GRIZ

Too bad Judge Napolitano didn't also discuss warrantless searches under exigent circumstances which I know he has to be aware of. This is when there is sufficient PC for a warrant but you need to do the search right away to prevent death, injury, destruction of evidence, or escape of suspect. This concept has been around way before the Patriot Act. The ONLY circumstance where a Warrant can be served without Judicial signoff, is under the PATRIOT act. EVEN THEN, it has to be demonstrated that there was an Emergent threat where waiting.....used to establish PC after the fact, it's can't be used as a fishing expedition to look FOR Probable Cause. This is 100% correct and one example of what I said previously. The Patriot Act really doesn't allow police to do more than they were already able to do, it just made it easier in regards to terrorist investigations.

Not always a no no. Read all of the court decision in NJ vs Carty. It puts a burden of reasonable suspicion on the police to do a consent search. It does not forbid them. If Mr Zimmer pled guilty to lesser charges then all this conversation is academic as its over. All of this is speculation as we don't have all the facts.

Yes they do. Its then reviewed by the US Attorney's Office. Sometimes they want more info and the agent has to collect and include in a warrant. Then it goes to a judge. Sometimes the judge wants more info and the agent has to collect that. I knew judges who would refuse to sign a warrant if the punctuation and capitalization weren't correct. It does get that close a scrutiny. When the judge is satisfied there is sufficient probable cause to issue the warrant the judge signs it. The warrant specifies the time of day the warrant can be served. It is only when the judge signs it does it become a search warrant. Its only a piece of paper until the judge signs it. The warrant must be returned after service indicating who served it and what was seized. I said in post #18: Anything can be misused. I have seen LEOs lose their jobs and go to jail for lying on affidavits The process is far from the rubber stamp a lot of people erroneusly believe.

http://www.sksboards.com/smf/index.php?topic=27678.0 Here is a link I found describing the parts counted toward compliance. The stock and the handguard count as separate parts. If you replace the magazine it and the follower that's two more parts (keeping it fixed and 15 rds or under to be NJ legal). I'm not sure what parts are available out there but outside of major features you desire (pistol grip, folder, etc) I would replace smaller, cheaper parts rather than more expensive ones like the bolt.

get screwed while doing the right thing.. and you have a forum full of people who will stand behind you.. get caught doing the wrong thing and fish for sympathy? you are better off looking elsewhere.. NOT saying anyone is guilty OR innocent.. we simply do not know enough about the situation.. I wholeheartedly agree with you on this. As responsible gun owners we need to take whatever steps are needed to comply with the law no matter how stupid the law may be. You need to be aware of the law wherever you are in order to maintain that responsibility. There is no sense to add another conviction for a firearms offense for the antis to throw in our face.

She consented to the search without a thought (probable cause is extremely questionable here), and the officer discovered the gun. No probable cause is needed for a consent search. That's why its called "consent". Consent can be oral or in writing. Refusing to consent to a search does not establish probable cause. It is also my understanding that in NJ if the police officer has to ask for permission to search you car then he doesn't have probable cause and the search may not stand up in court anyway. I could be wrong. There are only a few ways a consent search doesn't stand up: 1. Consent is given by someone who deosn't have authority to give the consent. For example: You have a locked box in your apartment and only you have a key. You are not there and the police ask your room mate for consent to search the box. The police break it open, find contraband, seize it, and arrest you later. What was in the box can be surpressed as it was not a legal consent. 2. The defense can prove the person giving consent was coerced into doing so. 3. The person who gave the consent withdrew the consent and the police continued the search and found contraband. Some agencies want their officers to get the consent in writing. If they fail to do so its violating a agency policy and does not make the search illegal. Strange that this was done thru municipal court. I'm not up on present practices but I've seen this done in the past when: 1. It was a lower level indictable offense normally heard at the county but the defendant requested a hearing rather than a jury trial. Good idea it the defense is a matter of law not of fact. In other words, admitting you did what you did but what you did was legal. 2. The defendant is willing to plea guilty to a lesser crime. This includes a PTI program. If there is no PTI and the defendant pleas guilty there is no appeal of the verdict. The sentence may be appealed but this is usually worked out beforehand. Either way it helps clear the docket at the county level as they could never hear all the cases that go to it. Did anyone say guilty during the proceedings? If so, your friend pled guilty to lesser charges. Going back on 11/17 would be the judge is waiting for the probation report before sentencing. Maybe I missed it but when was he arrested?

