Previous Post
Next Post

A tale of two mags (courtesy The Truth About Guns)

The New Jersey state Assembly on Thursday sent Governor Chris Christie a gun control bill that would limit the capacity of gun ammunition magazines,” Reuters reports, “but it was unclear whether the Republican governor would sign the measure into law.” TTAG polled our readers on Gov. Christie’s probable move in a previous post. Our Armed Intelligentisa were of two minds. If Christie wants the Republican nomination for President, he won’t sign the bill (limiting NJ-legal ammo mags to ten rounds, down from 15). Then again . . .

is a mag cap law a career killer? Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney wasn’t exactly the world’s most pro-gun pol before he got the party’s nod. So Christie might sign, figuring Republicans will hold their noses – again, still – when the time comes to vote. The Governor’s given no indication of his position on the bill. We shall see. 

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. State control of guns wasn’t a campaign issue last time. And depending on if the Statists keep beating the drum or not, it might not a national issue in 2016.

    • They’re crafty enough to not make that a campaign issue, lest that lose them votes in the National election. They (Presidents) wait until they’re firmly entrenched enough, await exploitable tragedy, then show their true colors.

    • @Pulatso, actually it was a huge issue and one that cost Mittster thousands if not millions of votes.

      • Interesting; I didn’t know that. I keep telling people that it’s not only the Democrats who want to take our guns, they’re just typically more blatant about it.

        I’ll be sure to look into this and reference Romney’s gun control stance when people blame “liberals” for everything.

        I’ll add him to the list of gun control Republicans, along with the suddenly-canonized Reagan, and Bush.

      • Agreed. A lot of pro-gun, limited government, and/or conservative Christian folks didn’t vote, because they didn’t see a difference between Obamney’s left head promising gun-control and its right head’s history of gun control, or Obamacare and Romneycare.

    • Just wait, when the election actually happens, Kristie will announce that he’s actually running as Hitlery’s Vice President.

  2. The big difference between this case and Romney’s case is that Romney was facing a veto-proof majority in the state legislature. An assault weapons ban (AWB) was going to happen no matter what he did. In Romney’s case, he actually worked with the NRA and the legislature to improve the bill from what it otherwise would have been. (For example, he got provisions to reduce the costs and extend the duration of pistol permits added to the AWB.)

    In Christie’s case, there’s no sign that he’s facing a veto-proof majority on this bill, and there’s no sign that he’s tried to work with anyone to make an “inevitable” law better than it otherwise would have been. Romney at least got some benefits for gun owners out of his deal. This bill would do nothing for them.

    • Gun owners don’t benefit from any kind of gun control. Nobody does. Not even gun control advocates.

      • I guess you’re missing the “it could have been worse” and the “worked with the NRA” part. I oppose gun control as well, but I understand political reality. Romney and Christie aren’t good candidates. If we’re going to go Republican, we need Rand Paul or Ted Cruz. Statist Republicans are almost as bad as statist Democrats.

      • Did you miss the part about the “veto-proof majority” that Romney faced? An AWB was going to happen no matter what he did. Once it’s clear you aren’t going to stop something bad, your priorities have to shift to minimizing the harm as best you can. That’s what Romney did in that case.

        For a little context, while Romney was governor he issued over 800 vetoes. Over 700 of them were overruled by the legislature. Of the remaining ones, all but one were budget line-item vetoes. He didn’t have a prayer of blocking an AWB, and vetoing it would only have encouraged the opposition to force something even worse down his throat.

    • Romney lost the election because millions of conservatives refused to vote for him. Despite his support for gun-control and support for the socialized medicine model Obamacare uses, I held my nose and voted for him. In retrospect I should have stayed home. The only way conservatives have any influence with the RINO political class is to stand on their air-supply—by refusing to vote for another accommodationist candidate. Despite his bluster, that’s exactly what Christie is. He’ll sell out gun-rights in a New York . . . er . . . New Jersey minute! It really doesn’t matter whether he passes the magazine limit, conservatives already have his number. Conservatives will not vote for another moderate, RINO candidate and that’s something the DC political class is struggling to acknowledge. They need us more than we need them.

