Trunk
-
Content Count
46 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
0%
Posts posted by Trunk
-
-
The flyer uses the same template - or someone wants us to think it uses the same template - as the Black Civics' Election Night Watch Party flyer.
Either way, it's pretty clear that this is a trap. It wasn't created by any pro-2A group and it would be a horrible idea for anybody to show up at a state capitol with guns. If you take peaceful, armed protestors and add violent counter-protestors with flagpoles and bear spray, I think we all know who's getting blamed.
They're already trying to link Michigan in May (armed, non-violent protest) with January 6 (unarmed, violent protest) to push their "but, but, but what if they had guns in D.C.?" narrative. They would just love an armed violent protest to boost public opinion for more gun control, especially AR-pattern rifles which play a minuscule role in the "gun violence" figures.
-
Although the language is slightly garbled, I don't read it the way Trunk does. Paragraph 1 is crystal clear and is the operative paragraph in legal parlance: "The Commonwealth of PA will recognize valid NH permits to carry concealed firearms by valid permit holders while said permit holders are present in the Commonwealth of PA". (Emphasis added). "Valid NH permits" unambiguously includes non-resident permits, and non-residents are unambiguously "valid permit holders." There is no other way to read it.
Guys, this situation is no different than our statutes here in NJ.^^^^This x10000000
2C:39-5(b)(1) clearly and unambiguously states that "[a]ny person who knowingly has in his possession any handgun, including any antique handgun, without first having obtained a permit to carry the same as provided in N.J.S.2C:58-4, is guilty of a crime of the second degree." Under this statue, absolutely nobody can possess a handgun without obtaining a permit to carry under 2C:58-4. But we all know that's not the end of the story. 2C:39-6 sets forth all of the situations when 2C:39-5 does not apply.
Based on your logic, everyone should also agree that nobody can possess a handgun in NJ according to 2C:39-5, regardless of what the rest of the criminal statutes say. Respectfully, that is completely wrong. You have to read the statutes (and contracts) as a whole.
I just thought it was worth bringing it up. We can agree to disagree (the attorneys I've spoken with have). We'll all do what we're comfortable with.
-
Are you taking about Bach v. NH Dept. of Safety? The issue before the NH Supreme Court was whether, by requiring a NJ resident to first obtain a carry permit in his home state, NH was subjecting NJ residents to a higher standard than required by NH law. The result is that NJ residents can obtain a NH permit without obtaining one from NJ.I guess the thing that makes me feel comfortable was the whole Supreme Court case.
It was completely based on non-resident who was trying to carry in PA
The NH Supreme Court was not asked to opine whether a NJ resident could carry in PA with a NH permit. Even if it was and even if it had, it wouldn't be binding on PA.
I'm not aware of any PA decision that interprets the reciprocity agreement, and I'm not willing to be the one who changes that.
-
As with PAFOA, that is their interpretation and is of no legal significance.According to CCW reciprocity website, NH ONLY takes home state licenses however, PA takes NH regardless:
http://www.usacarry.com/concealed_carry_permit_reciprocity_maps.html
-
Of course. We're just talking about what we think words mean. I'm only saying what I'm comfortable.i give no legal advice but i read paragraph (1) as pretty plain and simple.
If you're talking about paragraph one in the reciprocity agreement, paragraph 1 is crystal clear. But that doesn't mean that paragraph 3 does not have meaning or, more importantly, legal significance.
For example, you and your employer could enter into the following agreement:
1) You will show up at work.
2) Your employer will pay you.
3) This agreement only applies to the workweek and not to weekends.
Paragraph 3 serves a purpose, no matter how broad and clear paragraphs 1 and 2 are.
-
You pulled that from the AG website, right? You don't believe that the NJSP website is an accurate summary of the law, right?Category 1: States that have entered into written reciprocity agreements with Pennsylvania. (Title 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6109(k))
The following states have entered into formal written reciprocity agreements with Pennsylvania under section 6109(k) of the Uniform Firearms Act. These agreements provide for reciprocal recognition of valid licenses/permits issued by both states.
NH is one of these states...
If you are charged criminally, you are charged under a statute, not a summary of the law on a website. Therefore, you have to look at the applicable statute.
§ 6106. Firearms not to be carried without a license.
(a) Offense defined.--
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), any person who carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license under this chapter commits a felony of the third degree.
(2) A person who is otherwise eligible to possess a valid license under this chapter but carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license and has not committed any other criminal violation commits a misdemeanor of the first degree.
