What would you do?

[g17owner 137]

As I've heard many times, New Jersey waits to see what New York does and then follows suit.

If New Jersey implemented the same unconstitutional requirement that New York did, that is, to allow them to examine your social media activity in order to be "allowed" your constitutional right to carry weapons in public, what would you do?

[Lucky Lefty 112]

I lost all my social media accounts in a tragic boating accident

[oneshot 45]

I have no social media. I used to but realized is was a complete waste of time. I think everyone should get rid of it. All it does is make aholes like zuckerberg rich so they can spew there political BS at will along with censor anyone who they dont agree with,

 Wait ,this is social media lol. ok so i lied i have this

 

 

 

[g17owner 137]

I'll be first third, since I was the one that asked the question.

The truth is, I don't know. I certainly don't have anything to hide and mostly dislike social media. I've also been waiting a LONG time for CCW to make its way to New Jersey.

On the other hand, its blatantly unconstitutional to require giving up the 4th to practice the 2nd. I believe NYC requires you to allow "unannounced inspection" merely to be allowed to own firearms. I also know that acceptance of this requirement could make it that much harder to get it overturned.

In my head, I'd like to think I'd join/donate to any groups fighting to bring the issue before the court system all the way to the Supreme Court. 

BUT, the truth is, I don't know. As much as I'd like to say I'd stand my ground and fight for my rights part of me says that the anti-rights wing has such a strong hold that I don't know if court battles would be successful and Im tired of waiting. BUT, perhaps that is selfish in the long run. 

I just hope to not be faced with this choice. I feel sorry for New Yorkers.

[oneshot 45]

I'll fight. I am not going to rollover. Let the chips fall where they may. I will have at least fought for what i believe in. There is something to be said for standing your ground and not caving in on your beliefs, especially when it come to my constitutional rights

[g17owner 137]

Just now, oneshot said:

I'll fight. I am not going to rollover. Let the chips fall where they may. I will have at least fought for what i believe in. There is something to be said for standing your ground and not caving in on your beliefs, especially when it come to my constitutional rights

I agree. But the numbers would have to be there in order to win. 

To clarify, my answer is not saying I would cave in. My answer is really just an honest accounting of the conversation that takes place in my head.

[124gr9mm 859]

IMO the NY legislation is an obvious stall tactic.

It's absolutely unconstitutional and IMO will be shot down when challenged in court.  But that obviously takes time and money, so it will delay MANY applicants.

The only 'social media' account I have is Facebook, so they're welcome to look at vacation pictures, school graduations, etc, etc.

 

[JackDaWack 2,895]

I would just straight up lie on the application or when asked.

If caught lying I would find a good lawyer and collect a nice payday for the Civil rights violation. 

Gotta draw the line somewhere..

[Grima Squeakersen 481]

***DELETED***

[JackDaWack 2,895]

5 minutes ago, samiam said:

None of my socially diseased media accounts (or my email accounts, or my forum memberships) have identifying information that can be definitively linked to me as a person. That is particularly true of any accounts on sites featuring content that could be considered at all controversial. And beyond that level of indirection, I make certain that I never post anything that could be considered a direct threat, or a direct incitement to any illegal activity. That doesn't mean I don't have opinions that might be considered controversial, or even dangerous, in some quarters, but I keep such opinions almost exclusively to myself; at most possibly shared in face-to-face contact with a few trusted companions. All that is a legacy of >20 years in IT Security. So I don't intend (and have no need) to voluntarily incriminate myself should any  such law come to pass. 

So you are willing to give the state access to all your social media accounts? 

[dilbert1967 145]

I don't use social media.  I had two reasons to apply for a NJ permit:  I spend a lot of time in PA and in order to apply for a non-resident PA permit, you must supply a copy of your home state's permit.  The other reason is a NJ permit eliminates "exceptions" when transporting firearms.........for now. 