      • Couldn’t agree more, Garrison. I voted for state candidates but no presidential candidate in 2012. McCain was the last liberal Republican I voted for. I finally learned my lesson. They won’t learn until they lose our support.

      • “I held my nose and voted for him. In retrospect I should have stayed home.”

        You _SHOULD_ have voted for Gary Johnson. Or at least “None of the above.” That would have been an affirmative vote _against_ the Commissar.

  3. Get ready for another 4 years under the democrat crown if Christie gets the nomination. I doubt he will though.

    • Come 2017 when NJ gets it’s next Democrat governor, anything that even closely resembles ‘gun rights’ will cease to exist…………

  4. . So Christie might sign, figuring Republicans will hold their noses – again, still – when the time comes to vote.

    I’ve held my nose for the last time…

        • AGREE 100%. I am done as well. Romney was the last mainstream RHINO that I will vote for. If we don’t put forth a non-establishment candidate this time then it’s time to send a message to the elitists. Christie, Bush, and others will get an ignore from me in 16. I’ll write in Paul or Cruz before voting for one of these establishment A-HOLES!

    • Same here. I’ll vote independent or write in Rand Paul before I vote for Christie.

  5. The Fat F*%@ better not! He will never got the nomination and if he does it will only ensure that Hillary will be the next POTUS.

    He represents everything wrong with politics in the US in one big, loud mouth package.

    • As I’ve said before, I believe the purpose of this bill was to put Christie in an unfavorable light, whether he signed it or not. Further oppression of NJ gun owners was merely gravy.

  6. So now Romney’s an example of political success? Is this what the party on the Right has come to?

    • So now Romney’s an example of political success? Is this what the party on the Right has come to?

      The party on the Right also hailed him as an example of a “job creator”. Seriously!

      At least Rick Perry recognized Romney for the “vulture capitalist” that he is.

      • I find it ironic too that the Republican establishment are now falling all over each other to get lock-step in line with Rick Perry’s view on immigration after mocking him throughout the last primary season for his views.

  7. Doesn’t matter to me. I’m done voting for Repubs.
    I’ll vote for the Libertarian that actually wants a small gov instead of the Repubs who just want to talk about it.

      • At least we’ll be able to sleep peacefully knowing we actively voted _against_ both of the evils, rather than just voting for the “lesser” of the evils, which is still evil.

    • This is the thought process that I don’t understand. Instead of voting Republican and slowly moving the pendulum back to where it should be you’ll waste a vote on a Libertarian. It’s like cutting off your nose to spite your face. We’re not going to go from statist progressivism to Libertarian overnight. The Repubs of today have been pushed this way by the progressive Dems and the MSM so they have to soft peddle their message. What do you suppose would happen to a candidate that is an R but espouses L views? They would be castigated and pushed aside as a fringe candidate. So you have to slowly move forward by getting mores R’s in office and if the momentum builds then we think about moving toward Libertarian.

      • If you keep voting for Republican RINOs as the lesser-of-two-evils, they have no incentive to ever change. They need to see less votes to see that people are fed up.

      • Voting Republican will not by any stretch of the imagination “[move] the pendulum back to where it should be.” It will snap the pendulum to the other extreme wing of the Statist bird. They’ll pay lip service to the 2A while they recruit the bloodthirsty warmonger faction of the Gunz Nutz™ as brownshirts as they double down on the war on drugs, the war on women, the war on religious liberty, etc. The R’s have no interest in cutting back the surveillance state, they’ll establish school prayer and bring back enforcement of missionary-position-only sex between strictly regulated married couples. The only distinguishing factor will be that the swastika will replace the hammer and sickle.

        It is time to vote Libertarian – it’s the closest thing we have to “None of the Above.”