(b) Exceptions.--The provisions of subsection (a) shall not apply to:
(15) Any person who possesses a valid and lawfully issued license or permit to carry a firearm which has been issued under the laws of another state, regardless of whether a reciprocity agreement exists between the Commonwealth and the state under section 6109(k), provided:
(i) The state provides a reciprocal privilege for individuals licensed to carry firearms under section 6109.
(ii) The Attorney General has determined that the firearm laws of the state are similar to the firearm laws of this Commonwealth.
PA law requires you to obtain a license from PA before carrying, unless there is statutory reciprocity or a reciprocity agreement is in place. There is a reciprocity agreement in place with NH. The language in the reciprocity agreement is controlling (including any residency restrictions), not the general description of a reciprocity agreement on the AG website. You wouldn't carry in PA with a FL permit would you? No, you wouldn't... because the language in the reciprocity agreement doesn't allow for it.§ 6109. Licenses.
(k) Reciprocity.--
(1) The Attorney General shall have the power and duty to enter into reciprocity agreements with other states providing for the mutual recognition of a license to carry a firearm issued by the Commonwealth and a license or permit to carry a firearm issued by the other state. To carry out this duty, the Attorney General is authorized to negotiate reciprocity agreements and grant recognition of a license or permit to carry a firearm issued by another state.
(2) The Attorney General shall report to the General Assembly within 180 days of the effective date of this paragraph and annually thereafter concerning the agreements which have been consummated under this subsection.
-
Maybe. At this point, I personally wouldn't feel comfortable using it in PA as a non-resident of NH. I think the language in the agreement explicitly limits the agreement to PA and NH residents. Whether people have been carrying in PA with NH permits is completely irrelevant to my analysis.So what's this talk of the NH permit not being good in PA. The agreement has not changed since 2004 and people have been using it since then, no?
Paragraphs 1 and 2 state that PA will recognize NH permits, and NH will recognize PA permits, respectively. I think we all agree on that. Paragraph 3 of the PA-NH Agreement says: "This Reciprocity Agreement applies only to the carrying of firearms by valid license/permit holders from respective states and not to any other types of weapons."
In my opinion this language limits the agreement - albeit unintentionally - to permit holders from PA or NH. The paragraph was clearly supposed to limit the agreement to the carrying of firearms only, but was worded inartfully.
As I read it, "respective states" means PA and NH. I don't think it can mean another other state. Therefore, paragraph 3 can also be read as: "This Reciprocity Agreement applies only to the carrying of firearms by valid license/permit holders from [PA or NH] and not to any other types of weapons." It says "license/permit holders from respective states." (emphasis added). It does not say "holders of permits from respective states." To me, that difference is enough to keep me from carrying in PA with a NH permit.
To be clear, that is not PA's website. That is a website of a non-profit organization that has interpreted the various reciprocity agreements. My interpretation differs.http://www.pafoa.org/law/carrying-firearms/concealed-carry/reciprocity/
its quite simple really..
that is PA's website that straight says it honors NH.
it has no non-resident/resident restrictions.
-
1
-
-
Sent you a PM rather than post it here, though I'm sure the PA AG is aware. I'd be interested to hear what you think. If you think it's worth discussing openly, we can do that.Can you elaborate?
-
Honestly, after reading the NH reciprocity agreement again, I decided not to bother with NH. In my opinion, even if you received the permit, it would be a waste of money.That's my conundrum! I don't want to waste $100 that I could put to better use if things change. Which I think they will!
-
magnawing, this week. I wish I had more notice, because I think it could have otherwise worked out.
T Bill, thanks. I saw that. I think it's outdated, because they don't accept hard cards except under narrow circumstances for residents. Something like living in a county with less than 46,000 people and being a certain distance away from an electronic fingerprinting facility.
I figured out that if you proceed on the IdentoGO website like you're adopting domestically through a private attorney, it doesn't cross-reference your name with an active application like it does for a lot of the other categories. It brings you right to the scheduling page. Unfortunately there are no openings within an hour and a half radius until days after I'll be gone. Of course, this assumes that IdentoGO doesn't prioritize fingerprinting for certain purposes and show different results for each.
-
I spoke with IndentoGO again and asked to see if there are any available appointments when I'm in Houston. The representative asked why I wanted to do anything in Texas if I'm from New Jersey. She was completely unhelpful and insisted - unlike the representative this morning - that I had to pay the $140 to Texas DPS before she could look up availability.
She refused to help even after I explained that the representative this morning was able to tell me that information. I have a feeling that she was from a NJ, NY, or CA call center.
-
Does the fingerprinting have to take place in Texas or is it possible to go to any IdentoGO location? I'm going to be in Houston and think I can squeeze in an evening class but the nearest fingerprinting place is booked solid for days.
