SAF v NJ (MULLER et al v. MAENZA et al)

[ryan_j 0]

Certiorari DENIED in the Maryland case so it's not going to the US Supreme Court. 

 

Next case to be petitioned is our case (Drake v Filko) although at this point it seems that this one will be denied as well. 

[ChrisJM981 924]

Certiorari DENIED in the Maryland case so it's not going to the US Supreme Court.

 

Next case to be petitioned is our case (Drake v Filko) although at this point it seems that this one will be denied as well.

[Malsua 1,422]

Anyone surprised?

 

We'll get carry in NJ when the Humongous rules the roads.

[PDM 91]

Can Drake be heard this year or will it be next year?  Would be interested in hearing from anyone knowledgeable as to chances of Drake being heard (is Drake the last?).  Seems pretty slim.  Looks like the naysayers and pessimists about NJ concealed carry are going to be proven correct. 

[Fawkesguy 57]

Can Drake be heard this year or will it be next year?  Would be interested in hearing from anyone knowledgeable as to chances of Drake being heard (is Drake the last?).  Seems pretty slim.  Looks like the naysayers and pessimists about NJ concealed carry are going to be proven correct. 

 

Were there actually any optimists? 

[ryan_j 0]

Can Drake be heard this year or will it be next year?  Would be interested in hearing from anyone knowledgeable as to chances of Drake being heard (is Drake the last?).  Seems pretty slim.  Looks like the naysayers and pessimists about NJ concealed carry are going to be proven correct. 

 

Drake might be heard next term (if at all). The court takes what it takes and they are looking for clear circuit splits. I don't really see that since Illinois was about an outright ban and not about may issue. 

[springfieldxds 0]

so basically there is no hope left for nj

[Fawkesguy 57]

so basically there is no hope left for nj

 

None whatsoever.  Our current environment is as good as it will ever be.  I believe Christie will be replaced by a far more liberal Governor who will actively seek further firearms restrictions, and he/she will be successful in getting them.

[PDM 91]

None whatsoever.  Our current environment is as good as it will ever be.  I believe Christie will be replaced by a far more liberal Governor who will actively seek further firearms restrictions, and he/she will be successful in getting them.

I agree, with one caveat.  Grass roots 2A and conservative activism has exploded in NJ in the last few years, thanks in large measure to NJ2AS and gunforhire, which I believe has pushed the ANJRPC in the right direction.  Look at the surprising pushback on the gun bills; the turnout in Trenton; Lonegan's surprisingly successful campaign (even if he doesn't win, he's done much, much better than anyone expected).  I think we are moving in a good direction.  Yes, a governor like Buono would set us back, but I don't think it will be as easy to steamroll gun owners in this state.  It really is going to be a continued slow process, a grass roots slog, but I think it is possible to continue to make progress even though it is fairly clear that we won't get any help in the courts.

[Fawkesguy 57]

I agree, with one caveat.  Grass roots 2A and conservative activism has exploded in NJ in the last few years, thanks in large measure to NJ2AS and gunforhire, which I believe has pushed the ANJRPC in the right direction.  Look at the surprising pushback on the gun bills; the turnout in Trenton; Lonegan's surprisingly successful campaign (even if he doesn't win, he's done much, much better than anyone expected).  I think we are moving in a good direction.  Yes, a governor like Buono would set us back, but I don't think it will be as easy to steamroll gun owners in this state.  It really is going to be a continued slow process, a grass roots slog, but I think it is possible to continue to make progress even though it is fairly clear that we won't get any help in the courts.

 

I hope you're right.  But with upwards of 90% of the population of NJ being non-gun owners, a hostile press, hostile courts, almost certainly a future hostile Governor, I think the future looks rather dim.  I would LOVE to be proven wrong.  Either way, I will keep writing and donating money.  I hope to escape NJ someday, and if I do, I will still donate money to NJ2AS.  They rock. 

[illy 1]

it is fairly clear that we won't get any help in the courts.

 

Or NJ politicains.

 

I mean seriously. We accept and even celebrate minor encroachments as if they were victories, fight tooth and nail just to avoid super ridiculous stripping of our rights (like the Sweeney bill) and really were only able to forestall that because of 1 person (CC).

