Taking firearms to another house...

[BigHayden 77]

I think a long term stay under a contract in a hotel room is one thing. Staying a night or five is entirely different. You have not changed your residence, you will not be "moving in" or altering the place as your living quarters, you're just flopping down for a bit.

 

But renting a house at the shore for a week does count. You're not changing your residence there, but a rented house is treated differently than a rented hotel room, regardless of the length of stay. There doesn't seem to be any reason for it (well, aside from the obvious...), it just is.

[Malsua 1,422]

But renting a house at the shore for a week does count. You're not changing your residence there, but a rented house is treated differently than a rented hotel room, regardless of the length of stay. There doesn't seem to be any reason for it (well, aside from the obvious...), it just is.

 

Well, with a house or condo, you are being given exclusive use of a property as a whole unit, i.e. Possession. A hotel room is not a separate and whole property, it is part of a larger property. If it becomes your "home" it qualifies. As a bed, it does not. You do not possess the hotel by staying in a room. In most states, "Wherever you go, that's the place to be" qualifies. I call it the Damone school of gun laws.

[vjf915 456]

It sad that we have to deliberate this. The fact that you cannot just get into your car with your pistol strapped to your side and drive to your mom's for a few days is unconstitutional in my mind.

Dude I know, I completely agree. And honestly it's not that I'm "scared" of the area, but her and the next door neighbors have suspected that the neighbors across the street are selling drugs out of their house.....quite frequently too. That kind of unnerves me. It is sad that we have to deliberate this, but I would rather get it straight with you guys than get it straight with a judge.

Well, with a house or condo, you are being given exclusive use of a property as a whole unit, i.e. Possession. A hotel room is not a separate and whole property, it is part of a larger property. If it becomes your "home" it qualifies. As a bed, it does not. You do not possess the hotel by staying in a room. In most states, "Wherever you go, that's the place to be" qualifies. I call it the Damone school of gun laws.

Given what you are saying, someone who rents a room at a house, or sh*t even rents an apartment, would fall under this. Someone who rents an apartment does not own the whole apartment complex, however they are under contract to take temporary possession of the living quarters.....I don't see how a hotel would be any different. I'm not saying you are wrong, simply conveying my thoughts here.

[Malsua 1,422]

Dude I know, I completely agree. And honestly it's not that I'm "scared" of the area, but her and the next door neighbors have suspected that the neighbors across the street are selling drugs out of their house.....quite frequently too. That kind of unnerves me. It is sad that we have to deliberate this, but I would rather get it straight with you guys than get it straight with a judge.

 

Given what you are saying, someone who rents a room at a house, or sh*t even rents an apartment, would fall under this. Someone who rents an apartment does not own the whole apartment complex, however they are under contract to take temporary possession of the living quarters.....I don't see how a hotel would be any different. I'm not saying you are wrong, simply conveying my thoughts here.

 

I agree that it's confusing and really only a trap that will catch law abiding citizens.

 

That said, ask yourself two questions. 1. Do I possess this "place"? 2. Is this my home? If you answer yes to either, it becomes legal. You could argue that a cardboard box behind the Piggly Wiggly that you've lived in is your home and would qualify. Hotel rooms don't qualify, see the Revell opinion.

 

We all know the difference, so we should stop with the cognitive dissidence . You know that you're just borrowing the bed, the toilet and the TV when you're in a hotel room for a night and it is different than if you moved in for work or an extended period. Could you argue with a judge that you took possession of a hotel room for a few nights? Maybe, but you're treading on thin ice. The court was very clear about it. Like it or not, that's the way it is. I disagree with it. I believe you should be able to keep a gun where you sleep. NJ disagrees.

[SpecialK 193]

 

 

That said, ask yourself two questions. 1. Do I possess this "place"? 2. Is this my home? If you answer yes to either, it becomes legal.

 

I have now decided that I will live in my Car

 

It is now not only a possession, but my home to me.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

I have now decided that I will live in my Car

 

It is now not only a possession, but my home to me.

 

 

Motorhome????

 

Harry

[Rifleman1 32]

Hmmm. Got me to thinking. What if the other house is owned by an irrevocable trust and I am a trustee?

[vjf915 456]

That said, ask yourself two questions. 1. Do I possess this "place"? 2. Is this my home? If you answer yes to either, it becomes legal. You could argue that a cardboard box behind the Piggly Wiggly that you've lived in is your home and would qualify. Hotel rooms don't qualify, see the Revell opinion.

