kwadz

Also, when you call, ask to speak to one of his aides. They seem to take you a little more seriously than the operators who initially answer.

This is somehow not showing up in all the major news networks. I guess without a camera present in the house, no one cares to read about it! http://www.phillyburbs.com/my_town/cinnaminson/cinnaminson-police-seek-four-males-in-daytime-home-invasion/article_1ce55a1e-cb4c-5eca-9442-1008c3efeef6.html

When I dropped off my paperwork for more PPPs yesterday, at my municipal PD, I informed the police records staff that per the law Christie signed today (effective immediately) I wanted to request the following information from the PD: # of Pistol Purchase Permits issued in 2011, 2012, 2013 # of FID cards issued in 2011, 2012, 2013 # of carry permits issued in 2011, 2012, 2013 # of Pistol Purchase Permit applications rejected in 2011, 2012, 2013 # of FID card applications rejected in 2011, 2012, 2013 # of carry permit applications rejected in 2011, 2012, 2013 They were noticeably annoyed with me and confused over the law since they were completely unaware and told me I’d have to talk to the state police. I informed them that they were incorrect and that this information, per the law, was on a municipal basis, not just statewide. They told me “uhhh, uhhh, you’re going to have to talk to the clerk. His office is down the hall on the left” in a very annoyed and angry tone. I smiled (huge, devilish smile) and told them, “thank you VERY much!” I went to the clerk’s office and asked the same question. They politely told me that weren’t aware of the details of the law, yet, but that I’d have to fill out an OPRA request (with which they very nicely and willingly helped me make sure I filled out correctly) and that they’d give me whatever information they could per the law which they would research. They said to give them a week or two and that they’ll get back to me. I will keep you all updated with any response I receive. I urge everyone to perform the same request at your local PDs. If anyone has any other ideas for what we can request, I’d be game for heading back to the clerk and filling out more OPRA forms.

Thanks for the responses, guys. Just stopped in today to get my paperwork and found out the details. Cherry Hill requires no new fingerprinting. They require the following: $18 SBI money order standard application mental health check "next of kin" consent form (illegal form, btw) some other yellow signature form (also not standard, I believe)

Ok, so when I lived at my previous residence (also in NJ, different town), my chief told me that as long as I applied for a PPP/FID and underwent the $18 investigation within the previous 2 years, I didn't have to go through it again if I applied for more PPPs. Does anyone know if this is true (now or in the past) and if it is a town by town thing (subjective) or mandated by the State Police? I applied for my last set of permits and FID change of address 13 months ago and received them 11 months ago, if that makes any difference. I am about to apply for more permits, but I don't want to get the $18 money order unless I still need to go through all of that. And, no, I have not called and asked the township, yet, since they are pretty obnoxious and anti-gun to start with and never act friendly over the phone.

Guys, I'm all for this strategically when time is due, but one thing to consider is that if you all apply now, they can come back and accept all of ours (for just this one instance) and then claim to the courts (in the current case or in our SCOTUS appeal, if it goes that far) that they accepted 100% of the applications from "common Joe" folks such as ourselves. Then the case gets dropped and we are left with our Justifiable Need clause. When we attempt to reapply in 2 years (or whatever the expiration), we get turned down and it's back to business as usual. Like Frank said, it's free will and I'm not telling you guys not to do it, but please consider how it can be used against us in the long term.

For those of us who can't listen to the audio right now, can somone summarize? Do the judges come across blatantly anti-gun? What's the next step, if this fails?

I'm still in. My +1 is a maybe.

Just got an email from DEP FWLISTS stating the following: The NJ DEP Division of Fish and Wildlife is advising the public that the Makepeace Lake WMA shooting ranges will be closed for renovations from Monday, February 4 through Thursday, February 21. The hunter training facility is located in Atlantic County and has shotgun, muzzleloader and archery ranges. Also, on the website, it states: The Makepeace Lake WMA Shooting Range will be closed from Monday, February 4 throuth Thursday, February 21, 2013 for range renovation and improvements. For questions or comments call 856-785-0455. I can't call right now, but I'm just curious if anyone knows what improvements/renovations are being done. I've been there several times shooting clays and on the .22/muzzy range and it seemed to be in decent condition.

http://tax1.co.monmo...0&district=0200 If you can find out what county he lives in, you can narrow it down that way. otherwise, search all counties (select "all" under district")... under name put "moran"

Wally, My wife and I just did our change of address FIDs and a few pistol permits in CH back in July (took two months to come in). I tried to nicely talk to the women at the records desk about how their forms were illegal and they got obnoxious with me and said "it doesn't matter - if you want to buy guns, you'll fill them out. They're OUR forms. If you don't like NJ's laws, move to another state." I tried to reason with them and was polite the entire time. Every time I called to check on the status or went to pick up my permits/FID, I asked and got a rude response. What is the recommended OEC procedure to get the ball rolling? I'd be willing to put in for another permit just to jump on board if we got 10+ people (or whatever is needed for OEC to proceed). Msg me and let me know if/when we get there.