We're starting to look like California, where last week gun owners were positively giddy about some insanely bad bills getting vetoed. That's like popping champagne when your rapist's HIV test comes back negative.

 

How can anyone really believe that, in this environment, we'll ever make any actual gains? Begging to keep the f*cked up status quo or even just a little bit worse, is bullsh*t.

[springfieldxds 0]

well i for one dont think we have anything worry  about on Christie being replaced, NJ loves Christie, Christie isnt going anywhere and he knows it

 

now PA will be interesting as they have a 10% chance keeping a republican as governor

 

eveyone there thinks their state Constitution will keep them safe from 2nd amendment infringement but they fail to see what happened in NY or Connecticut

 

the disease has spread   

[revenger 473]

As I said in earlier posts about this, Now any anti-gun state/city need only copy and paste NJ's unconstitutional laws and they don't have to worry about a court challenge.  Unless a federal carry law is passed this will only get worse throughout the country.

[ryan_j 0]

Jeez guys. Of course there is hope. These things take time. This is a small setback in a much bigger fight.

 

I'm not prepared to give up yet.

 

First of all, there are more cases. The Hawaii case is more like the Illinois one and that has a better chance. 

 

Secondly, don't discount the legislature. If we can somehow get enough seats we can do this. Don't say it's impossible. It's only impossible if you believe it is.

 

Thirdly there's federal law. If we can get a federal carry law that will solve the problem. We almost had it quite a few times. It's within reach. 

 

Stranger things have happened. We will win this someday. I have hope. 

[PDM 91]

I've said this before but been shot down:  what's needed is a federal carry law, but not the reciprocity bill that was floated last year (which would have done nothing for us in NJ or other restrictive may issue states).  Rather, we need a law that would grant a permit on a shall issue basis, with background check and qualification test requirement, that is good in all 50 states.  This  should shut up politicians who moaned and complained about the reciprocity bill because it would grant reciprocity to people with permits from states without training requirements.  It would NOT pre-empt state law and thus would not present any states rights problems.  In other words, constitutional carry in the 4 states that permit it would be valid as would all less stringent state permit requirements.  Current reciprocity arrangements would remain in place between the states.  Current state permits would remain valid.  The federal permit would simply provide an option for people who don't want to worry about the hodgepodge of laws when carrying across state lines AND would provide relief to people in places like NJ who can't obtain a permit.  As a constitutionally protected right, a federal law protecting that right is completely warranted.

[CMJeepster 2,781]

Similar to the way that my NJ driver's license is valid in all 50 state?  Gee, that would make sense.

[lunker 274]

I've said this before but been shot down: what's needed is a federal carry law, but not the reciprocity bill that was floated last year (which would have done nothing for us in NJ or other restrictive may issue states). Rather, we need a law that would grant a permit on a shall issue basis, with background check and qualification test requirement, that is good in all 50 states. This should shut up politicians who moaned and complained about the reciprocity bill because it would grant reciprocity to people with permits from states without training requirements. It would NOT pre-empt state law and thus would not present any states rights problems. In other words, constitutional carry in the 4 states that permit it would be valid as would all less stringent state permit requirements. Current reciprocity arrangements would remain in place between the states. Current state permits would remain valid. The federal permit would simply provide an option for people who don't want to worry about the hodgepodge of laws when carrying across state lines AND would provide relief to people in places like NJ who can't obtain a permit. As a constitutionally protected right, a federal law protecting that right is completely warranted.

How about when the other political power is in charge and they modify Federal law so it trumps state law, requiring registration, training, fees, and other hurdles for gun owners? Without a Supreme Court decision to bind them, do you have any faith in legislators. Look how they ignore the spirit of the McDonald decision and try to limit self defense to the home.

[ryan_j 0]

It's absolutely rancid to think that "a well regulated militia" and "the right to bear arms" is confined to one's home.

 

Think of the absurdity of that for a minute. 

 

That said, even if we don't get full shall issue, let's talk baby steps. 