  8. Nationally,

    He can survive Bridge-Gate.

    He cannot survive enacting more gun control.

  9. I despise Christie as a candidate, gun control issues aside. I get the same vibe from him that Jon Edwards gave me.

  10. Either way, I can’t wait for the classic photo of The Fat Rino in waders with shotgun in hand out shooting ducks.

    • Can’t do that to animals. He’ll likely be hugging and holding hands with BO and Hillary as they go out to “shoot the skeets”.

  11. Christie v Hillary. Gee, what a choice.
    Voting only encourages them.
    Everybody needs to just ignore the government and take their seat at the front of the bus.
    They can’t lock us all up. They can’t even kill us all. Stop just accepting the system like it’s the only way.

    Government is not the 4th law of thermodynamics. It only exists because we put up with it.

  12. Nj resident here. Don’t think he will sign it, there isn’t any upside. The entire Republican legislature voted against it, I’m sure they asked him first.

    You folks who won’t support him for president only have yourselves to blame for supreme court justice holder in a few years.

        • @foggy, Fatboy Christie is just as likely to nominate a Justice Obama as any of the Demoturds would be. A turd is a turd is a turd no matter if it has an R before its name or a D.

    • The NJ judges Christie has nominated have been Holder types. I’m not sure why you expect anything better from him than from Hillary when it comes to the judiciary.

      • He can’t get his judicial nominees through the legislature.

        Not saying he’s my choice for a nominee. Just saying if he is nominated, and you sit out, supreme court justice holder is on you.

        Like it or not, our constitutional rights are subject to interpretation by supreme court justices. Your quixotic statements come at a cost. And the damage won’t be limited to nj.

  13. Christie’s not pretty enough or attractive to a vast majority of low information voters. Signing an anti gun bill would be the nail in his extra large coffin. We are screwed Evan. I don’t see this country surviving a lot longer. The Republicans backed away from any sort of balanced budget after disastrous fallout of the last shutdown. Near 18trillion and counting.

  14. If he signs the mag bill, I’m going to take it as a sign that he’s throwing in the towel, doesn’t plan to run in 2016, and therefore doesn’t care what Republicans in the rest of the country think about him.

  15. Career killer for Christie? Yes. Mitt Romney isn’t a great example, all his moves were pre-Newtown. Gun owners were less aware and active at that time. That stuff wouldn’t fly today.

    • Exactly. They had no excuse for being less aware, but they were. In any case, they are raring to fight, and they are more numerous than ever in recent decades.

  16. The advantage of the current 15 round limit is Christie can veto the bill on the basis that the difference between 10 and 15 is statistically meaningless. For those hooting and hollering about RINOs, I invite you to move to CT, NY, or NJ and actually spend some time, money and hard work electing Republicans. We’re the ones on the front lines, unlike the rear echelon in TX, FL etc. we beat the DNC/Clinton machine here in Westchester County last fall, and now have a viable, pro 2nd amendment candidate for Governor. It ain’t fun, but beats having to tell your kids your spent your time in the “great 2nd amendment war shoveling shit in Louisiana”

    • “…great 2nd amendment war…”

      Hyperbole much? Blogging/tweeting while acting in accordance with supposed “rights” which are doled out as privileges != “war” and phone/computer screen != “front lines”.

      • Sometimes hyperbole is fun. Frankly, not a lot of time fighting from the keyboard…too busy:

        1) Working to get 2A friendly candidates on the ballot–that means walking nominating petitions around, getting them signed.
        2) Writing checks. Big checks.
        3) Working phone banks
        4) Campaigning door to door
        5) Actually holding the elected officials that vote for this nonsense accountable. In person. Advantage of being a large donor to charitable causes is I get to corner them 1:1 when they show up to work the (usually) friendly crowd. Somebody has to. They don’t like it and I enjoy watching them squirm. This year’s score, 2 US Reps, 1 State Senator, 2 State Assemblypersons. Numerous local pols.