-
I have personally seen one carry permit. The guy was in check cashing.
-
I hand delivered an FPID address change application, application for 9 permits and completed exemption application to my local PD on December 31, 2012 and picked them up during the first full week of February. I can look and see when my exemption was approved by NJSP (IIRC, it was a week or two before the dates on my pistol permits), but that won't tell me when they received it from my local PD.
-
Yeah, it seems like the core targets were the PA residents who were denied a permit or had it revoked. After seeing the updated Utah statute and the fact that PA allows Illinois residents to obtain a non-resident PA permit with a showing of their FOID (suggesting that they don't mind non-residents carrying without their home-state's resident permit), I think Utah will stay safe for the time being.It's inconsistent with her campaign ads which say that people disqualified from obtaining a PA LTCF get one out of state and carry in PA. So even though we are affected, we aren't who they are going after. Yes there's a small chance she could target Utah but it seems unlikely given that the Utah law accomplishes the same.Do the other statutory reciprocity states have the same home-state permit prerequisite as UT?
-
In the post right above yours, I acknowledged that UT requires a PA resident (and residents of certain other states) to have a permit from their home state before it will issue a non-resident permit to that person. That's a relatively new (~2011) requirement, though, and it still doesn't apply to residents of states like NJ. Accordingly, the average NJ resident can get a UT permit (and carry in PA), even though PA won't issue a permit to that same NJ resident. That's completely inconsistent with the AG's push to modify all existing reciprocity agreements to prevent everyone from carrying in PA with only a non-resident permit from a reciprocal state.Wrong, since PA and UT have reciprocity a resident of PA must have a license from PA before getting a license from UT under UT law
Notwithstanding Utah's statute, above, the fact remains that there are enough differences between the states' laws that the AG could foreseeably nullify statutory reciprocity with Utah if she wanted to. As far as I can tell, there is no agreement or statute preventing her from doing that. To the contrary, the statute explicitly authorizes her to do it.
-
Based on how easily she negotiated new reciprocity agreements, I don't think anything is stopping her from issuing an official opinion letter making a determination that is different than a previous one.I am thinking that a determination had already been made by a previous Attorney General that it may hard to reverse that position unless some change in the laws of one or the other had actually been made.
However, after looking at Utah's statutes, I think it's important to note that Utah requires residents of states that recognize the validity of the Utah permit or have reciprocity with Utah's concealed firearm permit law (like PA) to hold a current permit from their state. Thus, if PA refuses to issue one to a PA resident, Utah will also. That seems to be what PA was mainly concerned with.
(4) (a) In addition to meeting the other qualifications for the issuance of a concealed firearm permit under this section, a nonresident applicant who resides in a state that recognizes the validity of the Utah permit or has reciprocity with Utah's concealed firearm permit law shall:(i) hold a current concealed firearm or concealed weapon permit issued by the appropriate permitting authority of the nonresident applicant's state of residency; and
(ii) submit a photocopy or electronic copy of the nonresident applicant's current concealed firearm or concealed weapon permit referred to in Subsection (4)(a)(i).
With that said, you still have to contend with Philly's ordinance. Did anyone ever challenge that?
-
"Utah" does not appear in the statute. I have been unable to find any "statutory agreement" as you are calling it. Based on the statute, Utah and the few other states are entitled to statutory reciprocity, because two conditions have been met. First, the states provide reciprocal privilege for individuals licensed under PA's statute. Second, the Attorney General determined that the firearms laws of the states are similar to the firearm laws of PA. It doesn't seem that hard for the Attorney General to simply determine otherwise.
Can you show me an example of any statutory agreements with any of the 6106(b)(15) states? (Colorado, Iowa, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Utah and/or Wisconsin)
I disagree. The statute doesn't need to be changed at all for her to revoke statutory reciprocity. Look at (ii). She simply needs to determine that Utah's laws are not similar to Pennsylvania's.She would have to have the statute changed to:
(15) Any person who possesses a valid and lawfully issued RESIDENT license or permit to carry a firearm which has been issued under the laws of another state, regardless of whether a reciprocity agreement exists between the Commonwealth and the state under section 6109(k), provided: (i) The state provides a reciprocal privilege for individuals licensed to carry firearms under section 6109. (ii) The Attorney General has determined that the firearm laws of the state are similar to the firearm laws of this Commonwealth. (16) Any person holding a license in accordance with section 6109(f)(3).
For example, Utah will issue a permit to someone without them having first obtained a permit from the state of their residency. Pennsylvania will not. The result is that PA residents can carry concealed with a UT permit in Philly, which is exactly what the AG and mayor are trying to prevent.
