Second Amendment Preservation and Protection Act (SAPPA)

[siderman 1,137]

Because there is no information about the actual plan. Having read their info, there seems to be absolutely nothing indicating that it shares much DNA with the apply to be denied plan.  

this excerpt seems to have some relevency no?

 

 

As many of you know, the United States Constitution prohibits individual states from implementing legislation that would interfere with or infringe on its citizen's civil rights.  This has not prevented many of them from doing just that.  

 

The laws they have passed, on the face of them, appear to comply with the 2nd Amendment's requirement to allow law abiding citizens the right to bear arms.  However, it is a ruse, for they wrote laws that gives them the right to evaluate your NEED to arm yourself as opposed to your right to do so. 

 

The application a citizen must fill out is designed to the eliminate almost every citizen from approval. And those not eliminated by their responses and history, will then be eliminated by an un-elected Judge who believes he has the right to circumvent your' rights as he decides that his perception of your need can trump your rights. As a result, virtually every NJ citizen is denied his civil rights.

 

Many states run by socialists, employ tactics such as these and New Jersey is by far the most egregious implementer of such laws of prevarication.  But that does not make them legal or constitutional.  We are about to take them on and we will be doing so, presenting the case in such a manor, that the United States Supreme Court will be unable to deny docketing it. 

 

DENIED APPLICANT

If you want to be part of this effort and possibly as a result have your rights restored and your application to carry revisited and approved please add your name to the list of those citizens whose rights have been denied.

 

CAUTION:  Only those individuals who have been denied the right to bear arms here in NJ for the unconstitutional reason of "lack of need" should add their names to this list.  If you were denied on the grounds of criminal record, mental health issues or some infraction of domestic violence, please do not sign up for this program.  We only want those with no issues to be part of this campaign.  You may well have a good reason for contesting that determination, but this will not be the forum for that.

 

Please send this posting to any friends or family members who may have been denied their civil rights.

As always,TPATH gives permission re-post or re-transmit a this article in any social media available.

 

*********

 

TPATH Founder

Dwight Kehoe

and

TeamNJ Founder

[SAPPA 74]

WOW!

Sure did build up a firestorm.

 

Okay all, here is the bottom line.  We asked a few things of the members here.

1. If anyone who had been denied a carry permit would be interested in giving us information on when and who rejected you?

2. We asked if anyone who was curious about what we are doing and thought you might like to help or have suggestions that you could contact us and then be invited to our statewide meeting.

3. We make nor have we made any promises to anyone and only have stated that we have worked our butts off to try to get something done.

4. For anyone who thinks we are going to guarantee a two hour drive will make him happy at the end of the day, forget that.  Your decision to come or not is yours.

5. Every effort so far, for the past 40 years here in NJ has failed.  Will our's work?  If it gets to the final stage, the answer is yes.  Will it get there?  The odds are against us.  But that is where our volunteers will come in.  If anyone wants to know more and to see the brief, you need to be at the meeting Saturday.  Again, we make no claim to anything except that we are trying.

 

There is still time to signup for Saturday's meeting.  Email us at [email protected] or at [email protected] if you think you want to come.  Please give us a contact number and a full name.   

 

Do not change your plans to come if you expect some sort of miracle.  We only offer hard work and a new approach.  Your choice.

 

This will be the last time I respond here for awhile. At least until after the weekend.  We have several leadership meetings and much material to prepare before Saturday.

 

Warm regards to all of you patriots,

Dwight

[Newtonian 453]

On the other hand, loose lips sink ships. Secrecy wasn't done any differently when this country thrived to have independence was it? I hope their endeavor is successful and for all the arm chair quaterbacks, if they are, I hope you stand at the back of the line with your head hung low in shame. If they are not, at least they tried. I also kind of recall, they never asked for a dime of your money. So how about cutting them some slack instead of being out right negative! Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I would respect their effort more if they'd asked for $30 than for five hours of my time without telling me what I was getting into.

 

"Trust me" from someone I don't know hasn't worked with me for several decades.

 

If this turns out reasonable I will admit it in this forum and support SAPPA's effort.

 

But I will never hold my head in shame because I didn't drive for 3-4 hours to meet someone I don't know to discuss a topic he won't tell me about. You were convinced it was worth your time? As they say on TV, really?

 

One more comment on secrecy. Do you believe that nobody reading or watching these groups, not a single person, has already alerted certain -- shall we say -- entities about Apply/Deny? 

 

Now where is my tinfoil? I need a new hat.

[Newtonian 453]

Because there is no information about the actual plan. Having read their info, there seems to be absolutely nothing indicating that it shares much DNA with the apply to be denied plan.  