      • You know, it just might be possible that he does more than type on the computer all day…

  17. I know he wants to sign it or is indifferent, which is all I need to know about him. Then again, I’m an informed liberty loving American. The average person who reflexively pulls the R lever no matter how bad the candidate makes up most of the GOP however.

    I don’t think Christie can win. People don’t like fat slobs.

  18. Queen Amidala: “If this body is not capable of action, I suggest new leadership is needed. I move for a Vote of No Confidence in Governor Christie’s leadership.”
    Senate response: “(quiet conversation)…VOTE NOW! VOTE NOW! VOTE NOW!”

    –Queen Amidala in the New Jersey Senate

    • Sadly, her speech would be interrupted by someone else saying “give us all of your rights so we can make you feel safe and here’s some symbolism to look at. Then, the people will chant “USA! USA! USA! USA!”

  19. GOP primary voters won’t be holding their noses and voting for anyone who has supported gun control. Not this time around.

  20. Christie is not going to get the nomination. That is why he will the sign the bill. He has to get through primaries and signing this bill ends his chances.

  21. I don’t think he’ll sign it. He’s got nothing to gain from doing so and plenty to lose.

    -I don’t think he likes this bill. I’m not naive enough to think politicains vote their conscious. But other than actually believing in it, there’s no reason for him to sign it.

    -The legislature voted on the bill strictly according to party line. No reason for him to break with his party on this.

    -He’s going to seek the nomination for 2016. That’s not an analysis of his chances, but of his hubris. And he’s not one for giving up any ground if he doesn’t have to.
    Ex. He was a lock in the last gubernatorial election. Yet he still spent millions to hold a special election just a fews weeks earlier to keep Cory Booker’s Senate election off the same ballot. Not because he might lose, but just so he could win by a bigger margin.

    All of that said, once he’s out of office, it’s gloves off against gun owners.
    The NJ liberals want to win at who’s more SAFE, which right now means being worse than NY. You can expect 5 rounds, smart guns, waiting periods, etc.

    • Yep. The NJ left will do anything to ban guns no matter what. And if we ever get a Supreme Court decision that truly protects the full RKBA, you can expect NJ to hold off implementing it for years, until absolutely forced to do it.

  22. Mitt got the nomination partly because it was his second time around and he had the superior campaign organization, and partly because he was considered the most electable among the GOP contenders. Ultimately he failed because because conservative voters saw through him and stayed home on Election Day. They saw that he does not have the sharp edge and street smarts to take on the Democrats with his bare fists over what’s important to conservatives.

    It’s possible Christie could sign this and still get the nomination, but he would then forfeit vital conservative support in the general election for coming off as yet another ladder rising, backstabbing Republican willing to sell us out to set himself up.

    • Critical to Romney’s success in the primaries was that conservative support always remained divided. Romney never broke into majority support. The combined support of Gingrich and Santorum represented a far larger proportion of the primary vote than anything Romney himself got. If Gingrich or Santorum had dropped out earlier and endorsed the other one, Romney would have lost.

      • And then a lot of blue states decided the Republican primary which was decided long before Florida and Texas ever voted. I think RNC should stop having blue states with open primaries cast ballots before the RNC base has voted for a candidate that has a record for standing for conservative principles.

      • Hmm….don’t think so. That’s an interesting narrative, but it’s revisionist history when squared with the facts. You can see the contest-by-contest allocation of delegates here:

        Following the delegate count totals after each contest, you’ll see that with Romney’s win in Florida early on in the process on January 31st, there was never a time when Romney’s delegate count was less than the combined delegate counts of Gingrich and Santorum. Hell, there was never a time when “Unpledged Delegates” count was less than either Gingrich or Santorum’s YTD counts. It’s hard to argue that these two guys were vote dividers, when their combined votes were not only far less than the winner’s, but even less than those of the unpledged, too.