"One tends to throw caution to the wind when wearing ‘commando-chic’ regalia, a bulletproof vest with the word ‘POLICE’ emblazoned on both sides, and when one is armed with high tech weaponry." This is true. Look at what happened to ATF at Waco with David Koresh. I've already stated that many local PD SWAT teams are undertrained. No argument from me on this. I don't think BDUs ahould replace a regular police uniform if it is but there needs to be something like a rough duty uniform for police. SWAT team deployment rates, this goes to 2001, I wish it had up to current. Is it really 'getting that bad' out there. If the SWAT deployment rates follow violent and serious crime rates, we're really going down the tubes I've already said SWAT teams are overused by many agencies to justify their existence and expense. Kraska found that 75 to80 percent of those deployments were to serve search warrants in drug investigations." Most of the search and arrest warrants I participated in were part of drug investigations so I speak from experience. Where there is drugs there is usually money and weapons. Not debating the effectiveness of the drug war just stating facts. All of the people in the drug business are not in the ghetto. Probably half the warrants I've been involved with were on residences in middle or upper class neighborhoods. They all follow the same formula of drugs+money+weapons. SWAT teams have been used to break up neighborhood poker games, sent into bars and fraternities suspected of allowing underage drinking, and even to enforce alcohol and occupational licensing regulations. Earlier this year, the Department of Education sent its SWAT team to the home of someone suspected of defrauding the federal student loan program." Once again overuse to justify existence. No excuse for any of that happening. No attempt at defending those actions you have related here because there is none. I know such things happen but no LEO I know or myself have ever been part of such stupidity. I would only want these tactics employed in a situation where there is a complete positive ID, and you the authorities are SURE.. you say there is always some doubt? if there is doubt.. ANY doubt.. then it is not right to employ those types of tactics As I said before if you wnat police to be absolutely sure before they use a dynamic or "hot" entry you can expect a lot more dead cops and a lot more barricaded suspect situations. Many times the only knowledge police have is there is the probable cause needed to get the warrant which has to satisfy the judge. You say you have a loaded gun nearby when you sleep. I suppose most of us on this forum do. That's just in case, right? What's wrong with the police controlling the occupants during a warrant rapidly just in case? Malsua said earlier "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." One of the best teachers I ever had gave me a bit of advice when I was starting to teach. He told me "start out tough, you can always lighten up but if you start easy its hard to get tough". This worked for me teaching and it works when serving warrants. The difference is you have already established there is someone breaking the law when you have PC for a warrant. You need to control the people first and make adjustments from there. You typically see these when you are stopped by a Trooper, he or she is always polite but makes sure you know they are doing business. There are people in this thread that don't like the uniforms, don't like the tactics, or don't like the weapons. Some don't like all three. I never see LEOs on gun forums tell everyone else how to conduct their business. It never ceases to amaze me that everyone on a gun forum knows better how a LEO should do their job. You may not like it but its not illegal.

922 compliance would be an issue as the OP said he was going to fit a pistol grip stock. 922 also an issue for a folding stock. Keeping the fixed magazine and 922r compliance would allow you to do both in NJ.

Ypu can do anything you want to a stock SKS as long as you don't change the fixed magazine. You do have to be concerned with 922r compliance however.

There is no need for towns to have SWAT. It is just a little overzealous for me. The State is always standing by and have better trained personnel than Barney Feif who just got issued an AR and thinks he is is MR Bad Arse. Bigger cities may have justification for SWAT but I generally agree with you on this. NJSP is very well trained and effective. The problem is if the need is not identified well in advance NJSP may not be able to respond as quickly as needed. Maybe the County Prosecutor's Office assume this responsibility. AS LONG AS IT FITS THE CRITERIA FOR THE NJ AWB. Just because you are out there to enforce the law doesn't mean you are above it. They should have to follow the rules that any one of us has to. I wouldn't put any restriction on the numbers of weapons as long as the agnecy was willing to provide the training and qualification. You have to face the fact police need to be above the law in order to enforce it and provide the services you expect. The police need to be exempt from the law when they speed or go through red lights taking an infant with trobule breathing to the hospital. They need to be able to use force to effect an arrest. They need to be able to demand things from people and arrest them if they fail to comply. About the only thing police "get away with" off duty is they can carry >than 15 rd magazine off duty. Stupid law? yes, but they can "get away" with that. Swat should not be allowed to wear balaclavas. You don't get to dress like a ninja or a cat burglar. If you're not willing to show yourself as a face of law enforcement, tough. Do something else. There are some valid reasons for SWAT to have balaclavas but I agree to conceal their identity is not one of them. Also, this "destroying evidence" thing always cracks me up. If the evidence can be destroyed in the 60 or 90 seconds you give as a warning, it wasn't enough evidence to warrant a hot entry. Giving 60-90 seconds as a warning is ridiculous. If this were done you will find many more LEOs and suspects killed serving warrants. 60-90 seconds is enugh time to flush a pound of weed, coke, or heroin (maybe more if to have one of the power flush toilets). Are any of these considered enough evidence? 60-90 seconds allows a lot of time for evidence to be destroyed and suspects to escape or arm themselves. 60-90 seconds would also crack you up if you were in the business of servong search and arrest warrants. I have often wondered this.. all of us here are NOT criminals.. (or we could not legally own guns).. so if someone smashed in our door and woke us up out of a dead sleep.. the LAST thing in our minds would be police? so in a situation where the police "break into" the wrong house.. and they are met with semi automatic rifle fire.. I see your concern. However you need to look at the facts. The main purpose of a "hot" or dynamic entry is gain immediate control of the occupants to minimize injury to anyone. Done properly, it will be over in 30 seconds or less. Done properly, you will hear the entry team yelling police as they clear areas and even their ninja suits, raid jackets, or body armor will have "police" promonantly displayed. You will have little time to react. Using the stats Dan provided in the link in post #4 there will be maybe 7 warrants served on innocent people this year nationwide so the probability of it happening is very low.

