The State Police letter....

[dajonga 396]

I want to start a new thread about that State Police letter that was circulating around yesterday.

I know the backstory about it and will share....

It was an email written by the State Police and sent to NJ police stations addressing phone call complaints the SP has been dealing with.

It was not meant to be released to the general public, hence the lack of proper press release "polish".

It could not be copy/pasted, so it was then re-typed by someone, someone who added in a lot of typos.

The author has confirmed that it is legit.

[Grayson6074 5]

9 minutes ago, dajonga said:

I want to start a new thread about that State Police letter that was circulating around yesterday.

I know the backstory about it and will share....

It was an email written by the State Police and sent to NJ police stations addressing phone call complaints the SP has been dealing with.

It was not meant to be released to the general public, hence the lack of proper press release "polish".

It could not be copy/pasted, so it was then re-typed by someone, someone who added in a lot of typos.

The author has confirmed that it is legit.

Who exactly is this author?

[Grima Squeakersen 482]

***DELETED***

[PK90 3,570]

If any LEO on NJGF wants to send me the official letter ([email protected]), I will post it confidentially.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Can't copy and paste an email? CANT TAKE A SCREEN SHOT, Lol OKAY.

If its not meant to be released to the general public, it's worthless anyway. 

I would think something formal would refer to the Barracks, Troops or stations, not PD's. The state police is one singular police department. 

It's just written and communicated so poorly, even if it was retype to beleive it's worth something. 

Like I said in the other thread, ANY and ALL internal memos have the indivual who authored the memo and the recipient. It makes less sense if these things were purposely removed. 

[Grima Squeakersen 482]

***DELETED***

[CJack 138]

Sometimes People have to leave these things alone.  Folks are going crazy over that letter online (reddit etc). Some idiots will start calling their PDs or NJSP about "authenticity" of the letter, nit pick stuff in that letter, starting calling NJSP again about if they can "open carry" blah blah blah.   Everything in that letter is "good" (as good as it gets in NJ), so better be left alone and let PDs process applications.

[Grima Squeakersen 482]

***DELETED***

[Displaced Texan 11,737]

Where is the letter posted? 

[CJack 138]

2 hours ago, samiam said:

If you are trying to say that we shouldn't be analyzing and discussing that letter, and debunk it if it doesn't seem to be authentic, I completely disagree. "As good as it gets in NJ" is really the problem. I'd hate to find out that some applicant relied on the content to be official NJ policy going forward, and got burned as a result.  

LOL, I guess we will discuss the letter here.. Unless I am mistaken, certain Range guys posted that on facebook first.  In my personal opinion, its irresponsible to do that unless its an official document. Internal memos, retyping of an "encrypted document", " a close friend in NJSP told me this over the phone and I typed" sort of things are NOT proper way to put information out, especially one is planning on staying in the business for long time.

I looked at the facebook thread and also reddit thread. Its turned into a shit show. What starts off as a simple discussion / thread about authenticity branches out into bashing ranges that are offering courses, then onto people calling /emails into NJSP about if they can "open carry"  etc.

Here is the first sentence of the post by the said Range:

"Incorrect information on NJ’s permit to carry is spreading like wildfire! This is a direct update from NJSP. ".

With the way social media works, if anything, that "memo" gonna make some people apply with less than what is on office instructions pdf. When sh*t hits the fan, the said range is going to take the heat.

I dont certainly advocate for banning of any topics or threads ..lol.. but whoever originally posted (The Range) should have thought it through about it and people need to chil a bit and not call NJSP for every little thing they needed.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

That letter, even if it's "authentic" applies to no other agency except the NJSP authorization of permits. 

Municipalities are not within their guidance, courts and or prosecutors. 

For example:

If you get caught carrying a firearm you didn't qualify with and are charged with illegally carrying a weapon, that letter isn't gonna do crap for you. 

NJSP, or any LEO for that matter do NOT advise citizens on legal matters, It's a liability. So, unless it's an official statement from the NJ AG office, I would disregard the entire "letter". GUN RANGES SHOULD KNOW BETTER. 

To clarify, not a single municipal PD is going to read this "letter" and or use it as guidance. 

[PK90 3,570]

Then why do they produce a Guidebook for PDs to use when issuing P2Ps and FPIDs?

[JackDaWack 2,895]

1 hour ago, PK90 said:

Then why do they produce a Guidebook for PDs to use when issuing P2Ps and FPIDs?

To assert a dominance they otherwise don't have. 

The NJSP firearms unit also wrote those letters for "others", just like the ATF seems to think they are the end all be all of "law". We see how quickly those decisions flip flop, so really... what is their "guidance" worth? especially if it a)changes or b) is incorrect. 

