High court denies man's gun arrest appeal

[mikeyboyeee 66]

Actually, your statement is wrong. According to 2C:39-5, you need a permit to carry to possess a gun in NJ. 2C:39-6 lists affirmative defenses that can be used in court, but since all of those apply to a place of business, or a residence, none of those exemptions would apply to Revell, making his possession of a handgun illegal under NJ law.

 

This guy had no way to legally possess a handgun in NJ. The second he claimed his bags he was in violation of state law, and had he notified the police at that time, they would have arrested him right there under the same charge. We officially have some of the dumbest laws in the country that clearly have no crime fighting/preventing purpose, but that exist solely to ensnare people who are trying to follow the law and to discourage others from engaging in what should be a legal activity.

 

 

Nonsense, I do not have a permit to carry a gun and neither do 99.9% of people on this board and every single one of us legally owns and transports firearms in the state of NJ.!

[BigHayden 77]

Nonsense, I do not have a permit to carry a gun and neither do 99.9% of people on this board and every single one of us legally owns and transports firearms in the state of NJ.!

 

But only under the affirmative defense exemptions put forward under 2C:39-6, which only apply to residents or business owners in NJ. All of the exemptions listed under 2C:39-6 have either a residence or fixed place of business as one of the end points in your journey. If you deviate from those exemptions, even to stop for a cup of coffee, you are violating the law under 2C:39-5 (which has also been discussed extensively on this board). If you are arrested for violating 2C:39-5 the burden of proof is on YOU to show that you are exempt under 2C:39-6.

 

From answers.com

An affirmative defense is also allowed under rules of criminal procedure. For example, a defendant accused of assault may claim to have been intoxicated or insane, to have struck out in self-defense, or to have had an alibi for the night in question. Any one of these affirmative defenses must be asserted by showing that there are facts in addition to the ones in the indictment or information charging the defendant and that those additional facts are legally sufficient to excuse the defendant.

 

The rules that govern pleading in most courts require a defendant to raise all affirmative defenses when first responding to the civil claim or criminal charges against him or her. Failure to do so may preclude assertion of that kind of defense later in the trial.

 

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/affirmative-defense#ixzz1BzBEV37g

 

That's not to say that an affirmative defense is bad. The claim of self defense is an affirmative defense to a murder charge. But to say that it's legal to own/transport guns in NJ is like saying it's legal to kill someone in the United States.

 

Legal because the law doesn't prohibit it and legal because the law provides an affirmative defense are two very different things.

[BigHayden 77]

This came up in another thread a few weeks ago. What is the exemption that allows us to drive to Newark Airport and check a firearm in to fly. I did it in Sep, TSA just checked that the gun was unloaded and locked in a case. They did not even know I was a NJ resident. They didn't ask me for ID, only the gate agent did. You can show a passport for ID, it doesn't show you are a resident of NJ or any other state.

 

Why would this guy get hassled and didn't? What makes it legal for me to do? FOPA? FOPA doesn't cover me driving to Newark, just driving out of the state.

 

 

Maybe the ticketing agent you dealt with had some common sense and the one Mr. Revell dealt with did not. It was the local police who charged him, not TSA (since he didn't do anything that violated Federal law). I don't think there actually is an exemption in NJ law that covers transporting to an airport or to the state border to leave NJ. I think you can make a pretty strong case that FOPA covers you, but I wouldn't want to be the one to have to prove it.

 

I believe that transporting a firearm to the Newark Airport is, in fact, a violation of NJ statutes. I also believe that it's a perfectly legal activity under FOPA, but that FOPA's language may not actually cover that activity. [All the more reason to change stupid NJ law.]

[ianargent 7]

Remember what this case was about - it wasn't Mr. Revell defending himself against a charge of possessing a firearm illegally (those charges were dropped before trial). Mr. Revell was (essentially) suing the cops because it should have been obvious that he was not possessing illegally; which it isn't because FOPA doesnt' clearly cover his situation. I hate to say it, but allowing the suit to proceed would be legislating from the bench.

 

This needed to have been fixed legislatively, and still needs to.

[bulpup 98]

A few things bug me about this story as quoted through A.P.

What is "readily accessible" in this case? What I consider readily accesible would be carrying in a way that charges would never be dropped. So what is the definition of readily here?

 

The other is I find it silly that it is easier for a person to carry and check a pistol into the belly of an airliner than it is to transport within New Jersey.

