(CNN) – New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie stood by his decision not to meet with Newtown families before and following his veto of gun-control legislation.
Some of those same families and other gun-control advocates protested Monday outside an event in Connecticut where Christie campaigned for GOP gubernatorial hopeful Tom Foley.
"I met with Newtown families a year ago and talked about the full range of gun control issues they were concerned about," Christie told reporters. "I didn't feel it was necessary to meet with them again, especially after I had made the decision."
Christie vetoed a bill approved by the Democratic-controlled legislature that would have reduced magazine capacities from 15 rounds to 10 rounds.
He argued that it would not solve the problem of gun violence and mass shootings, labeling it a "trivial" and "simplistic" approach. He sent it back with suggestions on how to tighten gun laws and strengthen the state's mental health system.
Christie's language about the magazine limit approach, however, angered some advocates pushing for tougher limits on firearms, especially after the December 2012 mass shooting at Newtown’s Sandy Hook Elementary School.
Mark Barden, who lost his 7-year-old son Daniel in the shooting and who serves as the advocacy director for Sandy Hook Promise, said he repeatedly tried to meet with Christie this summer before the governor made a decision.
"No one told me he had no intention to meet with us," Barden told CNN. "I beg to wonder why he didn't just tell me that."
In his veto response, Christie said it was impossible for magazine limits to "eradicate, or even reduce" mass shootings. But Barden called the governor's response "an emotional tirade" and said no one suggested that it would be the sole solution.
Gun control advocates argue a 10-round limit could stall a shooter when trying to reload.
"What we do know from data and fact-based evidence is that small magazines do save lives," Barden said.
Christie, who's considering a run for president in 2016, said Monday he "made the decision that I thought was best."
"I have nothing but sympathy for those folks who went through what they went through in Sandy Hook," he added. "But I don't believe the bill that was passed in New Jersey is an effective way to deal with it, and so I vetoed it. That's a difference of opinion, but it's nothing personal."