I agree with the purpose of the Act; however, I do not agree with the lack of checks and balances for it to be misused. If there is a potential for misuse, there is a high likelihood that it will happen. Couple this with the secrecy behind how it is used is a dangerous recipe. Good info here that saves me from typing it out. Contrary to what the media says there are checks and balances for the provisions of the Patriot Act. You need to prove to a judge why you need that wiretap or search warrant. You have to prove periodically are getting evidence on the wiretap for it to be renewed. These warants and subpeonas are not handed out like the media would like you to believe. Anything can be misused. I have seen LEOs lose their jobs and go to jail for lying on affidavits. Secrecy. Good point. Should the US post authentication codes for nuclear weapons on the internet? Thta's ridiculous of course and so is believing the public should know everything. We can't expect to get anywhere if we make everything public record. Terrorism and foreign intelligence investigations require secrecy to protect what we know and those who helped gather the information. They are released on a need to know basis. if you're charged with a crime of terrorism or espionage you and your lawyer will have access to that info if required. A judge determines what's required. That is what need to know is all about. Unfair election practices - I am most concerned with the last two or three paragraphs. It is a complex issue, and one that will take a sophisticated solution Sure if you are from a state with a larger population your vote counts more because there are more people in your state and you have electors. If you are from a state with a smaller population (Alaska has only one member of Congress) you get a little more say as you have 3 electoral votes. This will never amount to equal those of a large population state but is there to prevent larger states from determining an election. A check and balance system and you seem to be in favor of those. What I am against is no-knock/quick knock type raids with warrants obtained under sketchy circumstances. How much time should there be between the knock and announce and forced entry to allow the suspects time to arm themselves and/or destroy evidence. Police surprising and overwhelming the suspects rapidly results in less danger for all. There also has to be justification when using SWAT type teams for these types of things, such as good reason to suspect dangerous armed criminals are present. A tip that someone is dealing pot from their home is not enough to justify sending in a fully equipped SWAT team for instance. This does not only happen in high crime areas as I'm sure you can remember this example. As I said previously SWAT teams are overused in some areas to justify their existence. Keep in mind that arresting someone with a gun is an everyday occurence in Newark, Elizabeth, or Camden and rare in smaller communities. What establishes good reason to believe they are armed and dangerous? A marijuana dealer you say? Several years ago I was working with NYPD Narcotics and they told me the marijuana dealers are the most violent and most likely to be armed. This is at a time when NYPD would just take his grass and issue a summons. I can relate dozens of instances I have personal knowledge of where what should have been a seemingly routine, uneventful arrest turned violent because of the defendant. What exactly is the problem about using SWAT teams? The uniforms look too military? What if they just wore raid jackets? Your link about the incident in MD has a lot of questions unanswered. The police send a package of drugs to an address and then arrest the occupants for dealing? Sounds like entrapment to me. There is more to this story.

Ray may have the Cirillo connection wrong but NYPD was issuing this as recently as 2005 to my knowledge and probably more recently. IIRC it was the first hollowpoint NYPD issued in the early 90s.

That's the same frame size as an Official Police or Python. Mini Mags will never hurt it.