It IS a violation of the 4th Amendment to provide that kind of personal information and if ANJRPC were looking for individuals to join a lawsuit, I would, and I'd make a donation to the legal team.

[FairbanksRusty 64]

1 hour ago, 124gr9mm said:

IMO the NY legislation is an obvious stall tactic.

It's absolutely unconstitutional and IMO will be shot down when challenged in court.  But that obviously takes time and money, so it will delay MANY applicants.

The only 'social media' account I have is Facebook, so they're welcome to look at vacation pictures, school graduations, etc, etc.

 

It goes into effect Sept 1st. Orange County has already stopped fingerprinting applicants. What training regimen and how to review social media accounts is to be determined still and is up in the air. The lawsuits can’t come fast enough  

https://www.orangecountygov.com/DocumentCenter/View/25629/220818-Revision-1-Announcement-Suspending-Fingerprinting

 

 

 

 

[voyager9 3,433]

I’d delete all my social media accounts and create a new Pornhub account.  PD won’t have enough eye-bleach for what will be on that feed.  

[124gr9mm 859]

4 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

I’d delete all my social media accounts and create a new Pornhub account.  PD won’t have enough eye-bleach for what will be on that feed.  

LOL!!!!!!!!

Perfect!

[Cheflife15 455]

I'm getting qualified Wednesday. Hopefully I can set up a time to hand in my paperwork before sep 1st. More nonsense. 

[Steve_G 51]

2 minutes ago, Cheflife15 said:

I'm getting qualified Wednesday. Hopefully I can set up a time to hand in my paperwork before sep 1st. More nonsense. 

That Sept. 1st stuff is NY. Doesn't apply to us...yet

[CMJeepster 2,777]

That requirement is totally unconstitutional, but it won't be fought and overturned anytime soon.

ASs for my social media, they're more that welcome to take a look at all of my fishing pictures. 

[oneshot 45]

5 minutes ago, CMJeepster said:

That requirement is totally unconstitutional, but it won't be fought and overturned anytime soon.

ASs for my social media, they're more that welcome to take a look at all of my fishing pictures. 

Not to hijack, but i heard the fishing kind of sucked this year,saltwater.

[CMJeepster 2,777]

7 minutes ago, oneshot said:

Not to hijack, but i heard the fishing kind of sucked this year,saltwater.

Yeah, my go-to boat's owner / captain has said it's been tough because the water temperature has been colder than normal.  They've been able to boat on average 2 keeper fluke per trip and some sea bass, but it's been tough.

[CJack 138]

Primary purpose of most of these unconstitutional requirements is to catch you lie and deny your rights for that reason alone.  I remember reading couple of NJ PTC cases where Judge would praise the applicant for all the good things and ends up denying for failure to disclosing some arrest that happened decades ago.

Roberts is a big disaster and Kavanaugh is one in the making.  If not for those two, SCOTUS Bruen ruling would have put stop to all this BS from the get go.  Now, it will be another 10 years, and 10 years, and 10 years for the silly cr*p to be challenged.

Onto the question, I am inclined to provide as many social media accounts as I can remember, IF I were to apply and such ridiculous things are not challenged already by then.

[Grima Squeakersen 481]

***DELETED***

[JackDaWack 2,895]

1 hour ago, samiam said:

As far as the State of New Jersey is concerned, the individual identified by my driver's license, my FID, and my (prospective) carry permit, does not own any social media accounts.

Werd.

 

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Don't disregard the fact that Forums such as this are considered social media... 

[Smokin .50 1,907]

17 hours ago, g17owner said:

I'll be first third, since I was the one that asked the question.

The truth is, I don't know. I certainly don't have anything to hide and mostly dislike social media. I've also been waiting a LONG time for CCW to make its way to New Jersey.

On the other hand, its blatantly unconstitutional to require giving up the 4th to practice the 2nd. I believe NYC requires you to allow "unannounced inspection" merely to be allowed to own firearms. I also know that acceptance of this requirement could make it that much harder to get it overturned.