        With the exception of Gingrich’s win in SC, which was obliterated a week and a half later by Romney’s conquering of Florida, Gingrich was never a factor. After SC, he never bested Romney anywhere, save for a too little, too late last hurrah in GA.

        Santorum fared a little better, sharing some states with Romney and even coming out on top in several; particularly in the South. Still, he was going nowhere and even his sporadic mini-wins here and there were not enough to counter Romney.

        I get your point, which at its heart is the same as my point. There were conservative votes to be had, which Romney didn’t get, but that manifested more in conservatives staying home outright, than in conservatives voting either Gingrich or Santorum. You run a candidate who’s conservative, intelligent, articulate, and personally likeable, and you will win in 2016. Nobody in 2008 or 2012 had all four of those traits and that’s why they all lost.

        • Jonathan –

          Your argument is misleading. I’m not sure why you’re using delegate counts to measure support when I’m talking about percentages of the primary voters. Many states were winner take all, and therefore the support given to candidates coming in second, third, or fourth was not reflected at all in the delegates (since no one but the winner received delegates). If you look at the vote percentages, you will see that Romney had a lot of trouble breaking out of the 25-40% range, and generally did so only where the Mormon population is large (e.g., Nevada). Santorum, on a shoe string budget, clobbered him in state after state. Add Santorum’s and Gingrich’s support levels together, and Romney looks even worse. (Toss in a small share of Paul’s support, because a minority of voters for Paul were likely more conservative than libertarian but fed up with Bush-style Republicanism, and things look yet worse for Romney.)

          My analysis holds and is in no way revisionist.

  23. This whole “you’ll never get anything you want if you don’t vote Republican” thing annoys me. Every time around the Republicans nominate more and more left-wing Presidential candidates and the Dems move even further to the left.

    • Didn’t see your post til I finished mine right below–but I’m afraid you’re on to something there. OTOH without conservatives and libertarians in the party, there is no incentive at all for the R’s to even slow up in their leftward drift, much less try to reverse it. It really is a dilemma.

    • I’m still holding out hope that enough people are sick and tired enough of the same old shit that they might actually CHANGE something, and vote Libertarian just to make a statement! Vote in favor of the Constitution! Vote Libertarian!

      • The people are too busy voting themselves freebies at others’ expense. It’s bad enough when it’s taxpayers, but with the budget so overblown and the debt ballooning, they’re stealing from nameless, faceless future generations. There are just too many people living off of the government nipple today, either directly receiving a welfare check, or selling goods/services to/through the government at the politicians’ direction, for anyone to vote to change it now. At this point, sure, it’s bad for everyone as a whole and getting worse, but for any particular individual it’s best to keep the crazy gravy train chugging along at full speed toward the cliff and benefit personally from it all.

  24. I just thought of something, for all you Dem “there’s no difference between the parties” folks out there. Do you seriously think that if the Governor of New Jersey right now were a Dem, and a potential Presidential contender for the Dem nomination, there would be any question at all as to whether he or she would sign this bill? Any hesitation at all on his or her part? Seriously, not necessarily a rhetorical question. Are you out there, Wendy?

    • We should all keep voting for compromised Republican Presidential candidates until they’re as far left as the Dems. Sounds like a wonderful idea.

  25. Although at first glance it seems like Christie doesn’t have anything to gain by signing the bill, he’ll think long and hard about what’s in it for him before he does anything. He’s much more likely to sign if he stays in NJ politics and doesn’t run for president. But even if he does run, he could still sign it. A republican from NJ is just a democrat-light. So it follows that he’ll do what a democrat would. And if he decides to remain in NJ politics, he might think that he’ll appease the majority of NJ voters by signing the bill, which, unfortunately may very well be true.

    The cynic in me thinks he’ll sign no matter what. I wasn’t surprised when SCOTUS decided not to hear Drake. And I won’t be surprised if Christie signs this bill, or some version of it.

Comments are closed.