Wile E Coyote

1. Application type (FID/permit w/ existing FID). Initial FPID & 2 P2P 2. Police Department where you applied. Ocean City 3. Name of the person you dealt with at the PD. Detective Pancoast 4. Time taken to issue FID and/or permit. 79 - 81 Days / 11.5 weeks. I got the call they were done and picked up at the PD two days after they were dated. 5. Documents required by the PD (aside from the standard application and the mental health release form). None 6. Notes - anything pertaining to the application process (unforeseen difficulties, chief of police calling your home, you hiring an attorney, etc). Took approx. 6 weeks for references to receive their letters in the mail. Permits were issued a week after I left a message asking if my reference letters made it back through the mail to the station. Other than that the process was painless and Det. Pancoast was helpful.

1. Application type (FID/permit w/ existing FID). Initial FPID & 2 P2P 2. Police Department where you applied. Ocean City 3. Name of the person you dealt with at the PD. Detective Pancoast 4. Time taken to issue FID and/or permit. 79 - 81 Days / 11.5 weeks. I got the call they were done and picked up at the PD two days after they were dated. 5. Documents required by the PD (aside from the standard application and the mental health release form). None 6. Notes - anything pertaining to the application process (unforeseen difficulties, chief of police calling your home, you hiring an attorney, etc). Took approx. 6 weeks for references to receive their letters in the mail. Permits were issued a week after I left a message asking if my reference letters made it back through the mail to the station. Other than that the process was painless and Det. Pancoast was helpful.

Look on the bright side, at least your PD contacted you about not getting them.

If they embedded the endorsement in your DL's barcode, every FFL in the state would be required to by a device to read it. Currently DL readers run a couple hundred dollars minimum. KISS - keep it simple, stupid. Just give us a separate ID that looks just like a DL, but has an bar that reads "Firearms Purchaser ID" instead of "Auto Driver License," uses our DL photo, and have it printed at the DMV. They already have the infrastructure there and if you leave it to the NJSP or local PD to print, the completed applications will literally sit there for days before the card is run through a machine the officer will have no idea how to run let alone fix if it malfunctions. Not to fear, this is NJ and we're talking about a firearm related issue so our politicians will either willfully make it completely onerous or will screw it up out of total incompetence.

When it comes to the fingerprinting policy, it is left up to the discretion of the local PD's whether or not they have you re-printed. Nothing illegal about it. Most common excuse for reprinting I've heard around here is 1) FPID address change when a different PD did the initial FPID and 2) every 5 years when applying for FPID/P2P's.

The 7th Circuit ruled that an outright ban on carrying firearms in public is unconstitutional. The 2nd & 4th Circuit's ruled that "may issue" restrictions are constitutional. The way I look at it, right now there isn't a disagreement among the Federal Circuit Courts when it comes to "may issue." Hopefully, the 3rd Circuit rules in our favor and changes that.

If I were you, I'd try to arrange a meeting with your Chief before putting in for your FPID and see what he says.

Here's the yet to be unveiled state of the art NJ FPID card: And the computers each FFL will need to buy to check the punched cards: Hey, they did say it'd be electronic...

Sounds like Mr. Mayor was trying to catch a load in his mouth, but ended up putting one in the floor instead.

I think what it comes down to is this: If your firearm is legally possessed and/or carried, the HP's in that firearm are legal. If your firearm is illegally possessed and/or carried, the HP's in that firearm are likely illegal. The fact that these topics pop up repeatedly is a testament to how confusing and ridiculous NJ gun laws are.

Also, dug up one of the old deadly force discussions: http://njgunforums.c...__fromsearch__1

Here's the relevant statute: Read the whole thing, but take special note of the bold text. Without being a legal professional, I think the general consensus is that drawing down on an intruder with a firearm and telling them to prone out is completely lawful. If they try to run back out the door and you shoot them, you'd have a tough time coming up with an acceptable explanation to the prosecutor/judge/jury on why you employed deadly force on a retreating perpetrator.

According to the news story, the husband and wife had their child in the car while they were shooting holes in a vehicle full of teenagers. He deserves whatever he gets, possibly more, and I hope she is prosecuted to the full extent as well..

You can apply for as many as you want. See http://njgunforums.c...not-be-limited/. As far as your local PD is concerned, 1 P2P is handled exactly like 10 P2P's. 2 is an arbitrary number and is, quite frankly, illegal.

I'd compromise "shall issue" for a 10 round mag, as long as it exempted FPID, CCW permit holders, and possession in the home/transport to the range. Unlawful possession/carry of a weapon with a 11+ round magazine in public gets you an additional charge. It'll never happen seeing as it would be "common sense legislation" that target's Mr. Mainor's constituents "unfairly."