Okay. So just to play it on the safe side, it looks like handguns are out.

[Babaganoosh 192]

Since we can't carry, and the laws seem to favor long guns, AND the fact that I think a shotgun is better for home defense anyay... bring a shotgun!

[hd2000fxdl 422]

I was joking before when I said Motorome, but I do know a few people who do live in a motorhome and just travel around the country. They are a husband and wife combo, and they do not have any home, but do have children around the country also that they visit, but the do not have an address in any state, just the RV mail address from what I understand so they can get mail wherever they go.

 

How would that work if they came to visit me in NJ for a bit, they both have multiple long guns and hand guns. FOPA? but what about traveling around the state for a week or 2 with all the guns locked in the safe?

 

Harry

[Malsua 1,422]

I was joking before when I said Motorome, but I do know a few people who do live in a motorhome and just travel around the country. They are a husband and wife combo, and they do not have any home, but do have children around the country also that they visit, but the do not have an address in any state, just the RV mail address from what I understand so they can get mail wherever they go.

 

How would that work if they came to visit me in NJ for a bit, they both have multiple long guns and hand guns. FOPA? but what about traveling around the state for a week or 2 with all the guns locked in the safe?

 

Harry

 

When the RV is moving, it is a motor vehicle and NJ laws have to be followed if they're not passing through. I can see no way they could legally have various guns in the vehicle as they're tooling around the state. If they're parked and hooked up to permanent services for an extended period, it should qualify as their residence.

 

If they can't leave the guns out of state, carry them in a clam shell on the top. Even locked in a safe, a ballbuster LEO can still give them trouble since a person could access the firearms while in transit.

 

I'm not an RV guy so I am not up on all the specifics but I do know that the firearms need to not be accessible while the vehicle is moving.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Sounds about the way NJ would see it, but will have them look into it with the RV community help center that help people out with different state restrictions.

 

Harry

[halbautomatisch 60]

I was joking before when I said Motorome, but I do know a few people who do live in a motorhome and just travel around the country. They are a husband and wife combo, and they do not have any home, but do have children around the country also that they visit, but the do not have an address in any state, just the RV mail address from what I understand so they can get mail wherever they go.

 

How would that work if they came to visit me in NJ for a bit, they both have multiple long guns and hand guns. FOPA? but what about traveling around the state for a week or 2 with all the guns locked in the safe?

 

Harry

I know a guy who lives in CA and said to me in CA it is legal to drive your motor home with a loaded gun in your lap (or anywhere else in the RV) since it is considered a second home there. You cannot drive a car with a loaded gun in CA without a carry license.

 

This obviously would not fly here.

[halbautomatisch 60]

I agree that it's confusing and really only a trap that will catch law abiding citizens.

 

That said, ask yourself two questions. 1. Do I possess this "place"? 2. Is this my home? If you answer yes to either, it becomes legal. You could argue that a cardboard box behind the Piggly Wiggly that you've lived in is your home and would qualify. Hotel rooms don't qualify, see the Revell opinion.

 

We all know the difference, so we should stop with the cognitive dissidence . You know that you're just borrowing the bed, the toilet and the TV when you're in a hotel room for a night and it is different than if you moved in for work or an extended period. Could you argue with a judge that you took possession of a hotel room for a few nights? Maybe, but you're treading on thin ice. The court was very clear about it. Like it or not, that's the way it is. I disagree with it. I believe you should be able to keep a gun where you sleep. NJ disagrees.

I'm not saying you're wrong, because I don't know the answer, but you wouldn't consider renting a hotel room taking possession? That room is under your control and not open to the public. I don't see much difference between a hotel room and an apartment (which can also be rented for short stays).

 

As far as the Revell case, the link you posted deals with protections under FOPA not applying because of the hotel stay (he had stopped traveling). I didn't see anything addressing an argument that NJ law would or would not consider a hotel room a (temporary) residence. This is probably because the PAPD arrested him at the airport and the prosecutor could have easily argued that under NJ law he was not transporting the handgun to a place covered under the exemptions (range, place of business, for repair, etc.) even if the hotel room would be construed as a residence.

 

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just putting it out there to consider.

[JC_68Westy 1,024]

I'm not saying you're wrong, because I don't know the answer, but you wouldn't consider renting a hotel room taking possession? That room is under your control and not open to the public. I don't see much difference between a hotel room and an apartment (which can also be rented for short stays).

