RedBowTies88 41 Posted November 2, 2011 Please, to all, can we start a new thread about this and keep this one for news about this case being we probably have over a thousand people getting notifications then there are updates in this thread. subscribed...good read Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LorenzoS 100 Posted November 6, 2011 More bad news, on November 1 Judge Wall dismissed with prejudice the claims of Jeffrey M. Muller, the guy who was kidnapped and beaten by the gang and then still denied his permit. I can only assume it is because the state finally granted his permit after numerous appeals, no doubt to intentionally remove him from this suit. http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.njd.249720/gov.uscourts.njd.249720.37.0.pdf Not surprising. The real two questions are when will the case make it to the Supreme Court and what will be the Court's makeup at the time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RedBowTies88 41 Posted November 6, 2011 doesnt the fact that at the time he was beaten and kidnapped he was not permitted to carry stand for something? or did he not apply until after? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LorenzoS 100 Posted November 6, 2011 He applied after but was denied multiple times due to insufficient need. After multiple appeals and only AFTER filing this suit, the state finally gave him his permit in order to make the case go away. Since Judge Wall also wants the case to go away, he is happily going along with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NicePants 58 Posted November 7, 2011 That is the biggest piece of horse**** I have read all day. I can't believe they're allowed to get away with crap like that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zed's_Dead 16 Posted November 7, 2011 The judge signed the order dismissing Mueller. But if you look closely, it's a "stipulation" of dismissal, meaning the plaintiff attorney agreed to the dismissal. It had to happen because the granting of the permit to Mueller makes his claim moot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigHayden 77 Posted November 7, 2011 Judge Maenza was also dismissed from the suit for the same reason Muller was. This isn't unexpected and doesn't change anything except the number of parties in the case and its name. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cemeterys Gun Blob 165 Posted January 13, 2012 Looks like 2AF/ANJRPC are appealing. Press release; http://www.saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=386 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RLTW 3 Posted January 14, 2012 So it's ok for NJ to restrict guns because it could cause death to other people & Conceal Carry is a privilege... Wow! But it's ok that over 600 people are killed by cars in NJ every year. That "privilege is ok and the burden is bearable to the public. I wonder what type of security this judge receives from the Marshall service. Do as I say not as I do BS. This "judge" is legislating from the bench. I can't tell you how angry I am at this "judge" even though we knew what his ruling was going to be. He needs to learn that legislating from the bench & denying our inalienable rights makes him a criminal.... Now on too happy thoughts.. let me look at houses in Texas.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soju 153 Posted January 14, 2012 Another judge making up his own stuff as he (or she) goes. Go figure. Judging based on his on opinion outside of law, is illegal. He should have recused himself for a blatant conflict of interest, or should have been asked to recuse himself by the plaintiff. The only way to win is to beat them at their own game. Unfortunately the odds are stacked against you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve_G 51 Posted January 14, 2012 "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, in their home, shall not be infringed." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Live_Free_orDie 1 Posted January 14, 2012 Flash Tweet RINO Christie @GovChristie and let him know how you feel about our 2A Rights in NJ being legislated from the bench! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NicePants 58 Posted January 14, 2012 "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, in their home, shall not be infringed." *Some restrictions apply. Not available in CA, IL, NJ, NY, or HI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fawkesguy 57 Posted March 6, 2012 Not directly related, but very interesting: http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/03/05/md-gun-law-found-unconstitutional/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikelets456 78 Posted March 12, 2012 Not directly related, but very interesting: http://baltimore.cbs...constitutional/ I read that last week and believe that is "good news" for us in NJ...I think. It sounds like the same BS "red tape/hoops" in order to get a carry permit, which we know is next to impossible in NJ as well in MD. I really hope this makes a difference and gets 'SAF' moving again in NJ. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigHayden 77 Posted March 13, 2012 I read that last week and believe that is "good news" for us in NJ...I think. It sounds like the same BS "red tape/hoops" in order to get a carry permit, which we know is next to impossible in NJ as well in MD. I really hope this makes a difference and gets 'SAF' moving again in NJ. SAF is one of plaintiffs in the case referenced in this thread. The lower court ruled in NJ's favor and the case has been appealed. They are moving currently, but the courts aren't exactly speedy (though I would argue that they are speedier than if we were waiting for the legislature to start respecting our rights). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rysdad 5 Posted April 30, 2012 No update in almost two months... Is this case dead in the water? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Qel Hoth 33 Posted May 1, 2012 It's being appealed, not sure when briefs are due, I thought it was sometime in April though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenix_iii 0 Posted May 25, 2012 End of May, no change? This is one reason why I am in favor of the 'forced' reciprocity by the Fed. (Let's not pollute this thread with comments to my comment!) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hd2000fxdl 422 Posted May 25, 2012 Please for all of the new people here, please don't post to this thread being many of us have alerts turned on and when someone posts here it gets a lot of people excited, now stop that please. Ok now, nothing new, nothing to see, hopefully the next post will be a real update, until then as you were.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cemeterys Gun Blob 165 Posted June 30, 2012 Well, the State of NJ filed it's paperwork for the appeal yesterday, and the new NJ AG still says the 2A is a 'privilege'. http://anjrpc.site-ym.com/resource/resmgr/Legal_Motions___Briefs/NJ_AG_Appellate_Brief_RTC.pdf Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NicePants 58 Posted June 30, 2012 I read a few pages of it. They referred to NJ's gun laws as a "careful grid." I'd like to see what would happen to one of them if they couldn't get an FPID or CCW license and their lives were in danger. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mipafox 438 Posted June 30, 2012 Well, the State of NJ filed it's paperwork for the appeal yesterday, and the new NJ AG still says the 2A is a 'privilege'. Good news. That should admit your State into America. Where there is not a single right under the Constitution, only privileges. Despite the flowery language judges like to throw around to keep us asleep. If you want real rights, that government cannot infringe upon, you need to move to Europe, Canada, or a few other places. Of course, the firearms "privileges" are less in these places, but the firearms "rights" are pretty much the same. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TIGL 0 Posted June 30, 2012 Well, the State of NJ filed it's paperwork for the appeal yesterday, and the new NJ AG still says the 2A is a 'privilege'. http://anjrpc.site-y...e_Brief_RTC.pdf Any indication of when it will be heard in federal court? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NorthernYankee 94 Posted July 10, 2012 Any indication of when it will be heard in federal court? This is the Federal Appeals Court. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johnp 45 Posted September 23, 2012 I picked up a copy of the ANJRPC news and briefs, pamphlet they put out, yesterday and the front page had a story about this case. Basically how NJ shut the door on this case. I briefly read it and got disgusted and threw it down, I didn't check to ensure it was a current up-to-date copy. Anyone else read this, or am I thinking of an entirely different case? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RubberBullets 65 Posted September 23, 2012 I picked up a copy of the ANJRPC news and briefs, pamphlet they put out, yesterday and the front page had a story about this case. Basically how NJ shut the door on this case. I briefly read it and got disgusted and threw it down, I didn't check to ensure it was a current up-to-date copy.Anyone else read this, or am I thinking of an entirely different case?The summary from anjrpc's website http://www.anjrpc.org/ . "The case is currently before the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals,one step away from the U.S. Supreme Court. A decision from the Third Circuit is anticipated by early next year." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
revenger 473 Posted September 27, 2012 I think the case from Maryland is supposed to heard in October, I think that was the 4th circuit?? They seem pretty much the same argument "justifiable need" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TK421 2 Posted December 11, 2012 We're getting there guys! SAF WINS HUGE VICTORY FOR CARRY IN ILLINOIS For Immediate Release: 12/11/2012 BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation has won a huge victory for the right to bear arms outside the home, with a ruling in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals that declares the right to self-defense is “broader than the right to have a gun in one’s home.” The case of Moore v. Madigan, with Judge Richards Posner writing for the majority, gives the Illinois legislature 180 days to "craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment…on the carrying of guns in public.” Later, Judge Posner adds, “To confine the right to be armed to the home is to divorce the Second Amendment from the right of self-defense described in Heller and McDonald Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SJG 253 Posted December 11, 2012 The opinion has some good language in it for the cause, but does not examine N.J. justifiable need criteria as a predicate to a carry permit. The closest it comes is commentary on NY law and a suggestion that the historical analysis of the NY Second Circuit Court of Appeals on right to carry outside the home is deficient. That commentary may be of value in the fight we are waging here. The real key is to get our cases decided by the Third Circuit and the US Supreme Court, if necessary, before a sitting conservative justice dies or retires and the President has a right to appoint of a liberal. Timing is everything in life, and even more so here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites