Gov. Dannel Malloy of Connecticut followed New Jersey's lead last week by banning gun sales to anyone on the federal terrorism watch list.

Yes, nobody denies it's mostly a political gesture - you can still be on the watch list and buy an assault rifle in Florida, then use it for nefarious purposes in anti-gun states such as Connecticut or New Jersey.

But that's why we need a federal law such as H.R. 1076, authored by Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), which would authorize the Attorney General to deny the issuance of licenses for firearms or explosives to a known or suspected terrorist.

For reasons they choose not to share, the Republican members of New Jersey's congressional delegation apparently have decided to genuflect to the NRA, or they see no conflict with denying someone access to a plane while also allowing them to walk out of Wal-Mart with a Bushmaster.

The scorecard is online: There's a discharge petition to get King's bill out of the Judiciary Committee - where it has stalled - and force a floor vote. But it was 46 votes shy of passage Friday, and none of the six New Jersey Republicans has signed it.

Would such a bill be effective? Again, terrorists aren't likely to obtain weapons legally, and there is a fair debate to be had about violating the rights of those placed on the watch list in error.

But it stands to reason that anyone who is forbidden to board a plane shouldn't be packing until they are cleared. And between 2004 and 2014, people on terrorism watch lists across the U.S tried to buy guns 2,233 times and succeeded 2,043 times - which is sheer lunacy, unless 2,043 appeals were miraculously granted.

If the next one turns out to be another Syed Farook or Robert Dear (who, granted, didn't appear on any list), the flaws won't seem so burdensome. But if a federal law prevents just one of the 30,000 gun deaths likely to occur in 2016, mission accomplished.

As noted last week, Gov. Christie did the right thing by signing a law that barred watch list suspects from obtaining a firearm permits in 2013, noting that his "first duty is to maintain public safety," and that this law would "keep our communities safer."

He has been running away from that decision ever since; he now tells CNN it should be a "state-by-state" matter - a political dodge he knows is problematic, but the only way to maintain his gun cred.

But it makes one nostalgic for the days when we had a chief executive who followed his conscience and told special interests to take a hike. It's unfortunate we can't say the same about the sheep who occupy the right flank of our congressional delegation.