NO again. NJ law is only an issue in buying a long gun out of state and your need to have a firearms ID card. Other than that NJ law stops at the border. You will be bound by Federal law and the law of the state you're in. Go open carry in PA or CCW with no permit in Alaska. NJ has nothing to say about it.

One thing that contributes to this mess is people barking up the wrong tree. For example: Gradual erosion of our rights - For instance the "Patriot Act" The Patriot Act didn't give LE the power to do anything they hadn't been able to do in the past. It just made it easier for LE and more streamlined to catch terrorists. If you are not a terrorist the Patriot Act has had little negative effect on you and the general population. Yes it is a PITA getting your driver's license because you have to prove you are who you say you are. Is that that bad a thing? You also can't show up on the dock the day the cruise ship sails for the best deal as you haven't been checked through databases for terrorst activity. Can LE find out what library books you've checked out and get a roving wiretap? Most certainly so if it is all part of a terrorist investigation. There has to be some substance not just fishing as many have wrongly claimed. Many of the subpeona powers of the Patriot Act have been in effect in relation to drug investigations for about 20 years to my personal knowledge. Why no outcry over that? I worked for an agency with much use for the Patriot Act for 4 years, from the signing to when I retired, and saw no abuses. Yes, some parts of the Patriot Act have been ruled unconstitutional and you'll find that with any law passed with so many issues passed as fast as it was. If the Patriot Act is affecting so many people negatively please relate who and how? How has it affected people on this forum? Attacking the Patriot Act has been a favorite of liberals and libertarians and I suppose it will continue. Circumventing checks and balances, power creep - Rule by decree "executive orders" Good and bad here. POTUS can issue EOs to meet immediate needs. I agree with some and don't agree with many. I will agree that leaving it up to agency heads and AGs is a dangerous situation we don't have to look any further that NJ for that. The "gun laws" that the current AG has invoked by guidelines and opinions are the perfect example. Unfair election practices - just read up on the Electoral College. Also, the 2 party system is in decline in the US, people want to vote for who they like regardless of their party affiliations. We should be looking at proportional voting systems. If you want to dump the Electoral College you need a Constitutional Convention and appropriate amendments. Thay's the way it is unless due process changes it. The Electoral College was established to give smaller states a fair shake. What do you propose that will be better? Proportional voting might work for the legislative branches but you what do you propose for executive positions? Someone who gets 20% of the popular vote becoming president? Eventually two parties will rise as the leaders anyway. Fear of incarceration - There are so many state and federal laws on the books that the govt at any time Not much of an argument from me on that. It reminds me of Janet Reno at a press conference after Columbine when she asked for more gun laws to prevent something like that happening again. A reporter asked her what her response would be to those who say "enforce the laws that are alreday on the books". Reno's response was "it doesn't matter whether or not we enforce them, we need more laws". Militarization of the police - Perceived "us v. them" mentality. Military style raids , especially botched ones "Militarization of the police" is directly related to the militarization of criminals that has grown over the past 40 years. I don't think you remember the murders of Officers Foster and Laurie or Piagentini and Jones in NYC or Trooper Werner Foster in NJ or about the 10 other police officers in the country the Black Liberation Army murdered. How about when Patty Hearst and her buddies in the Symbionese Liberation Army opened up with automatic weapons and the responding police were armed with 38 revolvers? This was the time SWAT became popular. How popular? It poured over into entertainment with movies like "Dirty Harry" and TV shows such as "Police Story" (one of the best), "Adam12" and of course "SWAT". Let's roll it up to the present day. Cities controlled by gangs, drug lords used to control neighborhoods, now they control countries. If you insist that police have no use for military type armament you probably also agree the average citizen shouldn't own a M4 type rifle or 30 rd magazine either. The problem with SWAT is every little town has to have a team. Limited pool of personnel to pick from and limited funds to maintain training. Overused? In many cases yes. The town spent all this money to buy all this equpiment and all these weapons we have have to justify. If properly trained, armed, and led SWAT type tactics result in fewer deaths and injuries to both sides. You don't need black BDUs to use military tactics. Your link to the Cato Institute is interesting and like all statistics can be juggled. Up to 40,000 raids a year? That would mean 30,000 this year so far and only 6 reportable incidents. That's .0002%. Nothing gets down to zero. All incidents, all years averages out to less than 15 a year or .000375%. One stat, "examples of paramilitray excess" who determines that? You, me or the Cato Institute. 3 diffrent answers on many I'm sure. 50 years ago buying ice cream cones for lost children and writing parking tickets may have been what many PDs did but not now. 50 years ago Lakewood was a sleepy resort town but not today. Bureaucracy - It's is at an all time high. Agreed as my following comments will support. I see two main philosophies that fuel the dynamics between conservatives and progressives/statists... You have the people that believe in personal freedom and the responsibility and then you have the people that believe that humans cannot be given that freedom because they will abuse it. Patriot Oak this is the answer! CCW, gun rights, banking, immigration, military industrial complex, and all the other problems would go away with people who believe in personal freedom and responsibility running the show. You can nitpick about this and that but this is the answer. Some regulation, you need that in a society but the less the better.