 

First and biggest hurdle would be to get the superior court out of the permitting process. This will start the ball rolling. Let Sheriffs issue the permits. Many of them are pro gun and they are elected. Then we can go from there.

 

We won't get a system like Florida, Utah or Arizona but we can get something acceptable. There has to be a medium between "no guns" and "dodge city" that we can agree on. 

[intercooler 41]

Not ever gonna happen

[PDM 91]

How about when the other political power is in charge and they modify Federal law so it trumps state law, requiring registration, training, fees, and other hurdles for gun owners? Without a Supreme Court decision to bind them, do you have any faith in legislators. Look how they ignore the spirit of the McDonald decision and try to limit self defense to the home.

How about this, how about that.  Anything can happen.  We can have stormtroopers kicking down doors one day.  Who knows?  My basic question is, are we moving forwards or backwards?  A Federal carry permit would put us in a better position that we are today.  Would it be perfect?  No. Do I have faith in legislators?  No.  But if that's our concern we'll never support any laws, even if they help us, because we hold out for a 100% purist, absolutist win.  The perfect is the enemy of the good.

 

And it's very nice to say that you won't support any further laws "without a S Ct decision to bind them" but it looks like we probably won't be getting another S Ct decision on the 2A, so we need to live with that.  We didn't have a 2A decision for 60 years or so until we had Heller.  Oh, and don't be so sure that if the S Ct hears one of these carry cases it comes out the way we want.  For all we know, the reason these cases aren't getting cert is because one of the 5 Heller majority justices (perhaps Kennedy) is not on board with further expanding the 2A.  I suspect that could very well be the reason.

[galapoola 102]

 

Alan Gura responds to Supreme Court not taking up Woollard gun carry rights case

 

[ryan_j 0]

Not ever gonna happen

 

I know it must be nice to be a naysayer but how about giving us a real solution? 

[Fawkesguy 57]

I know it must be nice to be a naysayer but how about giving us a real solution? 

 

Find a good realtor. 

[ryan_j 0]

Well in all reality, you do know that even supposedly anti gun NY and CA have places that issue permits, right? That's because they have local control. 

[Fawkesguy 57]

Well in all reality, you do know that even supposedly anti gun NY and CA have places that issue permits, right? That's because they have local control. 

 

Yes, I'm aware.  But NY and CA aren't NJ.  And although NY and CA are "supposedly" anti gun, they each have a much larger percentage of gun owners than NJ, so they both have a gun culture that is absent here.  You really know it's bad when we look to CA and NY for a ray of hope.

[ryan_j 0]

Yes, I'm aware.  But NY and CA aren't NJ.  And although NY and CA are "supposedly" anti gun, they each have a much larger percentage of gun owners than NJ, so they both have a gun culture that is absent here.  You really know it's bad when we look to CA and NY for a ray of hope.

 

Take out the big cities, NJ is more conservative than you think, just not on certain social issues. 

 

Again, I say, the biggest problem is that the superior court has the power to grant or deny. Given that in all of these cases the local PD approved the permit before it was turned down by the court, this is absolutely true.

[Fawkesguy 57]

Take out the big cities, NJ is more conservative than you think, just not on certain social issues. 

 

Again, I say, the biggest problem is that the superior court has the power to grant or deny. Given that in all of these cases the local PD approved the permit before it was turned down by the court, this is absolutely true.

 

"Take out the big cities" - the same could be said for PA, which is consistently a blue state in presidential elections.  Problem with that is......you can't take out the big cities.  :-)

 

And I agree with what you're saying regarding grant and deny powers of the court.  Our only hope there is if a) a case makes it to the Supreme Court; and b) they rule in our favor.  We are one Supreme Court Justice death or retirement away from losing our already shaky 5/4 support.

[PDM 91]

Hey Horny, we may already have lost our support.  Could be that cert is denied because one or more of the 5 justices in the Heller majority have had enough of 2A issues and don't want to go any further.

[Fawkesguy 57]

Yep, that is certainly possible.

[Mr.Stu 1,928]

...  Could be that cert is denied because one or more of the 5 justices in the Heller majority have had enough of 2A issues and don't want to go any further.

 

Is there any rule that requires them to explain why they refuse to hear a case?