OMG. Someone in these forums can read. 

[Golf battery 1,223]

Lets do our thing saturday and they do theirs. Then well take it from there. Sorry i cant be at both. Because it would be more insightful. But can't be two places at once. Let's wait till sat evening for name calling. Agreed ?

[Newtonian 453]

Super-curious about what happened at this meeting as well. What was behind the curtain?

[raz-0 1,259]

 

this excerpt seems to have some relevency no?

 

 

As many of you know, the United States Constitution prohibits individual states from implementing legislation that would interfere with or infringe on its citizen's civil rights.  This has not prevented many of them from doing just that.  

 

The laws they have passed, on the face of them, appear to comply with the 2nd Amendment's requirement to allow law abiding citizens the right to bear arms.  However, it is a ruse, for they wrote laws that gives them the right to evaluate your NEED to arm yourself as opposed to your right to do so. 

 

The application a citizen must fill out is designed to the eliminate almost every citizen from approval. And those not eliminated by their responses and history, will then be eliminated by an un-elected Judge who believes he has the right to circumvent your' rights as he decides that his perception of your need can trump your rights. As a result, virtually every NJ citizen is denied his civil rights.

 

Many states run by socialists, employ tactics such as these and New Jersey is by far the most egregious implementer of such laws of prevarication.  But that does not make them legal or constitutional.  We are about to take them on and we will be doing so, presenting the case in such a manor, that the United States Supreme Court will be unable to deny docketing it. 

 

DENIED APPLICANT

If you want to be part of this effort and possibly as a result have your rights restored and your application to carry revisited and approved please add your name to the list of those citizens whose rights have been denied.

 

CAUTION:  Only those individuals who have been denied the right to bear arms here in NJ for the unconstitutional reason of "lack of need" should add their names to this list.  If you were denied on the grounds of criminal record, mental health issues or some infraction of domestic violence, please do not sign up for this program.  We only want those with no issues to be part of this campaign.  You may well have a good reason for contesting that determination, but this will not be the forum for that.

 

Please send this posting to any friends or family members who may have been denied their civil rights.

As always,TPATH gives permission re-post or re-transmit a this article in any social media available.

 

*********

 

TPATH Founder

Dwight Kehoe

and

TeamNJ Founder

 

 

 

No, because apply to be denied is going after the states defense of "but of course we approve tons of these. 97% of applicants get theirs". 

 

This is just looking for people who have been denied already looking for potentially aggrieved parties. The legal reasoning other than "shall not be infringed!!!!" really isn't stated. That's a legal non starter. So is going the privileges and immunities route as SCOTUS said as much in heller and a number of other cases that wanted to revisit that bit of the bill of rights. There's a difference between lunatic raving about 2A issues, wishful thinking that is slightly informed, and a legal strategy that has some sound legal thinking and wicked legal strategy behind it.

 

For example the calguns foundation and SAF have some sound legal strategies going. They don't give it all away though, but they do tell you enough to know it isn't lunatic ravings or wishful thinking. They also don't ever make the statement like: " 5. Every effort so far, for the past 40 years here in NJ has failed. Will our's work? If it gets to the final stage, the answer is yes."

 

Your final stage can be SCOTUS, it could be constitutional convention, it could be bloody revolution, it could be intervention by the lizard people. There are NO guarantees of victory, ever. Statements like this tend to make me thing that this falls into either the wishful thinking category or the lunatic category, in order of likelihood. There may be a sound plan, but the come on does not make it sound worthy of my time or money. Short of either altering the come on, or getting enough people I know have sound judgment to vouch, it jsut isn't going to get much of my time. 

[10X 3,296]

I'm curious too. SAPPA expended a lot of words here beforehand, nothing but the sound of crickets since. Can anyone who was present comment on whether it was worthwhile?

[Rysdad 5]

It was worthwhile.  To say the least. 

[10X 3,296]

Can you elaborate?

[Rysdad 5]

I can only say that at this time I will respect their wishes and hold off on any public comment for the time being.  I feel that if you were to email the leadership of their cause that they would answer your questions. 

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

I was at the meeting on Saturday, and had the pleasure of meeting a couple of fellow forum members, Rysdad and gleninnj.

Attendance was a lot lighter than I might have imagined.  They had 180+ sign up for it, had 55 confirmed, but ultimately only 25 or so of us showed up.