NJAC 13:54-1.3a exepmts most antique rifles and shotguns but not handguns from state firearms laws (with some conditions of course). Apparently NJ still looks at your gun as a fireram. As I said in my previous post Federal law and most other state laws do not consider it a firearm. If you take it to another state where it is considered an antique and not subject to firearms laws you could do a private transaction F2F.

I've used DeSantis Speed scabbards for about 20 years (see Ray's post #18). They are very secure without a strap and never lost a gun when being involved in vigorous physical activity. I have one for all the guns I normally carry. DeSantis Nemesis for pocket carry.

Don't try to clean it up. Collectors want all the original patina on such a gun. It is an antique (being made before 1898) under Federal law and most state laws but not sure about NJ. I do remember reading something once that may exempt it under NJ law but would need to research it.

What school?

You are correct. I thought they were referring to the relation of reverse.

they'd rather dump perfectly good ammo and fuel into the ocean than give it away to the taxpayers... When did this happen?

I have two older Taurus 669s (66 with full underlug) made in 1988 and 1992 both 6 shooters. The older one I have since new. I have no issues with either after thousands of rounds. The build quality is every bit as good as a S&W AFAIC and better than some S&Ws I've had. The DA is not as good as a S&W or Ruger but not something you can't work with. The only problem I see with Taurus is a lot of retailers price them near a S&W or Ruger. The older 669 I bought for 1/2 the price of a S&W Model 19 at the time and its proven to be a better gun than a Model 19 I once had. I would not hesitate to buy a Taurus that fit my need.

Being that the first 5 speed I drove (back in the 60s) was a deuce and a half the shift pattern makes sense in some respects. If you're trying to rock the truck out of the mud its much easier to shift first to reverse with that shift pattern the M35 has. First gear is a very low granny gear and unless you want to creep along, on a very steep hill, or have a heavy load you can start off in 2nd which is geared low anyway. There are a few cars out there with that shift pattern and I've heard it referred to as a "racing" 5 speed pattern. The logic being if you're driving in a road race you aren't using first or reverse after the race starts. These are about the most unbreakable trucks made IMO. The major problem with them in Vietnam was brakes and u-joints due to the mud and dust. Minor electrical problems are usually the result of military trucks (as in the Guard and Reserve) sitting a lot. Some seals also dry out from lack of use. There are some maintenance tips I can give you. Be sure to drain the air tanks at the end of a day. The water collects in it and rusts through the tank. It only takes a minute or so to build up pressure when you start the truck up again. When you are going to shut off the engine let it idle for a few minutes (I think the manual says 5) to give the turbo time to slow down. The bearings in the turbo are only fed oil with the engine running. If you shut down the engine right away the turbo is left spinning without any lubrication. Civilian cars and trucks with turbos are designed to deal with this lubrication issue but not a 2 1/2 ton. Never park the truck in gear. If bumped being a diesel the engine can start and keep running as the injector pump can suck up fuel without the fuel pump running. I have seen people seriously injured due to this. This is one reason the military uses chocks when parking. These trucks actually make sense if you're looking for a good utility truck with character. There were thousands of them reconditioned for Desert Storm that have been sitting since that time. I've seen them go for $3000-8000 depending on condition and accessories (canvas, seats, winch, etc). Mileage is a downer with 5-6 the usual but I have seen them get as high as 8-10 highway (level surface, no load, caeful driving). You can register as an antique (free renewals). It will last you the rest of your life with reasonable care. I'm still trying to convince my wife before they're all gone.

I believe Williams never applied for a carry permit, a "reasonable restriction". If he had and he were denied it would be a different case all together.

Ed, it's a Norinco(chinese) "Paratrooper" with an aftermarket folding stock. The rifle alone can usually be found for 350-400. ETA: Standard length SKS' have a 20" bbl, whereas the para comes with a 16" one. The original "paratrooper" was imported by Navy Arms. They were all wood stocks. Navy Arms also used to sell a "Cowboy's Companion", same as the paratrooper but without a bayonet.