Jump to content
M1152

NJ LAWMAKERS ANNOUNCE PLANS TO DESTROY RIGHT TO CARRY

Recommended Posts

Had to travel in some unsavory neighborhoods this morning. Thankfully I returned safely. Next time I’ll be armed in my car again. We should all be grateful the court saw through the indefensible position of the state and issued the TRO. Frankly, I am not accustomed to winning this much. Justice Thomas gifted this country with a great 2A opinion, let the good times roll. 
BTW, going to write some more checks for these great organizations that are working on our behalf to restore things. I may have to stop saying “in free America” when referring to most non-NJ states. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Moutinas said:

Had to travel in some unsavory neighborhoods this morning. Thankfully I returned safely. Next time I’ll be armed in my car again. We should all be grateful the court saw through the indefensible position of the state and issued the TRO. Frankly, I am not accustomed to winning this much. Justice Thomas gifted this country with a great 2A opinion, let the good times roll. 
BTW, going to write some more checks for these great organizations that are working on our behalf to restore things. I may have to stop saying “in free America” when referring to most non-NJ states. 

i'm wishing that my permit was gonna be in before i possibly have to go into camden for jury duty.....'cause......well......camden......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, 1LtCAP said:

i'm wishing that my permit was gonna be in before i possibly have to go into camden for jury duty.....'cause......well......camden......

Beware!  You will never be able to legally carry on government or state owned property.  Those are still judged to be "sensitive places. The TRO covers carry but only on most private property. You still cannot carry in Casinos, Pot Shops, Healthcare facilities, Schools, parks, Sporting events and all government buildings. Read the ruling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, I have seen NOTHING is the main stream news and its been a couple hours now to publish something basic... it's like they don't want anyone to know. 

 

Will wait and see if that changes. 

18 minutes ago, DAHL said:

Beware!  You will never be able to legally carry on government or state owned property.  Those are still judged to be "sensitive places. The TRO covers carry but only on most private property. You still cannot carry in Casinos, Pot Shops, Healthcare facilities, Schools, parks, Sporting events and all government buildings. Read the ruling.

NEVER EVER?

 

FYI, this is all preliminary, just the first few low hanging domino's of many to fall. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

Funny, I have seen NOTHING is the main stream news and its been a couple hours now to publish something basic... it's like they don't want anyone to know. 

Will wait and see if that changes. 

Not a word on NJ.com.  In the last hour, here is what they felt was more important than mere constitutional issues.

837802392_ScreenShot2023-01-09at2_26_43PM.thumb.png.8feffcacc0b11ba476e8e5cf9f432f14.png

  • FacePalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

Funny, I have seen NOTHING is the main stream news and its been a couple hours now to publish something basic... it's like they don't want anyone to know.

Federal judge temporarily blocks portions of New Jersey's new gun law (msn.com)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, DAHL said:

Beware!  You will never be able to legally carry on government or state owned property.  Those are still judged to be "sensitive places. The TRO covers carry but only on most private property. You still cannot carry in Casinos, Pot Shops, Healthcare facilities, Schools, parks, Sporting events and all government buildings. Read the ruling.

This is only the TRO; the full hearing still needs to happen. That may bring more good news on some of these issues. I don't know about anyone else here, but my mode is now "guarded optimism" about all of these cases. I've both read and heard several 2A attorneys in recent weeks who were nearly "giddy" about Bruen and how Thomas wrote it. It has provided a solid legal foundation for our side for sure.

So, THIS is what WINNING looks like in NJ, huh...? It feels great - can't we just enjoy that for a few more minutes before Negative Nellies rain all over the parade? :p

A big "shout out" to CNJFO ( @Smokin .50, @Krdshrk - who I believe are both on the board?), NJ2AS & the other 2A orgs who made this happen. Forgive me if I'm leaving out any NJGF members out who played a role in the orgs supporting this specific case!  For anyone who has whined - "what are our NJ 2A orgs doooooing?" This is the answer: WINNING! At this point, I'm really looking forward to seeing what happens with the ANJRPC case too! 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, DAHL said:

Beware!  You will never be able to legally carry on government or state owned property.  Those are still judged to be "sensitive places. The TRO covers carry but only on most private property. You still cannot carry in Casinos, Pot Shops, Healthcare facilities, Schools, parks, Sporting events and all government buildings. Read the ruling.

Don't be so sure. The Siegel case addresses a lot of those places.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

Glad they finally got around to it, and only 90 minutes after they posted the article on how to apply to be an Oscar Mayer Wienermobile driver.  

Priorities, you know.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

Funny, I have seen NOTHING is the main stream news and its been a couple hours now to publish something basic... it's like they don't want anyone to know. 

 

Will wait and see if that changes. 

NEVER EVER?

 

FYI, this is all preliminary, just the first few low hanging domino's of many to fall. 

