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

[ryan_j 0]

You have to get them either from the attorneys who file the brief or from PACER which is a system used by attorneys to access court documents. Some people are kind enough to get the documents and put them up on archive.org or some other forum.

 

Also, NJ's response may not be filed until the last minute... if it hasn't been filed already. 

[EX Carnival man 223]

You have to get them either from the attorneys who file the brief or from PACER which is a system used by attorneys to access court documents. Some people are kind enough to get the documents and put them up on archive.org or some other forum.

 

Also, NJ's response may not be filed until the last minute... if it hasn't been filed already. 

Ryan when do you think we will know if NJ filed or asked for another extension

[ryan_j 0]

Ryan when do you think we will know if NJ filed or asked for another extension

 

Sometime today.

 

They are unlikely to be granted another extension. 

[ryan_j 0]

Here it is from ANJRPC:

 

http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/anjrpc.site-ym.com/resource/resmgr/Legal_Motions___Briefs/NJ_AG_Brief_Opposing_Sup_Ct_.pdf?utm_source=Right+to+Carry+Case+Update&utm_campaign=March+13+Hearing+Results&utm_medium=email

[n4p226r 105]

I can't believe they can say that nj doesn't ban the public carrying of handguns for self defense. Am I reading that right?

[wooly bugger 1]

I can't believe they can say that nj doesn't ban the public carrying of handguns for self defense. Am I reading that right?

Yes you are, and this might be the time to pull the trigger on the mass CCW application drive.

[chris327 30]

From what I got from it they are using the fact that justifiable need was around for almost 90 years, and that a justifiable need does not limit the second amendment.

 

Also I disagree wsararceni and wooly, they say at one part not all gun owners have justifiable need and cant get permits. See page 15

[CMJeepster 2,778]

Here it is from ANJRPC:

 

She's reaching back to the 1960s for her statistical arguments. The times have changed, right? Civil right, etc., etc. What a dope.

[ryan_j 0]

She's reaching back to the 1960s for her statistical arguments. The times have changed, right? Civil right, etc., etc. What a dope.

Yeah there was a little court decision since then... Heller I think it was called? LMAO

[tmpnj 0]

She's reaching back to the 1960s for her statistical arguments. The times have changed, right? Civil right, etc., etc. What a dope.

I was thinking the same thing.  I also like how they try to distance themselves from the 9th circuit decision, they sound desperate while doing it.  You could almost feel how far they were stretching it while you read it.  Hopefully the Justices see thru this ridiculous document...

[n4p226r 105]

this part right here.  do they actually believe this?

 

While Petitioners urge this Court to look to the recent decision from the Ninth Circuit in Peruta v. County of San Diego, ___ F.3d ___, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2786 (9th Cir. 2014), to find a conflict, this Court should reject Petitioners’ invita- tion because San Diego County’s permitting scheme is materially different from New Jersey’s, the Handgun Permit Law does not operate as a ban on the right to carry a handgun publicly for self-defense, and the justifiable need standard is not inconsistent with the Ninth Circuit’s conclusion that the Second Amend- ment requires that states permit some form of carry for self-defense outside the home. 

 

i wonder how hard they were laughing when they finished that paragraph

 

[Mr.Stu 1,922]

2C:39-5. Unlawful possession of weapons.

 

...

 

b. Handguns. (1) Any person who knowingly has in his possession any handgun, including any antique handgun, without first having obtained a permit to carry the same as provided in N.J.S.2C:58-4, is guilty of a crime of the second degree.

 

 

And this is different from CA saying you may not carry a handgun without a permit in what way?

[Pythagoras 2]

To my reading, it's exactly the same.....

[ryan_j 0]

NJ is shall issue. I never knew that.

 

In New Jersey, on the other hand, the Superior Court “shall issue” a permit to carry if it is satisfied that the applicant is a person of good moral character, is not subject to any enumerated disability, is thoroughly familiar with the safe handling and use of handguns, and has a justifiable need to carry a handgun. N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:58-4(d).
Thus, California’s law gives the sheriff more discretion to refuse to issue a permit than the New Jersey law.

[NJPatriot 0]

The NJ brief seems to me to be the same old tired arguments ala more detail. Can anyone identify anything really new or credible?

[BCeagle 12]

Realistically, what if we got about 1,000 guys (prefer 10,000 but no chance of that) and we all applied the same day and all joined in 1 lawsuit.

 

Everyone must have a pristine record but no justifiable need.  The statistic of not one person getting a license would be hard to refute. 

[CMJeepster 2,778]

... but no justifiable need.

My justifiable need is the inherant human right of self defense.

[ryan_j 0]

The NJ brief seems to me to be the same old tired arguments ala more detail. Can anyone identify anything really new or credible?

 

They've basically tried all sorts of gymnastics to acknowledge a circuit split between the 9th and 7th and the other circuits. They've even gone as far as to say NJ is a shall issue state (as long as you have justifiable need). 

[JoeInOcean 0]

Standing by to apply...

[mipafox 438]

Standing by to apply...

It's a little late.

[olderguy 0]

It's a little late.

This^^^^

 

Applied January 21 and just sitting here waiting for my denial.  :-(

[MartyZ 693]

If they are saying that "nj doesn't ban the public carrying of handguns for self defense" then all we need to do is find one application that was denied that had "self defense" as a justifiable need.  Their defense will be useless.

[olderguy 0]

If they are saying that "nj doesn't ban the public carrying of handguns for self defense" then all we need to do is find one application that was denied that had "self defense" as a justifiable need.  Their defense will be useless.

That is the only reason I listed on my application.  When I get denied, I contact SAF et al to see if they want to use it.  I have a totally clean record and have been issued P2P and FPIDs in NJ and Carry permits in other states.

[68chris 20]

This^^^^

 

Applied January 21 and just sitting here waiting for my denial.  :-(

If believe if you are not denied by March 23rd, then you are approved by default. Check into that.

[mipafox 438]

 

If believe if you are not denied by March 23rd, then you are approved by default. Check into that.

 

 

I'm sure it's in the state's greater interest to maintain public safety than to allow someone to carry a gun due to a missed timeframe.

 

5 years in jail.

 

Next defendant!

[68chris 20]

mipafox, what do you mean?

[chris327 30]

you are right there is a time frame when it is auto approval. But i think the same goes with nics. If you don't get an answer in 3 days or something like that your auto approved. but no dealers even follow that because if it was a problem it would come back to them. NJ doesn't follow timeframes as we all know with the 30 day limit.

[mipafox 438]

mipafox, what do you mean?

In recent history, NJ hasn't followed laws in favor of Citizens, taxpayers, election laws, etc. There is a big bias by the courts to nullify the laws to the benefit of the top leftists issues such as gun control (strict liability, almost unheard of), sending money to Abbot schools, and allowing democrats to violate election laws.

 

Half the people on this forum are not getting purchase permits in the required timeframe, nobody is going to find you innocent of possessing a handgun because your denial is late and still pending. You're going to spend a very long time in jail.

[68chris 20]

 nobody is going to find you innocent of possessing a handgun because your denial is late and still pending. You're going to spend a very long time in jail.

I think that after the 60 days you pick up your carry permit. 

 

The P2P's are supposed to be issued within 30 days with no mention in the statue what happens after 30 days.

 

The permit to carry is very specific in point of law. It reads if not denied within 60 days of filing, it is approved.

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

If believe if you are not denied by March 23rd, then you are approved by default. Check into that.

 

Yes, I was going to mention that.  Thank you for beating me to it.  

 

Olderguy, wouldn't that be something if you got your carry permit because they forgot to deny you in time?  OTOH, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.