Chris Christy: Anyone Know His Stance on 2A issues?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can't figure out how he doesn't get and F from the NRA.

He's as big an anti as they come

That's why when he gets to the southern primaries he's going to crash and burn

AFS
 
This pretty much sums it up


1404985522109.cached.jpg
 
Because in spite of what many seem to say and belive he has stopped some gun control bills from going through.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...-owners-secure-a-significant-and-rare-victory
True, but how do you punish a dead man? Jersey is about as unfriendly of a gun place as you can imagine. I have to stop home and drop off the handgun before I cross over the bridge into Jersey to see my customers. While he may have stopped some anti gun legislation, now I cannot recall any bill he promoted that would have made things easier.
 
You guys are being way too nice. Also, it is not only about guns & civilian ownership with him. He has all the hallmarks of a benevolent dictator who can easily become malevolent on the flip of a coin. Anyone who doesn't believe this need to perform their own due diligence.
 
Christie is anti 2A all the way.....an ex- NJ prosecutor...we here in NJ call him the RINO....republican in name only......our gun laws are probably the worst in the country run by the state authority who thrives on fear mongering. Don't come to NJ, there's nothin' here for ya...IMO.
 
Last edited:
He Kissed Obama's rear hard after sandy hardcore....that alone makes him a guy I do not trust.

I think he is like any other New England Conservative....a conservative by name only. He is in my opinion just like Bloomberg. And that coming from a born and raised New Yorker. ICK, never want to go back to that hole.
 
True, but how do you punish a dead man? Jersey is about as unfriendly of a gun place as you can imagine. I have to stop home and drop off the handgun before I cross over the bridge into Jersey to see my customers. While he may have stopped some anti gun legislation, now I cannot recall any bill he promoted that would have made things easier.

I agree, but to argue he is 100% for gun control is also inaccurate, I belive based on what I know he has done and said he is neither pro nore anti, he is what ever suites the day. Which IMO is a very bad thing, but to paint him 100% anti is just factually inaccurate.

He is on record as saying he wouldn't "weaken" gun laws, that alone is enough for me to pass, especially since he was talking about New Jersey!

I'm just Pro-facts and it's a lot of opinion, unrelated political bs, and misinformation going on in this thread. The relevant 2A facts are enough for 98% of 2A advocates to pass on him, so there's no need to bring up all the false info and other garbage.
 
Let's give him the most benefit of the doubt possible. He comes from one of the worst states in the nation with regards to gun rights abuse and has not been a vocal critic of the state's gun policies. Despite the strict anti gun policies in his state, gun violence in his cities remains a serious problem and he has not been a vocal opponent of the argument that this is because NJ doesn't have strict enough gun laws. So assume Christy believes in the Second Amendment protections of our gun rights. His entire experience is informed by extremely strong anti gun laws, a population that is largely supportive of such laws, and having to constantly be aware of and cater to a voting majority that is generally liberal. He will simply not be a strong advocate for gun rights and will likely gravitate towards "compromise" positions on things like universal background checks, magazine restrictions and other things that he will likely see as "reasonable" (AWB entirely possible).
 
Honestly, I'd feel safer having a Democrat in the White House and a Republican congress, as far as 2A issues are concerned, than I would having a Christie type Republican in the White House and the R's also holding Congress. I'd like to think most red state Republicans would tell a Republican president to pound sand on gun restrictions . . . but then let's remember Reagan was in office in 1986, etc. Sometimes gridlock is better than a good working relationship . . .

As strange as that seems, I certainly do see your point.
 
Let's give him the most benefit of the doubt possible. He comes from one of the worst states in the nation with regards to gun rights abuse and has not been a vocal critic of the state's gun policies. Despite the strict anti gun policies in his state, gun violence in his cities remains a serious problem and he has not been a vocal opponent of the argument that this is because NJ doesn't have strict enough gun laws. So assume Christy believes in the Second Amendment protections of our gun rights. His entire experience is informed by extremely strong anti gun laws, a population that is largely supportive of such laws, and having to constantly be aware of and cater to a voting majority that is generally liberal. He will simply not be a strong advocate for gun rights and will likely gravitate towards "compromise" positions on things like universal background checks, magazine restrictions and other things that he will likely see as "reasonable" (AWB entirely possible).

Did you miss the post where he campaigned for office in NJ specifically on the AWB??

Come on, with so many candidates out there, there is no need to give Christie the benefit of ANY doubt. He is crystal clear on his position, and it is squarely in line with the folks who believe in "common sense" and "reasonable" gun control.

If you believe in that too, then he's your man.

If you believe in the RKBA -- the right, not the privilege -- then he shouldn't even be remotely on your radar as a viable candidate.
 
I've open carried for years without anyone freaking out. If Christie were to visit Seattle and see it, I'm pretty sure he'd be my first.