Another example is that UT law allows permit holders to carry on the property of public schools. PA generally doesn't, but does have an exception for "lawful" purposes. However, earlier this year, a man (Dr. Charles V. King, II DC) who was carrying concealed (with a valid PA permit) was arrested at a school in Confluence, PA. The DA's office, while acknowledging that the law was vague, took "the position that you do not, unless you are law enforcement, have the right to go on school property with any weapon." Again, this could give the AG reason to deem the states' laws dissimilar.
-
She would have a long road ahead of her if she tried to remove a statutory agreement In my opinion. But who knows, I'm not surprised by much any more.
"Utah" does not appear in the statute. I have been unable to find any "statutory agreement" as you are calling it. Based on the statute, Utah and the few other states are entitled to statutory reciprocity, because two conditions have been met. First, the states provide reciprocal privilege for individuals licensed under PA's statute. Second, the Attorney General determined that the firearms laws of the states are similar to the firearm laws of PA. It doesn't seem that hard for the Attorney General to simply determine otherwise.They can refuse to sign a written agreement and if they do they will stay in a statutory agreement
Can you show me an example of any statutory agreements with any of the 6106(b)(15) states? (Colorado, Iowa, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Utah and/or Wisconsin)
-
Based on my reading of the statute, I think that she can "touch" Utah and any other state currently identified on the Attorney General website as having "statutory reciprocity." The statute doesn't specifically identify states. It gives the Attorney General the ability to determine that the firearm laws of a given state are "similar" (or not similar) to those in PA. See § 6106(b)(15), below. I think that the statutory reciprocity states will be pushed to reciprocity agreements.The news is....
Bad.
This witch needs to be burned at the stake. I hope you guys are right and she can't touch Utah.
§6106. Firearms not to be carried without a license.(a) Offense defined.--
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), any person who carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license under this chapter commits a felony of the third degree.
(2) A person who is otherwise eligible to possess a valid license under this chapter but carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license and has not committed any other criminal violation commits a misdemeanor of the first degree.
(b)Exceptions.--The provisions of subsection (a) shall not apply to:
...
(15) Any person who possesses a valid and lawfully issued license or permit to carry a firearm which has been issued under the laws of another state, regardless of whether a reciprocity agreement exists between the Commonwealth and the state under section 6109(k), provided:
(i) The state provides a reciprocal privilege for individuals licensed to carry firearms under section 6109.
(ii) The Attorney General has determined that the firearm laws of the state are similar to the firearm laws of this Commonwealth.
...
-
I got this email today. Deal ends in 7 days. I haven't thoroughly checked it out yet. But it's very enticing. http://www.sportsman...line-course/all
The only catch is that he will try to sell you tactical pens and bulletproof panels during the video, which is easily ignored. Then he will bombard you with emails about those offers, his other course called "Spy Escape and Evasion", as well as joining an exclusive "members only" gun club that protects you in the event that you have to use your gun in a self-defense situation. If you don't sign up, he starts sending letters to your house.Is this legitimate?
I've very intrigued....
I'm looking at the website, watch a 90min video... Take a 20 question test and get your Virginia and Arizona CCW.. Sounds sweet
Edit: ok you get your training verification. $100 for the non resident Virginia and $60 for the Utah upon applying. Not a bad deal for $37
The good news is that if you enjoy his "Covert Guide to Concealed Carry: Confessions of a Former CIA Officer", you will also enjoy his "Covert Guide to Real Estate Wealth: Confessions of a Former CIA Officer." Check out some of his corny get-rich-quick videos on YouTube.
-
First, I would like to know if you purchased your gun(s) from an FFL and whether you hold any out-of-state CCW permits.While you guys are at it, I could use a few bucks too. PM me for my payment options. -
I was thinking the same thing.That's was not the question you were asked. I understand why you would be quiet on the subject, though. -
Assemblyman Rumana (District 40) has repeatedly sponsored the "New Jersey Right to Home Defense Law" bill.I would like to know why A SCUMBAG breaking into your house has any rights at all.
Why is it not one D bag politician will will bring this topic up. ???http://www.njleg.sta...000/1906_I1.PDF
It outlines circumstances under which people are presumed to have a "reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or serious bodily injury" in their home or residence. Importantly, it explicitly provides civil and criminal immunity for people who are justified in their use of force.
I have no idea why it doesn't get more support, though.
The biggest Joke of the day! New Jersey 2A Activists Warn – No Armed Protest In Trenton
in Legislative Alerts and Rallies
Posted
I think our chances of a national AWB would be closer to 100% than it currently is.