We've been all over it, here. Probably hundreds of votes from ppl I know or referred there. We can play the same game as them.

Do you mind quoting a statute that states that? Also, what is the definition of "anywhere that is legal"? So does that mean that you can legally just keep a rifle in your trunk all the time as long as it's unloaded? That would be great if it was the case, but I've never heard of it being that way. If you can cite something, I'd be very happy.

Ok, so I have been having a debate with a friend over whether NJ's laws allow for hunters/shooters to stop at the diner, Wawa, or a gas station on the way home from hunting or the range. To me, the way the law is written, it absolutely does NOT allow for any such stop unless the police subjectively decide that it is reasonable necessary. He claims that those of us who feel the way I do are being alarmists and in years and years of practice and precedent, they do not arrest people for doing such things. He said it's common, to the effect of being standard, during hunting season for guys to stop at the diner in full camo/orange for a cup of coffee on the way to the field and for lunch on the way home and police consistently see them doing this and historically have done nothing about it. He says that since the precedent has been set for years on end, it would take an announcement from the AG or NJSP that they will start enforcing the "reasonably necessary" clause and arresting people or else they would have no legal basis for changing precedent. His argument is entirely based on what really happens in the field and not on the semantics of the wording. He said unless he saw cited examples of people getting arrested in these situations, he wouldn't change what he does. FYI, he's been a hunter and clay shooter for 20-25 years in NJ. I'd like to get some feedback from you guys on whether we are overreacting, as he says, or if we have legitimate cause for concern. I cited the law below for reference. N.J.S.2C:39-5 (1)A member of any rifle or pistol club organized in accordance with the rules prescribed by the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice, in going to or from a place of target practice, carrying such firearms as are necessary for said target practice, provided that the club has filed a copy of its charter with the superintendent and annually submits a list of its members to the superintendent and provided further that the firearms are carried in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section; (2)A person carrying a firearm or knife in the woods or fields or upon the waters of this State for the purpose of hunting, target practice or fishing, provided that the firearm or knife is legal and appropriate for hunting or fishing purposes in this State and he has in his possession a valid hunting license, or, with respect to fresh water fishing, a valid fishing license; (3)A person transporting any firearm or knife while traveling: (a)Directly to or from any place for the purpose of hunting or fishing, provided the person has in his possession a valid hunting or fishing license; or (b)Directly to or from any target range, or other authorized place for the purpose of practice, match, target, trap or skeet shooting exhibitions, provided in all cases that during the course of the travel all firearms are carried in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section and the person has complied with all the provisions and requirements of Title 23 of the Revised Statutes and any amendments thereto and all rules and regulations promulgated thereunder; or ©In the case of a firearm, directly to or from any exhibition or display of firearms which is sponsored by any law enforcement agency, any rifle or pistol club, or any firearms collectors club, for the purpose of displaying the firearms to the public or to the members of the organization or club, provided, however, that not less than 30 days prior to the exhibition or display, notice of the exhibition or display shall be given to the Superintendent of the State Police by the sponsoring organization or club, and the sponsor has complied with such reasonable safety regulations as the superintendent may promulgate. Any firearms transported pursuant to this section shall be transported in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section; (4)A person from keeping or carrying about a private or commercial aircraft or any boat, or from transporting to or from such vessel for the purpose of installation or repair a visual distress signaling device approved by the United States Coast Guard. g.All weapons being transported under paragraph (2) of subsection b., subsection e., or paragraph (1) or (3) of subsection f. of this section shall be carried unloaded and contained in a closed and fastened case, gunbox, securely tied package, or locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is being transported, and in the course of travel shall include only such deviations as are reasonably necessary under the circumstances.

The catch is that if Jared had to get two references, he would probably contact some of his online gaming friends who have never met him in person and asked them to fill out the forms for him. He'd have them sent to them, they would (possibly being equally crazy) fill them out, get them notarized, and clear him to purchase. Anyone can find two people willing to sign anything. Unless you want to open the can of worms containing a full neighbor, coworker, teacher, and everyone else who ever knew someone background check, there is no way to effectively protect the public with references. I'd really like to see some stats from NJSP about how many people have actually received negative reference responses since the system has been in place.

Ok, cool - sorry if I added any confusion.

Krdshrk, NJ's magazine limit is 15, not 10. The proposed bill (Greenwald-D6) is to change it to 10, but we will make sure that does not pass.

I would agree if you are referring to the spousal consent form, but a reference form does not go against the law. However, I would agree with you if you said to send it back without notarization and with a copy of the law. I would be curious to see how they would handle that. They can't legally deny the applicant because his reference did not have the form notarized, can they? In fact, if they did delay and legal action had to be taken, a judge might even be able to stop them from requiring notarization as a means of determining eligibility since it has nothing to do with the applicant directly.