I think you're absolutely correct on incorporation. Illinois decided that despite the 14th Amendment, Heller didn't apply to them. They went off 19th century case law that held that, in essence, the Bill of Rights didn't apply to the States and the Supreme Court voted 5-4 that the 2nd did. While their prior 2A rulings have been good, I'm hoping the SCOTUS takes up the case and issues a broader judgement this time around. IMHO, even after the McDonald and Heller decisions, some States and federal courts clearly haven't gotten the message. CCW as real "shall issue" here in NJ would be ideal, especially since 40 some states have it now and despite anti-gunners fears, the streets haven't turned into rivers of blood. That being said, I'd be satisfied with a judgement that says the States must allow some form of shall issue (Constitutional) carry with no "justifiable need (NJ)/proper cause (NY)/good-and-substantial reason (MD)/whatever BS California does/whatever BS Illinois is going to pass." If a particular state doesn't like concealed carry and wants to strictly regulate it, fine, but denying law-abiding citizens a protected right is simply not acceptable. Frankly the 2nd Amendment may have been written with open carry in mind , but in today's day in age, concealed carry seems to me to be much more socially acceptable. People who don't like guns or are afraid they are death machines have the benefit of out-of-sight out-of-mind. We'll see what happens but right now we are still probably at least a year out from a decision one way or the other.

I think we here in NJ need to prepare ourselves for a similar ruling. Maryland has a "good-and-substantial reason" requirement to obtain your CCW. NJ has a "justifiable need" requirement. Maryland DA argued "less guns, less crime." NJ DA argued "less guns, less misuse and fewer accidents." Almost most importantly, Maryland has no open carry. NJ has no open carry. I'm still holding out hope that the counsel for NJ was so incompetent, the judges are almost required to swat away her bumbling argument. This is how I see it. SCOTUS: Keeping and bearing arms is a recognized individual right of citizens protected by the the Constitution that does not require militia participation. States can, however, regulate that right. NJ/MD: Gotcha. Individuals have the right to keep arms and as states we can decide who among them is worthy of the privilege to bear those arms under the cover of regulation. SCOTUS: ???

The real problem is that most legal departments wouldn't answer those questions under any circumstances. Your employer might not be anti-gun at all, they just don't want to get sued for answering those questions. You are better off contacting legal and tell them if they aren't comfortable answering the questionnaire, to just do what actual employment verification is (i.e. not the BS the PD sent) and send in "So-and-so has been employed here at so-and-so-company for such-and-such time" on company letterhead. They might even already have a template or form letter for it. Presto! Employment verified and the process can move along for you. Stupid NJ FPID/P2P process.....

IIRC, if you apply for a NJ CCW and don't hear back one way or the other in 30 or 60 days it's supposed to be automatically approved. I can't seem to find the statute right now though.

Gain entry to what end? I'd assume to let a repairman in. In this case there was no repairman let into the apartment. Unless one of the cops happened to a plumber and had his tools with him, I'm not exactly sure what they were trying to accomplish by going inside.

Then I think you and others are going to be disappointed. First, I think Nappen is going to try and get the whole thing tossed due to illegal entry. Plan B is attacking the search after finding the supposedly legal handgun. If neither of those work and the supposedly NJ illegal AR is admitted into evidence, he'll go after the ridiculous "evil features." If this eventually turns into a NJ AWB challenge, I'm not convinced this has any more or less chance to succeed than any other AWB related case. Hopefully I'm mistaken.

If we assume the cops did enter legally and the AR & mags were in plain sight, I'd say this guy has no shot in the NJ court system. However, if on a broken boiler call, the officers used a legally possessed handgun in plain sight as PC to search the entire place I'd say he could get out of it. Ultimately I think this guy is another causality of the NJ mentality that all firearms in the state are illegal. Well, despite that attitude, they aren't. Hell, in some states with a strong castle doctrine (not that I think it'd be right or smart), this guy might have been able to get away with taking a shot at them when they were in the living room if they didn't announce themselves.

If they saw a bottle of prescription pills on the kitchen table in plain sight, does that give police PC to search the apartment for weed or cocaine? After all they are both drugs, only difference is that one is legal and the others aren't. How does legally possessed property grant probable cause that a crime has been committed? If this guy was carrying on the street or in his car that'd be a totally different story because the law says you are presumed to not possess a permit until you produce one but he was in his dwelling. This guy was exercising a constitutionally protected right inside his home and the police used that against him to conduct a search of his apartment which yielded contraband. I think the prosecution is going to have a tough road if they try to argue the cops should be able to assume every gun they come across, whether it is in an exempted place or not, is illegal until proven otherwise. As far as detaining him, I get it officer safety and all. But was he under arrest before they found the AR? If so why the rush for the search? "Hey we think we got an illegal gun in a residence, can we get a warrant to toss the place? We can. Ok." Case closed. IMHO the guy is cooked in that scenario. From what we know so far in this one, I'm not so sure.

Mossberg 464™ SPX: MSRP-$535.00. I'm a little disappointed in the 5+1 capacity