 

They presented a well thought out plan.  As Rysdad notes, it would be unfair to give away too much of the plan at this point.  But they will be

filing a complaint within the next few weeks, and it will all be public at that point.  Basically, it is a two-pronged approach, involving litigation and

legislation.  As I understand it, the former involves bypassing New Jersey's corrupt, liberal judicial system; naming specific defendants in a systematic

scheme to deprive the state's citizens of their civil rights with regard to the Second Amendment.  If that is successful, they will petition to have NJ's anti Second Amendment laws nullified, and replaced with something similar to the legislation on their website.

 

They have prepared a lengthy, carefully crafted legal brief to those ends.  While I have not read the entire brief (oxymoron?), their plan sounds

better than any I have heard to date.  They did not ask for money, and they did not ask anyone to volunteer huge amounts of time, so I'm

having trouble understanding the negativity that I'm hearing here.  For those who feel unwilling to get behind this

due to a lack of information, then just wait a few short weeks until the complaint has been filed, at which point it will

all be in the public domain, and you can make an informed decision as to whether or not to support it.

 

 

[CMJeepster 2,777]

You also, in an ideal world, would be able to go back to the NJ constitution, the oath to hold office, and the guarantee in the constitution to defense of oneself. ("All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain natural and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness. ")

That's the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

 

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

[njJoniGuy 2,131]

No.

It's quoted directly from Article 1 Paragraph 1 of the 1947 version of the New Jersey Constitution

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/lawsconstitution/constitution.asp

[mipafox 438]

I'm curious too. SAPPA expended a lot of words here beforehand, nothing but the sound of crickets since. Can anyone who was present comment on whether it was worthwhile?

They ate everyone. The two guys who are back are part of their clan

[Rysdad 5]

Mmmm. I like legs...

[raz-0 1,259]

That's the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

 

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

 

You should really check you are right before calling out people for being wrong. 

No.

It's quoted directly from Article 1 Paragraph 1 of the 1947 version of the New Jersey Constitution

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/lawsconstitution/constitution.asp

 

Yup.

[CMJeepster 2,777]

You should really check you are right before calling out people for being wrong. 

Ease up.  My mistake.  I thought that he was looking at the US Constitution, not the NJ Constitution.

[10X 3,296]

Ease up. My mistake. I thought that he was looking at the US Constitution, not the NJ Constitution.

NJ had a Constitution??

[CMJeepster 2,777]

NJ had a Constitution??

Another document that's not followed.

[CMJeepster 2,777]

No.

It's quoted directly from Article 1 Paragraph 1 of the 1947 version of the New Jersey Constitution

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/lawsconstitution/constitution.asp

Oh, and I did bring this us about 2 years ago:  http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/24428-constitutional-challenge-to-part-of-new-jerseys-gun-carry-law-rejected/?p=729228

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

I know that a number of people on this board expressed some negativity toward SAPPA, mostly due to a perceived lack of information about it.

Here is Dwight's blog from today.  I hope people will take a look at it, as it appears to be a worthy effort.  Is it guaranteed to be successful?

Absolutely not, but it's the best strategy I have seen so far to overturn New Jersey's unconstitutional requirement of "justifiable need."

 

http://www.tpath.org/it-s-about-defending-civil-rights.html

[JohnnyB 4,323]

I know that a number of people on this board expressed some negativity toward SAPPA, mostly due to a perceived lack of information about it.

Here is Dwight's blog from today.  I hope people will take a look at it, as it appears to be a worthy effort.  Is it guaranteed to be successful?

Absolutely not, but it's the best strategy I have seen so far to overturn New Jersey's unconstitutional requirement of "justifiable need."

 

http://www.tpath.org/it-s-about-defending-civil-rights.html

 

We are all after the same goal! There is no instruction booklet on how to accomplish this goal.

We must welcome all who are trying to help and give them credit for not just sitting at home and bitching but

actually getting off their butts and trying to forward our mutual cause!

 

We must all work as a team. Not fight each other!

[Golf battery 1,223]

Johnnybuddha. Agreed. Any avenue of approach to this issue must be backed. Unless its asinine like just carry and dont worry about it until you get caught. Well then. Thats a whole different topic.

[1LtCAP 4,262]

I get it.  In my dreams we tar and feather them all for violating the constitution and our civil rights. (by the way, I edited that down two notches to tar and feather).  But they took our rights piece by piece.  We'll probably end up getting them back that way.

 

But, if we can actually win some court challenges, it can happen in bigger steps.  This is a big part of why I'm ready to do this.  That, plus I just want to p. off Weinberg, Sweeney, Mainor, and the rest.

we need to also find a way to hold accountable those that gave away our rights, and continue to give them away. without those willing to give them away, those in power could never take them away.

