Jump to content

mikey_golds

Members
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    N/A

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About mikey_golds

  • Rank
    Forum Dabbler

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Hudson County
  • Home Range
    RTSP Union & Cherry Ridge

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Either way not a big deal. Lesson learned to review them, Ill swing by there get them extended and post dated and go from there..
  2. Absolutely agree with both you and Griz, I should of reviewed I just grabbed the folder they had ready for me and was in a hurry. However I did look back at a prior batch of handgun permits I got from Feb 2019, I got the voicemail saying my permits were approved and ready for pickup on Feb 4th, I picked them up Feb 14th, (how do i remember it was valentines day and I heard it for not coming straight home after work). I looked at both of the copies I retained from purchases, what date are they dated... Feb 14th
  3. I guess semantics on the Issued vs Issued to Me. Either way they still forgot to write the date in 5 out 6
  4. Hey guys, I am pretty annoyed, my girl got me a handgun for my birthday a SW 22 Victory, and I was going to pick it up this morning. I get to the FFL and basically we can't go any further since we realized the detective didn't write the issued date on the permit. I get home of course Permits isn't open on weekends. And look at the other 5 since I put in for 6 at once but when the Gov Murphy price increase was floating around and it looks like he dated one of them. He dated it 5/16/19 which is the date I got the e-mail saying they are ready for pickup please come at your convenience. I actually picked them up June 26th. (work, masters degree, getting to a place that is open till 4 PM on weeknights is a pain) So my first question is what date is SUPPOSED to go in that box, obviously when I go back to Permits I am going to say I think they should be the current date in the box since they made the mistake to not populate originally. And if they must backdate I think the 26th should of been used since that is when they were issued TO ME. If they force May 16th I basically have to get them all extended since 90 days was Aug 14th... Overall a frustrating situation. Any advice? or Knowledge around this would be appreciated. MG
  5. Thanks, don't love the 9 inch handguard w/ an 11.5 so 442 on Aero now, + 347 on BCM =789 (pre shipping and tax) 13% savings vs complete BCM this does not have me shopping around solely Aero's site and BCM's Aero: 242 Upper linked Complete BCG 129 Ambi CH 79.99 BCM: Barrel 269 Gas block 45 Tube 15 VFG 19
  6. Just 1 last thing anyone that says I cannot quote other cases state or federal because this is NJ - come on don't be ridiculous. Why is the supreme court holding the conceal carry case until the NY case is opined upon? --> Because that ruling may directly effect how the other courts review the NJ conceal carry case. Furthermore read about how state laws are challenged which end up at the Supreme Court. Look at what the plan is in Alabama and how they expect the new abortion bill to be blocked in lower courts due to FEDERAL Roe v Wade, and plan to appeal until it arrives at the Supreme Court's desk - at that time in order to consider the Alabama bill --> STATE LAW, they need to review against a federal opinion. Now this is different because the suing is occurring during the grace period before the law goes into affect - so no one is being arrested. But if someone did get arrested the same process would occur, if the STATE law being challenged is deemed invalid due to FEDERAL your conviction is overturned Flowers’s vs Florida So once again Thompson Center vs the US Government attorney James Bardwell's: lower court had held in a prior case that that set of parts was a SBR. The court agreed; that if the parts had only one use, to make a SBR, and a person possessed them all that was a SBR also. Then the supreme court: decided the [T/C] kit was not a SBR, nor was any set of parts where they could be used for a legitimate purpose, even if they could also be used to assemble a SBR. If you don't think I will pull that out in a heart beat you are crazy. The SUPREME COURT ruled on this. Substitute NFA, for SBR or AW, they are interchangeable. So now you want to play the psychological aspect I would LOVE to tell a NJ Jury this is Roe V Wade but with firearms. Id break their brains.
  7. Do you got a link. Looking For light weight
  8. I plan on building mine, pulling the trigger (pun intended) tonight on the upper. ordered the lower yesterday. 1.pdf
  9. THEY LITERALLY USE THE WORD CONVERT Now you are saying "into" must mean pieces become 1 thing. I am defining "into" a MW has it expressing a change of state. You own a screw driver or wrench you are in possession
  10. THANK YOU!!!! Every single person in America.
  11. define it w/o using the word parts. and define parts remember the AG hasn't defined these so no matter what you say, we have to look at it under the Rule of Strict Construction. My argument is once you have an assembled rifle that is what it is by the definitions. it is not defined a collection of parts that make rifle. it is rifle. signing off to take study for my CPA be back in a few hours to argue rule of law.
  12. you can not define combination of parts, nor has the state. nor has an opinion by the NJSP or AG ever been given therefore there is not 1 interpretation
  13. Define easy, or readily available how many tools does it explicitly say are reasonable to have to require to then be back to parts in combination. The AG can opine its 1 tool, you can opine 10
  14. when not defined by law the court uses rule of Rule of Strict Construction not some reasonable interpretation. And NJ follows the rule of strict construction also known as rule of lenity In United States v. Rodriquez, Justice Souter suggests that lenity ought to apply when a statute has two plausible interpretations.254 We have two plausible interpretations here? You MUST take mine as the defendant. Unless you clarify your definitions futher
  15. And you can apply prior rulings to current situations United States, Petitioner v. Thompson-Center Arms Company You sound like the US Government a disassembled bicycle still being a bicycle. The supreme court ruled in favor of Thompson Center they could sell conversion kits (PARTS), 16 inch barrel and stock in the same kit for a pistol (10 inch barrel), and this did not equate to the individual being in possession of a SBR w/o a stamp. Uh show me that please. Rule of Strict Construction requires a court to apply any unclear or ambiguous law in the manner most favorable to the defendant. And I think we both agree the laws are fairly ambiguous. Based on this thread alone I would dance circles around a jury and Gurbir
×
×
  • Create New...