 

As far as the Revell case, the link you posted deals with protections under FOPA not applying because of the hotel stay (he had stopped traveling). I didn't see anything addressing an argument that NJ law would or would not consider a hotel room a (temporary) residence. This is probably because the PAPD arrested him at the airport and the prosecutor could have easily argued that under NJ law he was not transporting the handgun to a place covered under the exemptions (range, place of business, for repair, etc.) even if the hotel room would be construed as a residence.

 

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just putting it out there to consider.

+1

I have read the Revell decision and it doesn't appear to have anything to do with where he stayed. It had everything to do with the fact that he had access to the gun was in violation of FOPA. Below is an exerpt:

"Although we conclude that Revell fell outside of §926A’s protection during his stay in New Jersey, we recognize that he had been placed in a difficult predicament through no fault of his own. However, Section 926 clearly requires the traveler to part ways with his weapon and ammunition during travel; it does not address this type of interrupted journey or what the traveler is to do in this situation. Stranded gun owners like Revell have the option of going to law enforcement representatives at an airport or to airport personnel before they retrieve their luggage. The careful owner will do so and explain his situation, requesting that his firearm and ammunition be held for him overnight. While this no doubt adds to the inconvenience imposed upon the unfortunate traveler when his transportation plans go awry, it offers a reasonable means for a responsible gun owner to maintain the protection of Section 926 and prevent unexpected exposure to state and local gun regulations."

[Malsua 1,422]

I'm not saying you're wrong, because I don't know the answer, but you wouldn't consider renting a hotel room taking possession? That room is under your control and not open to the public. I don't see much difference between a hotel room and an apartment (which can also be rented for short stays).

 

As far as the Revell case, the link you posted deals with protections under FOPA not applying because of the hotel stay (he had stopped traveling). I didn't see anything addressing an argument that NJ law would or would not consider a hotel room a (temporary) residence. This is probably because the PAPD arrested him at the airport and the prosecutor could have easily argued that under NJ law he was not transporting the handgun to a place covered under the exemptions (range, place of business, for repair, etc.) even if the hotel room would be construed as a residence.

 

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just putting it out there to consider.

 

What I feel about the issue isn't really at issue here. The court stated that a Hotel room doesn't count. They were talking about FOPA. If NJ exemptions had been an affirmative defense it would have been brought up. Furthermore, had the hotel counted, Revell would have qualified under FOPA because he was in transit from a place where it was legal "Hotel Room" to a place where it was legal "Airport" for transit. Since the hotel room was not a legal place, FOPA protections didn't count.

 

As to the difference between a hotel room and an apartment, let me as a question. When you go to a hotel for a night, do you feel it would be appropriate to take the TV out of the stand and put it on the table? Ask yourself the same question about even a short stay at an apartment. There is clearly a difference between how you and the hotel management view your living quarters depending on whether it's a "hotel room" or a long term stay/apartment.

If you can't see it, I don't know what to tell you. When I check into a hotel room, and I do so for work and vacation regularly, I don't feel at liberty to alter the environment. When I had a multi-week stay in a hotel villa in Honduras for a work trip, the management gave me a bunch of extra stuff. A portable clothes rack, extra blankets and pillows, complete tea/coffee service with weeks of supplies, a couple cases of water, a box of cleaning supplies, etc. They asked me to put out towels when I was done with them and to put the thing on the door when I wanted in room cleaning as they wouldn't enter unless requested to do so. The difference is stark to me.

[Malsua 1,422]

+1

I have read the Revell decision and it doesn't appear to have anything to do with where he stayed. It had everything to do with the fact that he had access to the gun was in violation of FOPA. Below is an exerpt:

"Although we conclude that Revell fell outside of §926A’s protection during his stay in New Jersey, we recognize that he had been placed in a difficult predicament through no fault of his own. However, Section 926 clearly requires the traveler to part ways with his weapon and ammunition during travel; it does not address this type of interrupted journey or what the traveler is to do in this situation. Stranded gun owners like Revell have the option of going to law enforcement representatives at an airport or to airport personnel before they retrieve their luggage. The careful owner will do so and explain his situation, requesting that his firearm and ammunition be held for him overnight. While this no doubt adds to the inconvenience imposed upon the unfortunate traveler when his transportation plans go awry, it offers a reasonable means for a responsible gun owner to maintain the protection of Section 926 and prevent unexpected exposure to state and local gun regulations."

 

If he had been covered under the NJ home exemption while staying at a hotel, the FOPA protections would have been immaterial.

[njmike 1]

Just so I am tracking what everyone has said....

 

I am renting a beach house this summer so..

I can take my AR variant (5.56) any where but I have to leave the XDM (9mm) at home to be on the safe side?

[Malsua 1,422]

Just so I am tracking what everyone has said....

 

I am renting a beach house this summer so..

I can take my AR variant (5.56) any where but I have to leave the XDM (9mm) at home to be on the safe side?

 

A beach house in NJ?

 

You will take possession and have full and exclusive use of the property during your stay? If the answer is yes, you may have a handgun on that property.

 

As to the AR, do you have a Firearms Purchaser ID? If the answer if yes, you may possess the firearm anywhere it is legal. This does not mean you cannot be charged for some other thing, but you will not be charged with illegal possession of a firearm.

 

To the larger point, you're going to have a much larger margin of error by just having a long gun and a FPID so that is the wisest course of action.

[Aleshka 0]

How about a situation when you're traveling for an extended distance and stop over at the hotel. What should you do with your firearms in this situation?

I wouldn't leave them in the car, and if the hotel room is off limits as well than I guess I am limited to sleeping in the car

[Malsua 1,422]

How about a situation when you're traveling for an extended distance and stop over at the hotel. What should you do with your firearms in this situation?

 

 

Keep driving.

[Rifleman1 32]

To add a little slant or complexity, the beach house is in Washington state and I'll be traveling by airline. Anybody have experience traveling by airline with firearms. I understand I am limited to 11 lbs of ammunition and the firearm needs to be in a locked case in locked hardsided luggage and declared to the airline agent at check-in.

[njmike 1]

My situation is a beach house in LBI NJ

 

I signed a rental agreement that says I am responsible for the house so I would say yes. It is a house and not a duplex or portion of a house.

 

Yes I have an I'd and have no plans to show it off or move outside of the house.. Only for transport... Just have it tucked under the bed incase.

[vjf915 456]

AND the fact that I think a shotgun is better for home defense anyay... bring a shotgun!

Apple to apples...yes, a shotgun will be more effective. But I have much more experience with my handgun, and feel that I can be more precise, more effective, and safer with it. I would rather bring my shotgun than nothing at all, but I would rather bring my handgun than my shotgun.

[mipafox 438]

I can't believe anybody could participate in 3 pages of this thread and then still wake up in Jersey the next day.

 

Good grief.

 

I never claimed to be an expert on the details, and who really cares anyway, since it's up to the cop and then the mood of the judge. Never a matter of rule of law in Jersey. But I thought I knew the basics after 30 years there. Reading this thread made me pick up a few details of the law that are even worse than what I thought.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

I can't believe anybody could participate in 3 pages of this thread and then still wake up in Jersey the next day.

 

Good grief.

 

I never claimed to be an expert on the details, and who really cares anyway, since it's up to the cop and then the mood of the judge. Never a matter of rule of law in Jersey. But I thought I knew the basics after 30 years there. Reading this thread made me pick up a few details of the law that are even worse than what I thought.

 

Didn't want to drift off topic but I think everything has been answered here and here is one more thing about NJ and in you home crazy things.

 

My wife is getting a Ruger MKIII this week, I want to show her how to field strip it and clean it, well by the letter of the law I can't do that in my own home but I can take her to the range or my club and do it there. Crazy, just crazy.

 

Harry

[vjf915 456]

Didn't want to drift off topic but I think everything has been answered here and here is one more thing about NJ and in you home crazy things.

Please, feel free to discuss anything that you feel is even remotely relevant. I agree, that the laws are just....well... :thsmiley_deadhorse:

[Dan 177]

Didn't want to drift off topic but I think everything has been answered here and here is one more thing about NJ and in you home crazy things.

 

My wife is getting a Ruger MKIII this week, I want to show her how to field strip it and clean it, well by the letter of the law I can't do that in my own home but I can take her to the range or my club and do it there. Crazy, just crazy.

 

Harry

 

Its madness.. I'm sure thousands of gun owners "break" the law everyday with technicalities like this. For instance, a husband taking a wife's handgun purchased under her FID/PP to the range to practice with it. Technically she would have to "temporarily transfer" it to the husband under approved exemptions and conditions, i.e. at the approved range and stay with him for the duration.

 

If the husband went in the safe, and just took it.. illegal possession as he took possession of a handgun without going through the PP process. If she handed it to him at home to take to the range... illegal transfer (temporary or not) of a firearm - as "home" is not an approved location for temporary transfers. Just like someone cant gift a handgun to someone without them going through the PP process + CoE etc..