[Newtonian 453]

I know that a number of people on this board expressed some negativity toward SAPPA, mostly due to a perceived lack of information about it.

Here is Dwight's blog from today.  I hope people will take a look at it, as it appears to be a worthy effort.  Is it guaranteed to be successful?

Absolutely not, but it's the best strategy I have seen so far to overturn New Jersey's unconstitutional requirement of "justifiable need."

 

http://www.tpath.org/it-s-about-defending-civil-rights.html

I read the post. The first 2/3 is about all that stuff that everyone here gripes about, and that our public servants stopped listening to decades ago. The last third is the same pig in a poke. "Believe us, trust us." 

 

I wish them well. Upon revelation of their brilliant, original strategy I'll be the first to admit I was wrong. I'll even write them a check. 

 

As I've said a dozen times legal routes are treacherous, time-consuming, horrendously expensive, subject to infinite re-interpretation, challenge, and delay. Favorable decisions are easily overturned or redefined by some other court, even the same court. Look at what's happening in California. There can be only one reason why the 9th circuit court insisted on hearing this appeal, which amounts practically to re-hearing the case.

 

Since I've been following this stuff, which is for more than 25 years, all but a handful of significant advances were achieved legislatively -- NOT through the courts. 

 

Turning a critical number of NJ legislative districts around before 2018 is the only answer. But that would take work and cooperation among the various organizations claiming to represent NJ gun owners. The prevailing sentiment here seems to be to pin our hopes on the same judicial system that has turned its back on us numerous times. In other words, magic.

 

Abracadabra!!

[1LtCAP 4,262]

They ate everyone. The two guys who are back are part of their clan

SEE THIS?  this is funny

[maintenanceguy 510]

I read the post. The first 2/3 is about all that stuff that everyone here gripes about, and that our public servants stopped listening to decades ago. The last third is the same pig in a poke. "Believe us, trust us." 

 

I wish them well. Upon revelation of their brilliant, original strategy I'll be the first to admit I was wrong. I'll even write them a check. 

 

As I've said a dozen times legal routes are treacherous, time-consuming, horrendously expensive, subject to infinite re-interpretation, challenge, and delay. Favorable decisions are easily overturned or redefined by some other court, even the same court. Look at what's happening in California. There can be only one reason why the 9th circuit court insisted on hearing this appeal, which amounts practically to re-hearing the case.

 

Since I've been following this stuff, which is for more than 25 years, all but a handful of significant advances were achieved legislatively -- NOT through the courts. 

 

Turning a critical number of NJ legislative districts around before 2018 is the only answer. But that would take work and cooperation among the various organizations claiming to represent NJ gun owners. The prevailing sentiment here seems to be to pin our hopes on the same judicial system that has turned its back on us numerous times. In other words, magic.

 

Abracadabra!!

 

I've thought that we could run a few candidates against the most anti-gun legislators as democrats in the primaries.  Nobody turns out for primaries so you can win races with a couple hundred votes.  But I don't know that we could take enough key positions to make a difference. 

 

Do you have any thoughts on how to get the right people into office that hasn't been tried?

[Newtonian 453]

I've thought that we could run a few candidates against the most anti-gun legislators as democrats in the primaries.  Nobody turns out for primaries so you can win races with a couple hundred votes.  But I don't know that we could take enough key positions to make a difference. 

 

Do you have any thoughts on how to get the right people into office that hasn't been tried?

I value your opinion but this is not a strategy. I believe we need 7-8 seats in both houses. You're talking 15 seats. Winning will involve overcoming the $$$ that the incumbents have built up. As soon as they see the threat they'll be on us like flies on doo-doo. After they win the nomination what do we do? Let them hang out to dry? Even faux democrats, you know, are humans. 

 

My plan to get out the vote is the best idea that anybody's had. It's 100% stealth. We have the elections and suddenly an extra 2000 people show up and the assholes lose.

 

I've demonstrated mathematically, to the precision of 17 decimal places, how we can overcome the situation we are in. But as a guy in a porno movie once said, "nobody gives a doo-doo." 

 

You keep going to those SAPPA meetings. Report back on whether the relevant circuit court gives a s**t whether St. Paul the Evangelist owned a Ruger or a Glock, or the meaning of "militia" within the context of James Madison's original intent. Don't forget to dig deep into the letters of Benjamin Franklin, the original manuscripts. Those tactics have been so successful after all.

 

Sorry to be such a sarcastic SOB but that's my general mood.

[1LtCAP 4,262]

how do we get the lazy#$% out to vote though?