The NJSP will simply say they never provided advice to the general public. IIRC, that guidance book, was super secretive that was not allowed to be seen by us peons. 

 

[CJack 138]

Got bit more info. A user on facebook posted this saying they got it at their PD. Not sure if the individual is with the PD.

These appear to be pictures of a printed document, for whats its worth.

[45Doll 5,877]

3 hours ago, Displaced Texan said:

Where is the letter posted? 

I found this in another forum thread.

https://imgur.com/a/CRiMXjZ

[Displaced Texan 11,737]

1 hour ago, 45Doll said:

I found this in another forum thread.

https://imgur.com/a/CRiMXjZ

Thanks. 

 

That doesn’t sound too bad..

Its unfortunate that the permit is only valid 2 years, and you have to go through all that shit again. 

[Scorpio64 5,153]

4 minutes ago, Displaced Texan said:

only valid 2 years,

There is absolutely no reason for this.  If something happened in a two year period that would disqualify a permit holder, there guns would have already, or should already have been confiscated.  The two year renewal is a reminder that you are under the thumb of progressive democrats keeping citizens on a short leash. 

 

[Displaced Texan 11,737]

1 hour ago, Scorpio64 said:

There is absolutely no reason for this.  If something happened in a two year period that would disqualify a permit holder, there guns would have already, or should already have been confiscated.  The two year renewal is a reminder that you are under the thumb of progressive democrats keeping citizens on a short leash. 

 

The reason is to make it inconvenient. 
 

Ours are good for 5, and renewal isn’t overly painful. 

[JC_68Westy 1,024]

5 hours ago, Displaced Texan said:

The reason is to make it inconvenient. 
 

Ours are good for 5, and renewal isn’t overly painful. 

Ours is good for 5 years as well. Renewal  is just a one page form that gets signed off by the circuit court judge. My renewal was mailed to me a few days after it was submitted.

[Grima Squeakersen 482]

***DELETED***

[Grima Squeakersen 482]

***DELETED***

[YankeeSC 1,204]

8 hours ago, Displaced Texan said:

The reason is to make it inconvenient. 

no, it's "for your safety!" lol

[Grima Squeakersen 482]

***DELETED***

[10X 3,296]

9 minutes ago, samiam said:

Three of my non-resident permits are for 5 years (VA, UT, NH) and FL is for 7 (increased from 5 in 2008). I just wish I could maneuver the renewal anniversaries so that they fall within a shorter period. I had made good progress on that, until VIrginia claimed a to have a huge backlog during COVID restrictions, and strongly recommended submitting renewal paperwork at least two months early. I submitted mine even a little more quickly, and, of course, it flew right through their system, and (also of course) the approval date became the new effective and renewal date

I like what Utah is doing with the latest renewal (mine is due by the end of the month).

With a smart phone, you can watch the newly-required firearm safety and suicide prevention video, fill out your renewal application online, enter your credit card number, and take your passport-sized photo with your phone.  No paper, nothing to mail.  Renewal for non-residents is $25, and is good for 5 years.

The paper process still exists if one prefers, but it requires mailing in the application and a photo.

Straightforward, no vague requirements, and so much simpler than the nonsense NJ put in place.

[Grima Squeakersen 482]

***DELETED***

[10X 3,296]

12 minutes ago, samiam said:

Can that all also be done from a computer? Because, after nearly 40 years in IT and the last 33 or so in IT Security, I refuse to use my phone to connect to the web (used for nothing but live calls, voicemail, and SMS texts).

The renewal letter says you can watch the video and complete the application from a PC, but it is unclear as to whether you can upload a picture from there, or still have to send one in.  And I haven't yet started the process.

The website is http://bcd.utah.gov

 

[Grima Squeakersen 482]

***DELETED***

[PK90 3,570]

On 7/10/2022 at 6:38 AM, PK90 said:

If any LEO on NJGF wants to send me the official letter ([email protected]), I will post it confidentially.

ETA: A reputable source has told me that this letter was sent out by an unauthorized person. DISREGARD the contents.

[10X 3,296]

1 hour ago, PK90 said:

ETA: A reputable source has told me that this letter was sent out by an unauthorized person. DISREGARD the contents.

So the contents of the letter are bogus?   That is consistent with the advice to disregard.

But,

'Sent out by an unauthorized person' could also mean the letter is real, but not authorized for distribution outside of official channels.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

1 hour ago, 10X said:

So the contents of the letter are bogus?   That is consistent with the advice to disregard.

But,

'Sent out by an unauthorized person' could also mean the letter is real, but not authorized for distribution outside of official channels.

GFH just sent out an email, they were in court for some permits being authorized. 

You MUST qualify with the handgun you wish to carry. You can ammend your permit at a later date through the courts to add additional handguns.