August 6, 2008 - 11:00am
News

Christie on guns

One hint on U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie’s political ideology comes from his 1995 campaign for the State Assembly, when he attacked two other candidates, Anthony Bucco and Michael Patrick Carroll, for supporting a repeal of the ban on assault weapons. A reader sent PolitickerNJ.com a copy of the mailer from that campaign after Matt Friedman’s story on conservatives wanting to know where the federal prosecutor stands on some state issues.

Christie's position won't hurt him as a general election candidate in a state where polls over the last decade have constistently demonstrated support for an assault weapons ban.  His exposure is in the GOP primary against former Bogota Mayor Steve Lonegan, a staunch advocate of the Second Amendment.

Christie was serving as a Morris County Freeholder in ’95 when he sought an Assembly seat. One incumbent, Arthur Albohn, was retiring, and the other, Bucco, had won a special election convention after Rodney Frelinghuysen went to Congress. Christie and his running mate, Rick Merkt, lost the Republican primary to Bucco and Carroll. (Merkt went to the Assembly two years later when Bucco ran for State Senator.)

WALLY EDGE can be reached via email at politicsnj@aol.com.

Comments

And so


it begins...

08/06/08 12:17 pm

13 years ago...


Rick Shaftan needs to find better things to do with his time than dig up old mailers..

Are we seriously going to make a gubernatorial primary next year about guns and abortion given the real serious problems in this state?

08/06/08 12:19 pm

Doesn't Matter


New Jersey already has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation for those who either are carrying while a convicted felon or carrying without a license. No one is seeking to loosen the standards on felons or people without a license to carry firearms. As long as he's for not expanding what is already on the books, it's not much of an issue.

08/06/08 12:32 pm

Guns


Are guns really that big an issue for NJ Republicans?

Run as a crime/corruption fighting fiscal conservative, and try not to piss off the abortion crowd, and CC should be just fine.

08/06/08 12:36 pm

Not Much of an Issue ?


Christie denial of Federal Class 3 licences to lawbyding citizens and his failure to support CCW licences ( already isssued in the rest of our Republic) add that to his failure to support the Castle doctrine in NJ. This alone disqualifies him in Libertarian /Republican circles. Making NJ Gun owners 2nd class citizens. While he allows Lou Dobbs wife to carry. What a hypocrite. Dr Murray Sabrin and Lonegan will set him up for another Estarook moment

08/06/08 12:45 pm

very clever


look a little closer at the mailer. It says "Automatic Assault weapons," however it was the civilian semi Auto versions that were banned in NJ. You know someone is going to call him out on that one.

08/06/08 12:57 pm

not too clever, though


The mailer said he supports "the ban." As you point out, "the ban" applies to semiautomatics. Not just the automatics that he faulted Bucco and Carroll on.

08/06/08 1:17 pm

Guns


The only people in New Jersey allowed to carry guns are the criminals.

Honest people are defenseless.

This whole state will look like Newark-Camden in 10 years.

08/06/08 3:01 pm

What heavy-handed


What heavy-handed propaganda... "Okay, to make you look good and sell this liberal position to a conservative base, we'll... uh... surround you with children. Smile!"

08/06/08 6:58 pm

Semi-automatic Rifles Are Not The Problem


Since this article has chosen to repeat the Brady Campaign's lies about semiautomatic rifles (what they and you incorrectly term 'Assault Weapons'), I am forced to rebut the general lie about semiautomatic rifles that appears over and over in the media. The FBI has kept crime data per weapon type for the last two years. If semi-automatic rifles are truly "dangerous", I suppose we would see that fact reflected in the FBI data. However, the data below tends to indicate that your assumptions are wrong.

"by State, Type of Weapon, 2005"

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_20.html

Total murders: 14,860
Total handgun murders: 7,543 50.8% of total
Total rifle murders: 442 3.0% of total
Total shotgun murders: 517 3.5% of total
Total unknown firearm murders: 1,598 10.6% of total
Total knife murders: 1,914 12.9% of total
Total other weapons: 1,954 13.1% of total
Total no weapon murders: 892 6.0% of total

"by State, Type of Weapon, 2006"

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_20.html

Total murders: 14,990
Total handgun murders: 7,795 52.0% of total
Total rifle murders: 436 2.9% of total
Total shotgun murders: 481 3.2% of total
Total unknown firearm murders: 1,465 9.8% of total
Total knife murders: 1,822 12.2% of total
Total other weapons: 2,158 14.4% of total
Total no weapon murders: 833 5.6% of total

So what is this telling us? It looks to me that there are several things we can take away from this data:

1. The percent of murders committed with all rifles, not just semiautomatic, but all rifles including bolt actions, lever actions, single shots, and all other types, account for only 3% of murders. The number of murders committed with semi-automatic rifles is clearly even lower. All the murders committed with "dangerous" AK-47s, AR-15s, M1As, M1 Carbines, M1 Garands, .50 caliber rifles, H&K semiautomatics, Calicos, Beretta Storms, Galils, Steyer AUGs, and Mini-14s taken together account for less than 3% of all murders. Since you are lobbying to ban these rifles, I would expect that they were a larger part of the problem, but they are not. In fact, the .50 caliber rifles that are so "dangerous" the Violence Policy Center specifically wrote a pamphlet calling for their ban in particular have never been used for any crime within the United States.

2. Rifles represent the lowest danger of all weapon types, including "no weapon" - i.e. severe beating, strangulation, or throwing someone off the balcony. The number of murders committed with no weapons at all is almost DOUBLE the number of murders committed with rifles. The number of murders committed with a knife or other edged weapon is more than QUADRUPLE the number of murders committed with rifles. The number of murders committed with a blunt weapon is almost QUINTUPLE the number of murders committed with rifles. In fact, a person is more than ELEVEN TIMES more likely to be murdered with a knife, blunt object, or no weapon at all as compared to a rifle.

3. Despite the fact that semi-automatic rifles weapons are also said to be "increasingly" used by criminals by the Brady Campaign (I would like a quote for this but I can't find it), the percentage of murders committed with all rifles dropped from 3.0% to 2.9% between 2005 and 2006.

Semi-automatic rifles are not a crime source or a crime problem. The problem with these weapons is minimal compared to handguns and far less sophisticated weapons. They are not being used increasingly in crime. The fact is, because these weapons cannot be concealed, they are the poorest possible crime weapon imaginable. The Democrat group you cited is correct in opposing the banning of semiautomatic rifles, because it would decrease the rights of the citizens and deliver no crime reduction. You and the Brady Campaign simply use semi-automatic rifles as a red herring, but no one is biting anymore. Please turn your attention to passing laws that will deter crime like longer sentences for gun crime, gun running, and criminal gun possession.

08/07/08 2:32 pm