siderman 1,131 Posted April 8, 2016 Just a couple of quick observations. On the permitting directive "The Superintendent may from time to time modify the investigation standards and protocols as appropriate.". So after all the bluster from CC and this AG directive itself it can still come down to the NJSP sup't doing whatever/whenever he wants to at his discretion. It also would've been nice to see a residence to residence transport allowence (w/o moving) specified, that is still suspiciously missing. The whole transport issue is still waaay too reliant on the cops discretion, we may need to start carrying a log book like the truckers do.So much to go thru yet not even going near the ccw stuff, waste of time, dont want to hear any baby step BS. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GramGun79 226 Posted April 8, 2016 Step in the right direction but we have a long way to go. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NYMetsFan86 9 Posted April 8, 2016 ccw portion is cryptic. not sure what that means for average joe Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin125 4,772 Posted April 8, 2016 There is another lengthy thread on this..... "ITS LEGAL TO PICK UP FRIENDS AND GO TO THE BATHROOM" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MLArmory 33 Posted April 8, 2016 There is another lengthy thread on this..... "ITS LEGAL TO PICK UP FRIENDS AND GO TO THE BATHROOM" My bad haha, delete this thread then please, the title of that post threw me off I looked at the other thread titles to see if this had been posted yet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Krdshrk 3,871 Posted April 8, 2016 I merged the threads 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,569 Posted April 8, 2016 A step in the wrong direction IMO. Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MLArmory 33 Posted April 8, 2016 A step in the wrong direction IMO. Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk. Elaborate Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mipafox 438 Posted April 8, 2016 Does this interpretation of the law require you to meet with Jim McGreevy before you leave the restroom? 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,569 Posted April 8, 2016 Already did Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MLArmory 33 Posted April 8, 2016 Already did Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk. Minus the fact that you believe this will be seen as a direct list of appropriate deviations, how is this a step in the wrong direction? We are finally getting the Gov. and AG's attention enough to have them create directives and press releases. They are outlining a new process to hold the NJSP accountable for the amount of neglect put into issuing permits. They are finally addressing carry permits to at least SOME extent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silence Dogood 468 Posted April 8, 2016 So the "Study Commission" was real? A step in the right direction for sure, but all I keep thinking is: A little too late now huh Gov? But at least now I can stop and take a poop without risking a 30 year sentence. And I can go through a drive-thru but I can't stop and eat at a decent restaurant?...fast food blows. Now I'm thinking about if I actually have to poop, do I need to use the drive-thru for that too?...shit....now i'm "reasonably" concerned. "Any means" changed to "Reasonable means" Great....now define "reasonable". How about the effing Constitution says I can? That's reasonable to me and 40+ other states. Ridiculous .....and sad that some will probably consider this a victory and be placated by it's nonsense. My 8 year countdown to freedom continues. Hell yes, it was real - I testified in front of them and presented them with suggestions as to how to improve NJ laws - including this one. Showing up MATTERS. SD 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Knuckle Sandwich 5 Posted April 8, 2016 Yet another net-loss for NJ gun owners. The 30 day limit stuff is just too cute. No punishment to the state or municipalities for breaking the law, just a mild "we might bother to make you tell us you broke the law, but don't worry we won't bother to do anything about it, so feel free to keep breaking law" do nothing recommendation. What a load of garbage. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SW9racer 262 Posted April 9, 2016 So no laws were changed, they only restricted the restrictions? I can go thru a drivethru but can't go inside the restaurant? But I can go inside to poop but not to eat? Now I can make a detour, I didn't know before that I had to register my flight plan before going to the range. And all this can easily be revoked when the next governor comes in, as nothing is in writing. Where is the step forward, what was permanently changed in the laws? 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob0115 1,105 Posted April 9, 2016 Does this interpretation of the law require you to meet with Jim McGreevy before you leave the restroom? You're on fire tonight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mipafox 438 Posted April 9, 2016 So no laws were changed, they only restricted the restrictions? I can go thru a drivethru but can't go inside the restaurant? But I can go inside to poop but not to eat? It did not specifically say you can poop. I would hold it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1LtCAP 4,258 Posted April 9, 2016 this is the same one i've seen linked over on farcebook? where the ag issued directives that all issuing agencies comply with state mandated guidelines? if so, have they specified punishment or consequences for non-compliance? 'cause if they didn't, then it's nothing more than we already have..... 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,569 Posted April 9, 2016 Smoke and mirrors. Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SmartAss 11 Posted April 9, 2016 Funny how Christie does these so called pro 2A moves on Friday late afternoons because he's afraid of liberal press/backlash. I think they refer to it as "Taking out the garbage." 