Lucky Lefty

Just read through the entire amended bill from 11/14. There is only one worthy thing to note amongst the dumpster fire that is 4769.. They changed the definition of "holster". No more retention strap lingo. Great news chaps, you can wear your kydex to the mailbox... still. h. For purposes of this section, “holster” means a device or sheath that securely retains a handgun which, at a minimum, conceals and protects the main body of the firearm, maintains the firearm in a consistent and accessible position, and renders the trigger covered and inaccessible while the handgun is fully seated in the holster.

Bah humbug! I mean... congratulations!

Last I've seen confirmed as of last week was #186 The number approved applications have been extremely inconsistent week to week. I wouldnt be surprised though if this week they get up to near ~250, as 2 weeks ago it seemed like the got out 40 in one clip. However, it's all a guess with this shit-show of a process. Best of luck, fingers crossed, knock on wood and all that good stuff

Technically GSP is 80mph. The signs say otherwise, but you WILL NOT get pulled over between mile marker 0 to ~135ish unless you are doing 81+ The "understood" limit was 85 before Corzine almost died in a state trooper SUV that was doing 95+ through ocean county.

Don't feed the troll. You gave him exactly what he wanted, attention. Typical mindset of a wannabe LEO. Guarantee you he's a dispatcher that walks around with an owb phone, military boots, and the cop cut to match. Might have even flunked the academy. Anyhow, really hoping we see an uptick in approved applications this week.. as we approach the holidays I can only imagine the vacations amongst court personnel is going to greatly delay what is already a snail-paced process. And to think - I scoffed at the records clerk back in July when he said "you MIGHT get it by December, maybe even later".

I bet 5000 is even pushing it. Also, @Batt52 permit number doesn't necessarily mean that is the 493rd "post bruen" permit. I would wager that is the 493rd permit to carry on record for Passaic County's existence, unless the court number given to his application was 'GP-PC-493-22'. The issued permits numbers across the state have been inconsistent with the "GP" application numbers. One thing I really liked that was brought up at the last hearing, by one of the DC Project reps during their testimony, was that if the state has claimed there are 300,000 applications, how does the state justify less than 15,000 permits being issued. Excellent example of the PDs and courts abusing the process that should be completed within 90 days.

It should read "stripped away the state's ability to restrict a citizen's constitutional right to carry a firearm"

Retain a lawyer well versed in 2a

One of the best parts of Danielson's BS from that interview Flat out says this bill has nothing to do with stopping criminals, it has everything to do with law abiding gun owners. https://mobile.twitter.com/avsternator/status/1585776402796023808?fbclid=IwAR3GPXEJ_0C0kZ7_C2SszTfXgqU4E349w3YgjUe8JlYOck0EAhepDN6oYVM

My guess is that there have been approx 100-150k applicants so far, just from the various streams of information I've seen, such as the gentleman who owns Gun For Hire stating a couple weeks ago that his facility has had over 20,000 people take their PTC qualification course post Bruen. That's just 1 establishment with over 20,000 qualifications in 3.5 months

Not only did he get to speak in the middle of people who were testifying against this bill, the Republican assemblymen asked him no questions, Assemblyman Danielson told the PBA rep he was "co-author of the bill", and the icing on the cake for me was when the chairwoman running the show told the PBA rep 'we like you & you are very special to us".

That hearing yesterday was nothing short of despicable. They treated the PBA representative like he was their choir boy. Everything he said they handled with white gloves, and every argument he made was why this bill shouldn't exist for anyone, let alone cops vs citizens. He stated how this bill essentially prohibits carry everywhere, and that's just not fair (to Leo and rpo). He brought up the holster language, and insinuated that the bill was essentially telling woman who wanted to carry would have to alter their wardrobe to follow the bill as written, and he 'wouldn't dare tell women what they could or could not wear' and they chairwoman interjected with a "thank you" for speaking up for them. The chairwoman made a reply to him of how much they like him and how "special" the PBA rep was to them. Then when the Republican side has a chance to question the sponsor (which while they did a decent job, they really could have dug a but deeper with their arguments with the sponsor), they acted offended and were extremely condescending. When assemblyman Bergen made the same exact argument about woman carrying, they all blasted him as trying to make woman seem helpless and the chairwoman and sponsor Danielson appeared deeply offended he would try to say the bill was unfair to woman. The sponsors response to the bill prohibiting carry in places of worship, when asked if the place of worship could allow members of the facility to carry amd would they exempt them from the place of worship prohibition, he scrambled and with high levels of uncertainty claimed that it would fall under permission from private property, and he "wouldn't want anyone at church to be mad at him", implying he'd make sure there was a loop hole for places of worship. One of the worst, is assemblyman Danielson refusing to give even 1 example of where you can utilize your carry permit when not on your own property. His answer of "everywhere.... everywhere that is not listed as prohibited in the bill" is unbelievable, considering "everywhere" is essentially prohibited on the bill. Everywhere, should mean everywhere. It's sad and disheartening to see this is how our political system works. End rant.

This bill passed through the NJ Legislature hearing today with a majority vote of YES. PBA supports the bill, as long as they are excluded from it. The sponsor of the bill, assemblyman Danielson, acklnowedge he believes you should be arrested and charged with a 3rd degree crime for accidentally walking onto private property while carrying, and then said he doesn't even know what the punishment for a 3rd degree crime was (3 to 5 years in prison and a $15,000 fine). When asked about the part of the bill not allowing carry in a vehicle, which would force a permit holder to brandish their firearm in public view, which is a crime, assemblyman Danielson said he was not aware that brandishing a firearm was a crime. The assemblywoman running the show then said something along the lines that it's on the public to know whether or not someone is brandishing a firearm to commit a crime or if they were just attempting to properly store their firearm in the trunk. I feel like I just watched an episode of The Twilight Zone Awesome! Thanks for sharing!

Ball is rolling in Ocean county again, finally. Appears there are 3 judges involved now, 2 approving and 1 for denials. As per this fb post and accompanying comments, Ocean County has approved somewhere around GP#140. Very important to note, permit checked no restrictions and there was ZERO attached court order.

This has been my assumption for all of the delays and the PDs "waiting for further guidance". I'll remember that next time I get a moving violation. I'm going to notify the PD and Court that I am awaiting further guidance until I move forward with paying any fines. If they can wait for the laws to change prior to taking action, instead of adhering to the current statutes, so can I, no?