In my head, I'd like to think I'd join/donate to any groups fighting to bring the issue before the court system all the way to the Supreme Court. 

BUT, the truth is, I don't know. As much as I'd like to say I'd stand my ground and fight for my rights part of me says that the anti-rights wing has such a strong hold that I don't know if court battles would be successful and Im tired of waiting. BUT, perhaps that is selfish in the long run. 

I just hope to not be faced with this choice. I feel sorry for New Yorkers.

Why wait to join 2A organizations? They're already working on your behalf---and everyone else's here---to rid all unconstitutionality for the process of buying, transporting and CARRYING firearms!

My social media is public. As the Editor in-Chief for Black Wire Media---CNJFO's Facebook page---my life and thoughts are an open book! Several members here are members of the Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners (CNJFO). Everybody here SHOULD BE! Here's where to JOIN:  https://www.cnjfo.com/join-us

As just one example, CNJFO is currently running a "Matching Funds" Campaign for Jay Factor's lawsuit. Here's the story:

CNJFO LAUNCHES MATCHING FUNDS CAMPAIGN FOR FACTOR!

SUIT SEEKS FARS SYSTEM TO REPLACE JUDGES & CASE-BY-CASE!

by Black Wire Media Wed. Aug. 17, 2022 www.cnjfo.com/join-us

 

The Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners proudly announces a "Matching Funds" campaign to help PAY for the LAWSUIT that may end judicial control of applications to CARRY A HANDGUN in New Jersey! CNJFO's Board of Trustees voted yesterday to match up to FIVE THOUSAND dollars of public contributions for Historian Jay Factor's case # 087269! The special donation link is active, and all funds are earmarked for this case: https://www.cnjfo.com/page-18138

With your help, victory and further restoration of your gun rights will be achieved. Superior Court Judges will no longer have the ability to question applicants on an UNCONSTITUTIONAL CASE-BY-CASE basis post-Bruen SCOTUS decision of June 23, 2022. Judges will no longer be able to instruct their staff to DELAY applications, slow-walking them through a 50+ year old overburdened and antique RED-TAPE series of built-in DELAYS that currently require handgun carry permit holders to start the renewal process 6 MONTHS prior to the expiration of their permit!

 

"The New York State Rifle Pistol Association v. Bruen case eliminated "Justifiable Need" in New Jersey, but that's all it did. The rest is up to US, and CNJFO, New Jersey's busiest Second Amendment organization is leading the way by putting hard-earned funds where its mouth is! Please JOIN THE FIGHT and CNJFO will match your donation up to the first 5K!"

---Jack Pyle, CNJFO Treasurer & founding Trustee

 

SOME HISTORY FOR THOSE NEW TO THE FIGHT:

 

CNJFO ran a Matching Funds campaign for the Rogers case, writing a check for five thousand dollars to our state NRA affiliate ANJRPC to help offset legal expenses. We did a second Matching Funds campaign for Mark Cheeseman's SCOTUS case #19-27, raising 11,000 dollars (see photo of check presentation). This is the Coalitions THIRD Matching Funds campaign, an unparalleled achievement for a statewide 2A organization!

 

THE NITTY-GRITTY AS ONLY FACTOR CAN EXPLAIN IT:

 

"With Rogers 18-824 and Cheeseman 19-27 not getting granted Certiorari at SCOTUS in 2019, New Jersey needed another carry case to attack the Siccardi Rule aka “urgent necessity.” IN THE MATTER OF DENIAL OF A PERMIT TO CARRY A HANDGUN FOR JAY FACTOR SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY Docket No. 087269 was launched in October of 2020 to be that case. With the SCOTUS win in Bruen, “urgent necessity” is off the table. But the NJ Attorney General’s Directive isn't case law and therefore subject to whim.