AFAIK no CCW holder nationwide was ever allowed to carry in a Federal building, Courthouse or a National Park. Koons vs Reynolds had to do with the NJ state government deciding that ALL Private property is a sensitive location. This was clearly wrong and hence the TRO was issued. Some sensitive locations are still in effect and I encourage everyone to understand where they are. You carry there and you are a felon. The full extent of the cancel carry bill has yet to be decided. I believe that more of this egregious cancel carry law will be found unconstitutional and I believe that it will be brought to  the 3rd circuit court of appeals to decide on its legitimacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, CMJeepster said:

Link?  I'm interested!

Here you go:  https://www.nj.com/business/2023/01/oscar-mayer-weinermobile-driver-job-heres-how-to-apply-for-the-coveted-role.html

I'd rather see Murphy or his AG applying for the job; the ones they have are clearly above their pay grade.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DAHL said:

AFAIK no CCW holder nationwide was ever allowed to carry in a Federal building, Courthouse or a National Park. Koons vs Reynolds had to do with the NJ state government deciding that ALL Private property is a sensitive location. This was clearly wrong and hence the TRO was issued. Some sensitive locations are still in effect and I encourage everyone to understand where they are. You carry there and you are a felon. The full extent of the cancel carry bill has yet to be decided. I believe that more of this egregious cancel carry law will be found unconstitutional and I believe that it will be brought to  the 3rd circuit court of appeals to decide on its legitimacy.

Just one point. There is no extra federal restriction on carrying firearm in national parks. It generally follows the law of the state where the park is located. However, any occupied building (federal facilities) within national parks is off limit. And such buildings must be posted with specific signage to be considered valid gun free zone.

Firearms in National Parks (U.S. National Park Service) (nps.gov)

P.S. All the standalone restrooms within national parks usually don't have such signage. :D

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DAHL said:

Beware!  You will never be able to legally carry on government or state owned property.  Those are still judged to be "sensitive places. The TRO covers carry but only on most private property. You still cannot carry in Casinos, Pot Shops, Healthcare facilities, Schools, parks, Sporting events and all government buildings. Read the ruling.

this is true. but i could carry in the car on the way there, considering how far into that shitty city i hafta go. then, i guess once this stuff's all settled, then ininstances like this, i feel it becomes incumbent on the entity(in this case the courts) to provide a secure weapon check at the entrance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DAHL said:

AFAIK no CCW holder nationwide was ever allowed to carry in a Federal building, Courthouse or a National Park. Koons vs Reynolds had to do with the NJ state government deciding that ALL Private property is a sensitive location. This was clearly wrong and hence the TRO was issued. Some sensitive locations are still in effect and I encourage everyone to understand where they are. You carry there and you are a felon. The full extent of the cancel carry bill has yet to be decided. I believe that more of this egregious cancel carry law will be found unconstitutional and I believe that it will be brought to  the 3rd circuit court of appeals to decide on its legitimacy.

 You can carry in national parks, and on federal property.. IN certain buildings is different. 

If they placed the limit at state buildings were official duties are conducted, the only one with historic significance that would be likely. 

You said "Never" with a pretty broad range of places. 

Keep in mind this is the "mini" case against the state. Like I said, low hanging fruit... clearly. This was smart by all the 2a groups.. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a glorious day…. Glad to join the party over here…  

I hope to see a lot more restrictions removed but the TRO so far gives me a usable carry permitt. I did not have one of those yesterday..So I have a big smile from ear to ear.

For me typical weekdays I can’t think of anyplace I go on a regular basis where I could not carry.
But weekends my wife and I often take the dogs to several different Parks. Local, County and State mostly.   That s the one additional restriction I would really like removed. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My son just reminded me with a smirk to ruin my day that NY got a TRO for most of their CC improvement Law but then the State appealed to a Three judge panel that overturned their TRO.

Someone please tell me that is not possible here and that the Thursday court case can only add to the TRO to make it better, not remove or make it worse…

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the take on the ruling from The (Huffington Post-owned) Patch:

https://patch.com/new-jersey/riverdell/s/ijep6/court-strikes-down-njs-new-concealedcarry-law

The article implies that the entire law has been enjoined.

Surprisingly, most of the 200+ comments are pro-2A.  Of course there are ones calling us "ammosexual" gun fetishists.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jfoster99 said:

My son just reminded me with a smirk to ruin my day that NY got a TRO for most of their CC improvement Law but then the State appealed to a Three judge panel that overturned to TRO.

Someone please tell me that is not possible here and that the Thursday court case can only add to the TRO….

 

 

NJ can, and almost certainly will appeal the TRO in the 3rd Circuit. That may or may not go better than NY in the 2nd Circuit. First, we have Judge Hardiman in the 3rd Circuit and he has been a 2A originalist for a long time. Also, the 3rd Circuit is overseen by Alito whereas the 2nd Circuit is overseen by Sotomayor. That may be significant.

It will be interesting to see what Sotomayor says about the stay on the NY TRO.

  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...