You know, this is something that I really just don't understand. Before I was a gun owner, my wife and I lived in Northern Virginia (hated the people down there) for a year. A few months before we moved back to NJ, my wife's uncle died and we were unsure whether her aunt was going to give us some of his guns. In the end, she held onto them, but in the meantime I contacted NJSP to ask them what I needed to do to legally move back to NJ with guns from out of state. He told me (correctly) that I need not do anything as long as they were NJ legal, but he "strongly recommended" the voluntary registration. At the time I was only gathering information and was not involved or knowledgeable about 2A rights, so I didn't think much of it. But looking back and now hearing what your PD told you, I really can't figure out why this is always "recommended". Even my pro-gun Chief of Police recommended voluntarily registering guns previously purchased or gifted out of state. From their perspective, what is the purpose (other than potential confiscation)? I would never do it, but is there a supposed benefit to the gun owner if he or she is pulled over with the gun in the car?

Maksim, I'm not trying to get off topic, but what would you (as a NJ resident who legally purchased with a PPP in NJ) say if a cop asked to see a purchase permit on the spot? Do you keep copies of your sales receipts and PPPs with your guns whenever you transport? I'm actually asking this as a legitimate question - not a rhetorical one. The only thing I keep with me when I'm going to the range or hunting is my hunting license (when going to a WMA or hunting) or my FID (if I remember to bring it with me when I'm going to any non-public land range). Even with that, half the time I forget my FID at home. If I'm going to the range, isn't this a legal activity for which to have a gun locked in the trunk, unloaded, without requiring an FID? What if I had moved to NJ from out of state with guns and wanted to go to the range, but had not obtained an FID? That's not illegal, right?

Axe, Vitarelli was very warm and friendly over the phone. The reason I didn't push back too hard over the phone is exactly the same reason as you stated. I currently have a great relationship with Chief Bauer in Merchantville - he's one of us. I want to stay on good terms with DSG Vitarelli, as well. I figured if my wife and both go in person, with our infant daughter, and meet him when we pick up and/or drop off the forms, he will see us as a professional family and a good neighbor in Cherry Hill as opposed to a conservative activist (let him believe that I'm not one) who threatens everything liberal about Cherry Hill. Who knows - maybe he is even pro-gun and just following the chief's orders!

Axe, you know what? I hadn't even thought of it that way! That is a VERY good point! Hey, if they send her one, then they BETTER send me one as well, right? Man, would that be a lawsuit in the making...haha. Ironically, my wife used to work at a Domestic Violence center in PA and she said you'd be surprised at how many men came in for help with abusive wives. She'd probably confront them if they didn't send ME the form but sent one to HER only for that reason.

I'm wondering whether CH will send these forms to my house when my wife and I move there and both apply at the same time for our FID change of address. It would be kind of ironic to receive forms in the mail the same day for both of us to consent for each other since both of us would be applying for the same thing, in person, together. This would be a good test to see whether this is an intended method to slow things down or dissuade one from applying or whether they truly believe they are doing something good.

DSG. Joseph W. Vitarelli, Jr., #234 Public Information Officer [email protected] 856-432-8818 I spoke with him two weeks ago after seeing these posts. Wife and I are in the process of moving to CH and this was a concern. She and I both have FIDs and would need to transfer them. He told me he "owed this to the taxpayers of Cherry Hill to confirm the references were real people". This wasn't regarding the spousal consent form but the notarization of the references. I didn't want to stir the pot over the phone so I politely told him that I didn't believe that was a legal requirement. He then said that the references could bring the forms directly to the CHPD and they would notarize them for free (getting around the "extra fees/costs" requirement). Unfortunately, I wasn't thinking quickly enough to ask about references that lived far away, such as North Dakota (friend in the USAF). I figured that was more of a reconnaissance phone call to figure out his thought process and then plan around it. I encourage everyone to contact him directly and push this issue - both politely and professionally. As long as he only hears from people who sound like rational and "normal" people, we may be able to defeat this without legal action by just convincing him that it is wrong. I'm copied this exact post from the other Cherry Hill thread, so don't be surprised when you see it there, too.

DSG. Joseph W. Vitarelli, Jr., #234 Public Information Officer [email protected] 856-432-8818 I spoke with him two weeks ago after seeing these posts. Wife and I are in the process of moving to CH and this was a concern. She and I both have FIDs and would need to transfer them. He told me he "owed this to the taxpayers of Cherry Hill to confirm the references were real people". This wasn't regarding the spousal consent form but the notarization of the references. I didn't want to stir the pot over the phone so I politely told him that I didn't believe that was a legal requirement. He then said that the references could bring the forms directly to the CHPD and they would notarize them for free (getting around the "extra fees/costs" requirement). Unfortunately, I wasn't thinking quickly enough to ask about references that lived far away, such as North Dakota (friend in the USAF). I figured that was more of a reconnaissance phone call to figure out his thought process and then plan around it. I encourage everyone to contact him directly and push this issue - both politely and professionally. As long as he only hears from people who sound like rational and "normal" people, we may be able to defeat this without legal action by just convincing him that it is wrong. I'm going to copy this exact post to the other Cherry Hill thread, so don't be surprised when you see it there, too.