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin125 4,772 Posted April 9, 2016 So no laws were changed, they only restricted the restrictions? I can go thru a drivethru but can't go inside the restaurant? But I can go inside to poop but not to eat? Now I can make a detour, I didn't know before that I had to register my flight plan before going to the range. And all this can easily be revoked when the next governor comes in, as nothing is in writing. Where is the step forward, what was permanently changed in the laws? The way I read it, you can go inside the restaurant, unless there was a quicker option in the judgement of the arresting officer. I say "arresting officer" because if you head into a Panera when there's a McD' drive thru there... you may just be a convict in the near future. That's how its written. You're at the mercy of the LEO. Again... somehow... he'd have to become aware that there was a firearm in your vehicle. Like if you've got some targets visible thru the window of your pickup and it peaks his curiosity. And by the way... If there's a long gun in my car, as we all understand here, I can drive around in circle's all day and all night if I was issued a FID. So my take is this pertains to those without a FID and anyone without a carry permit transporting a handgun. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mipafox 438 Posted April 9, 2016 Call him and tell him/his staffers that you want the statement clarified about taking a crap. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Redlines 202 Posted April 9, 2016 And to think there are states that you don't even need a permit to carry. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silence Dogood 468 Posted April 9, 2016 Keep something in mind. The only thing that permits you to have a Colt Match Target rifle in NJ is a written letter from the State AG (Peter Verniero). This is even though the Colt AR15 and CAR15 series are considered 'assault firearms' in NJ. So there you have a written interpretation from the highest law enforcement official in NJ that something is legal, as a further interpretation of law. People who own the Match Target rifle depend on this in their ownership. A written interpretation from the AG office carries weight, as it is an instruction, in part, to the NJSP who are in charge of enforcement of our goofy laws. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xXxplosive 819 Posted April 9, 2016 It's still better today than it was yesterday......and lookin' ahead to the future. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,569 Posted April 9, 2016 The PDs ignore the Law now. What makes everyone think that they will follow the AG Directive? Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pjd832 146 Posted April 9, 2016 after having the time to actually read the .gov link all 5 pages of legalese of bs regulations...i have to agree with those that say nothing has really changed...the original "no deviations in the course of travel than reasonably necessary" stands....pissing /pooping your pants is not reasonable then and they just reiterate the same all the nancy's that were clamoring for an exemption for a sit down lunch at joe bobs burger house still didn't get that...they got 5 pages saying the same thing as it said 5 yrs ago, i agree with what pk90 has said , its smoke and mirrors .....a long winded convoluted statement that doesn't loosen the nazi travel restrictions..and if anything tightens things, as if its not written there it will be illegal (in practice) there is a line in it which basically says "if the officer is unsure if its reasonable charge the traveler and let the courts decide" ( II-B)...... then in II-c-2......it mentions taking a "roundabout" route to simply "enjoy the drive" as not permissible again officer discretion to him taking njtp may ok but taking 295 that runs parallel may not acceptable? and the line about passing several options and choosing a later one as unacceptable....so if you have to go to the bathroom and you have your wife and kids with you...and the first 2 you see are dirty looking gas stations with the bathroom doors sitting open and a dirty horror movie looking truck stop..you have to tell your wife and daughter to suck it up and use those facilities as opposed to driving another mile to a better place? thats essentially what this 5 page bs says the most disturbing thing i think is even though we know how overreaching nj is...its really driven home if you actually read every line start to finish 5 pages about "limiting time a firearm" is "outside its cage" in fear of "how it could be used" in circumstances ...like self defense maybe?....the simple and right solution is to throw all these bs laws out the window.....and come into sync with 97% of the other states where they don't feel the need to tell you what road to drive on to get to your destination... all the people that think this is a win are sadly delusional its little more that an attempt to make people think there was a change when there wasn't because they apparently see gun owners as unintelligent fools....im surprised as many here are proving them right? nj mindset and a good portion of nj gun owners lol-------> http://gph.is/11vUiYo 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin125 4,772 Posted April 9, 2016 Pjd832: Your paragraph 4 above...That part of the AGs letter reveals that the view of not just The socialists in Trenton but the alleged conservatives, see the firearm as a problem that must be controlled very tightly by the state. And I say "state" as in DPRK kind of state....their basic premise is that "We can not allow guns to be outside of our implicit control and therefore we can not allow citizens to freely possess a firearm as that itself is a threat to public safety. And...we the govt know better than the people of this state what is best for them."I see little difference between this AGs position and the position of someone like Sweeney. But I see a MAJOR difference between his position and the position of someone like Sen. Mike Lee.This may be an improvement in terms of the language, but I don't see a change in how the Rs in power now see our right to the 2nd Amendment.(Had to edit... Meant to type para 4) 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
owadj01 0 Posted April 9, 2016 So what if we, NJGF as a group, do our part to excerise our 1st amendment rights in the face of some of these Mom Demand types. One of them threaten us as a group and we all would be CCW eligible. They would be so mad, they would keep coming at us with empty threats, we would be able to renew our CCW forever! Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bt Doctur 188 Posted April 9, 2016 It`s why you never admit you have guns in your car. drive sensibly, wear normal clothes never allow a search period. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pjd832 146 Posted April 9, 2016 It`s why you never admit you have guns in your car. drive sensibly, wear normal clothes never allow a search period. +100000000000000 ......and ill add don't have vehicle windows covered in stickers like an elementary school kids folder...why do some gun owners insist on trying to seek attention , more often its the unwanted kind 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites