal and moral.

      • I hear you, but many dems make your same argument about immigration. Though, IF he could do this, there could be some good outcomes in individual, cases, until he changes his mind. This is feel good protest. I’d rather have a governor who led real change. But, I live in a relatively free state regarding firearms–though the last few governors have been turds in so many ways.

        “no one of consequence” articulates it better below.

  7. Treating the symptoms. Not the disease.

    Plus I really don’t like the whole “don’t enforce it but leave it on the books” approach. That engenders contempt for the law as a whole, and it’s a common practice on the left (see: sanctuary cities / counties / states). I’d rather not stoop to their level.

    If it’s on the books enforce it. If it shouldn’t be enforced, it shouldn’t be on the books so repeal.it.

    • No one of consequence,

      “If it’s on the books enforce it.”

      No one should enforce unjust laws or laws that are just plain wrong. To claim otherwise is to elevate government to god status.

      Example: if government declared that wearing blue shirts is a felony with a mandatory 20 year prison sentence (with no chance of parole), should the police, prosecutors, and judges enforce that law? The obvious answer is “NO!”.

  8. I am concerned about this events, if we will see democrat/governor in NJ my family will move to the PA which is way better for guns and taxes etc Fu.k these idots, I want to conceal cary my pistols!

  9. This guy is poison.

    There’s a decent chance he’s funded by the Democratic candidate as to draw votes from the Republican.

    Regardless, there is a huge difference between the Republican and Democrat candidates in this election. One promises no new laws. The other promises to sign everything vetoed by Christie. That includes 50 cal ban, 5 or 10 round mags, ammo taxes, and embedding fid in drivers license.

    This guy should get no love.

  10. I voted third party back in the early 90’s. Basically a throw away vote there. The Democrats and gungrabbers own the state. I fled when the NJ AWB turned me into a felon overnight. NJ is an anti-gun utopia and getting worse. Gun owners are the only minority that it’s actually encouraged to oppress in NJ.

  11. He won’t win, probably not even get 5% of the votes, but it is nice that somebody shows the republicans over there that they aren’t the great protectors of the constitution either.

  12. Kim G is not going to restore our rights. Kim G is not going to beat Murphy. Murphy has 60 % of NJ. Kim is down 25 points. Kim G is a part of the RHINO problem in NJ. A vote for Kim is going nowhere. It is time to throw out both parties who have crippled the state. If you believe in your Constitutional Rights believing you have no choice but to accept one of the two is not going to ever give you freedom. 40% of New Jersey doesn’t even know who Kim G or Murphy is. Better wake up Murphy is the DNC Finance Chairman whom raised 300 million for O’s 50 state strategy. Goldman Sachs and wall street peddler. RNC won’t even support Kim G. That ought to tell Conservatives and Independents a lot. Standing with Riccardi. Time for a radical change if NJ is ever going to have a New Day.

Leave a Reply

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