 

But the kicker is; what freakin NJ license? How can you be arrested for not having something that does not exist? This last point is what I would want to sue for, if we can believe that what the AP wrote is what Revell was actually to be charged with.

Point being, how legal is it for you to be arrested for something that the arresting officer only believes is illegal? Its like saying " i think your hat is isn't within guidlines so you are coming with me," and then locks you up for 10 days.

10 days to realize that there is no license in NJ? Really? You bet your a** I would sue. You bet your a** I would sue for denying me access to my posesions for 3 years after seizing them for reasons that were found not to be illegal.

 

I am all for a cop arresting a person with a handgun because the situation appears questionable, but 10 days in jail, 3 months to drop the charges and 3 years to get my licensed firearm back? No way. He should be suing.

[BigHayden 77]

But the kicker is; what freakin NJ license? How can you be arrested for not having something that does not exist? This last point is what I would want to sue for, if we can believe that what the AP wrote is what Revell was actually to be charged with.

 

They're talking about a NJ Permit to Carry. (I know, they might as well be talking about unicorns). Go read the text of 2C:39-5. I know, I know... :thsmiley_deadhorse: It states plainly that possession of a handgun is illegal unless you first obtain a NJ Permit to Carry. WTF, right? But that's what it says.

[BRN169 6]

"Prosecutors said it doesn't matter whose fault it was: Revell was arrested in New Jersey with a readily accessible gun in his possession without a New Jersey license."

 

He took the guns to a motel room and returned to the airport the next day. He did not posess a NJ FID card. He should have gotten arrested which he was.

 

So they are all idiots... He was not attempting to purchase a long gun or ammunition in the state of NJ so there is no legal requirement for him to have one... Furthermore there is no registration requirement in NJ period. What they did to this guy was a sin. Hopefully one of those responsible for this will find themselves at the receiving end of a complimentary hard time in another state some day so they can get a little taste of their own medicine...

[bulpup 98]

They're talking about a NJ Permit to Carry. (I know, they might as well be talking about unicorns). Go read the text of 2C:39-5. I know, I know... :thsmiley_deadhorse: It states plainly that possession of a handgun is illegal unless you first obtain a NJ Permit to Carry. WTF, right? But that's what it says.

That's very interesting. I had never read that part of the law before. Interesting because this "license" is also refered to as a permit in different parts.

 

But it is interesting that that part of the law would be applied because;

My link

 

On March 31, 2005, Revell, a resident of Utah, embarked on a flight from Salt Lake City to Allentown, Pennsylvania, via Minneapolis/St. Paul and Newark, New Jersey. When he arrived at the Northwest Airlines counter[1] in the Salt Lake City Airport, he checked his luggage through to his final destination and declared that, in the luggage, he was carrying an unloaded firearm contained in a locked hard case and ammunition in a separate locked hard case. He signed an orange firearm declaration tag, which was placed inside the locked hard case containing the firearm. That was apparently the last thing on the trip that went as expected.

 

He had it in a locked box at the point of origin. How was it readily accesible? If the box was not locked or if he took it out of the box and put it in his pocket I could see how that would apply, but if that were the case how could the charges ever be droppped?

 

If it is in a locked case he was transporting it in a manner that I transport my own handguns. I don't have a "license" either. So really, WTF? If it was in a locked case he should never have been arrested. If he had it anywhere else, why would the charges be dropped? I don't get it.

[KpdPipes 388]

Part of the problem (and before anyone states i am NOT MAKING EXCUSES) is that IIRC the officer involved was normally assigned to an NYC airport, not to EWR, and he was applying NYC laws rather than NJ Laws. It SHOULD have been cleared up by a Supervisor WITHOUT an arrest made, and barring that the Essex County Prosecutor's office SHOULD have dropped it immediately..... Of course there's one TEENY problem. Take a look at WHO the Essex County Prosecutor was at the time of the Revell Case. Revell is a Clear and BLATANT example of the fact that despite some here's fervent wishes, Gov Christie is NO FRIEND To Gun Owners. IMO this has always been a problem with PAPD, you have too many people working in Two states that arent familiar enough with the laws Where they Currently are. If you guys think 2C is Confusing, try looking at NY's Criminal Code, and the annotated NY CITY Criminal Code.... It looks like War and Peace. the difference is so great that I know of Rangers on Ellis island, who will Escort an arrestee to the section of the Island in NJ before they make the actual Arrest...just so they dont have to deal with NYC.