 

In Siccardi, the NJ Supreme Court explained that “the legislative designation of the judiciary as the issuing authority was unfortunate for it burdened the Justices with functions which were clearly nonjudicial in nature…” and that “the Justices might well have declined the designation as unduly interfering with the proper discharge of their judicial responsibilities.”

Attorney David Jensen was the lawyer in Drake v. Filko, in the 3rd Circuit. Counsel for Mark Cheeseman in 19-27. And Jensen co-authored CNJFO’s amicus brief in Rogers. In FACTOR 087269, Jensen explains to the NJ Supreme Court that without “justifiable need,” there is nothing left for the Superior Court Judges to do. Judges can’t even consider “good moral character”. Jensen points out that Judges can only hold a hearing to waste another 30 days on top of an already oppressive 60-day investigation period.

 

FACTOR 087269 allows “the judiciary” the opportunity “to decline the designation as the issuing authority,” and overturn Siccardi, Preis, and Wheeler, all at the same time. The later would provide infinitely more protection to Carry Permit Applicants than the Attorney General’s Directive. To the former, as the Siccardi Court prognosticated over fifty years ago, “in the event (of the judiciary declining), the Legislature would presumably have to revise the legislative scheme to provide for administrative issuance of permits,” which could be as simple as the FARS system now taking place with 2C:58-3a Permits to purchase a handgun and 2C:58-3b Firearms purchaser identification cards.

 

At the very least, the removal of the judiciary from the carry permit process saves applicants 30 days on issuance of permits and abuse as we've already witnessed in several New jersey counties. It could very well spell the end of ““good moral character” and references because they too, are decided on a case-by-case basis."

---Jay Factor, Litigant & "Justifiable Need" victim (twice)

 

#CNJFO #2AHeavyLifters #2A #2AShallNotBeInfringed #gun #firearmsinstructor #GunRightsAreWomensRights #gunrights #gunrightsarecivilrights #takeakidtotherange

 

 

There's no reason to NOT be a member of New Jersey's busiest Second Amendment organization!

 

To DONATE TO JAY'S LAWSUIT: https://www.cnjfo.com/page-18138 

 

Thanks for your time and attention!

 

Dave "Rosey" Rosenthal, VP

Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners (CNJFO)

https://www.cnjfo.com

https://www.JustifiableNeed.com 

[Grima Squeakersen 481]

***DELETED***

[Grima Squeakersen 481]

***DELETED***

[CAL. .30 M1 2,101]

21 hours ago, samiam said:

None of my socially diseased media accounts (or my email accounts, or my forum memberships) have identifying information that can be definitively linked to me as a person. That is particularly true of any accounts on sites featuring content that could be considered at all controversial. And beyond that level of indirection, I make certain that I never post anything that could be considered a direct threat, or a direct incitement to any illegal activity. That doesn't mean I don't have opinions that might be considered controversial, or even dangerous, in some quarters, but I keep such opinions almost exclusively to myself; at most possibly shared in face-to-face contact with a few trusted companions. All that is a legacy of >20 years in IT Security. So I don't intend (and have no need) to voluntarily incriminate myself should any  such law come to pass. 

Do you have a static IP address at home?

[CAL. .30 M1 2,101]

47 minutes ago, samiam said:

Befioe I join and/or contribute to a charitable organization, I always try to verify that the true purpose of the org is to pursue its stated goal, not enrich its principals or employees. I trust you aren't offended by that - there is much too much scammery disguised as "noble causes" going on these days. I usually begin my analysis by doing a Guidestar inquiry, however, there doesn't appear to be very much information on CNJFO available there. Does CNJFO make its form 990 filings and other financial documents easily available somewhere? Thanks. 

@Smokin .50 and @Krdshrk have been second amendment advocates since as long as i can  recall....  you dont need to see any 990 filings and if you did a bit of research on Rosey on this forum alone you would see he and the CNJFO is a stand up organization....let alone all the other great work they have done, with little to no glory.

 

[Grima Squeakersen 481]

***DELETED***

[Grima Squeakersen 481]

***DELETED***