The idea that rights frighten people is pretty well established, heck, we see it in this forum even. That is NOT a quality I want to see in a POTUS. I held my nose for Romney, I hope I don't have to say home for the next one.
 
Honestly, I'd feel safer having a Democrat in the White House and a Republican congress, as far as 2A issues are concerned, than I would having a Christie type Republican in the White House and the R's also holding Congress.

I'd agree if it was one of the few pro 2A Democrats, but with the amount of power a president has with agencies under executive command like ATF and the US Justice dept, it is scary what a president can do. Think Janet Reno, Waco, and Ruby Ridge. Think of all the new ATF "regulations" aimed at putting dealers out of business, that never went through congress.
 
Definitely not saying an anti-gun president would be an optimal solution by any standard, just that if we were going to be stuck with one I'd prefer he have as hostile a relationship as possible with Congress to minimize what could be done.
 
I can't figure out how he doesn't get and F from the NRA.

Probably because believe it or not there are others more liberal them him, that at least admit it by being in the Democrat party. They probably gave him a better grade just to make the Conservative less of an enemy.
 
One wonders if he could have signed an executive order that modified New Jersey's threshold on "justifiable need" for conceal carry. The law is in place, it is just the "justifiable need" interpretation needs to be changed. If anyone didn't know, New Jersey's "Justifiable Need" was up for review recently.

Source:

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/73028-nj-law-re-justifiable-need-expires-nov-13th/

Why didn't he try? Or at least come clean on the issue? I get the impression that he is avoiding the whole subject, he can't ignore the issue and expect the voters to support him.

(The old saying..."It won't play in Peoria"?) Well I say 'what plays in Paterson is not going to play in Peoria'.

Meaning what is acceptable for gun control in Paterson NJ is not going to be acceptable in Peoria.
.
 
Last edited:
The majority of citizens of the Dark and Fascist state of NJ are institutional hoplophobes who consider interest in firearms to be socially aberant, which can manifest in all sorts of weird, stressy ways, ranging all the way up to ostracization and loss of business opportunity.

Chris Christy serves that constituency, which has zero problem with the premise of using the force of law to suppress such aberrant behavior for the common good.

It's no surprise at all that his record is very much a mixed bag.

Unfortunately, NJ has wandered too far afield from the normative culture of Lockean America, and must be considered as an allied foriegn nation. Consequently, no one culturally in tune with that state's center of mass is qualified to be the leader of a free people, because they fundamentally do not understand what a free people is.
 
Let's give him the most benefit of the doubt possible. He comes from one of the worst states in the nation with regards to gun rights abuse and has not been a vocal critic of the state's gun policies. Despite the strict anti gun policies in his state, gun violence in his cities remains a serious problem and he has not been a vocal opponent of the argument that this is because NJ doesn't have strict enough gun laws. So assume Christy believes in the Second Amendment protections of our gun rights. His entire experience is informed by extremely strong anti gun laws, a population that is largely supportive of such laws, and having to constantly be aware of and cater to a voting majority that is generally liberal. He will simply not be a strong advocate for gun rights and will likely gravitate towards "compromise" positions on things like universal background checks, magazine restrictions and other things that he will likely see as "reasonable" (AWB entirely possible).

If Crisy blows with the wind, then he's NOT pro-RKBA. "Pro" means he's actually FOR something.

From the standpoint of the Second Amendment and our RKBA, there is no "compromise" position. A compromise by definition means that BOTH parties make sacrifices in order to arrive at some mutually agreeable position. The pro-gun control side thus cannot, by definition, EVER make a "compromise" because ALL gun control laws are 100% in their favor and 100% against the pro-RKBA side.

The pro-gun control side doesn't have anything to "give" in the discussion in order to reach a "compromise". It's all "give" on our side and all "take" on their side.

So please do not allow yourself to use "compromise" in the same breath as "gun control" and "RKBA". It's an illusion at best...and a bald-faced lie at worse.
 
NJ and NY gov's are cut from the same cloth. He will have the same problems as Rudy Giuliani seeking presidential office.
 
Hard to find anything on it. Thanks.

Easy to find his wobbling positions on gun rights<->gun control. Wobble wobble.

Here's a quote from him a few years ago:
"The issue which has energized me to get into this race is the recent attempt by certain Republican legislators to repeal NJ's ban on assault weapons." He's noted publicly that NJ has too many guns already.

Where he had not been pro-gun control, he's been equivocal at best.

He's tried to move the ball in questions from discussing gun control to "violence control," particularly after eyeing the national stage. But it really comes off as ducking the issue, or trying to have his cake and eat it too.

And, boy does he like his cake. :D
 
I think we've quickly and easily shown that Gov. Christie isn't purely pro or anti 2A, but that he's leading in a state with strongly Anti leadership and sentiments.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top