CC in NJ?

[charleslee 45]

Will we ever have Concealed Carry in NJ?

[AnthonyG 36]

It depends on you and how involved you get in wanting it to change. It will happen if the majority fight for it and work together.

[dave545 15]

ashfbsjavsnsldkJKHDAJVNKDJSKCHJNDSFVKJandjhvsdjh vd$@&^$%^$^%&^gfmjfhj@^@#%@#%@#$^&TRHVD

 

theres ur answer lol

 

pretty hard to understand huh?

[BigHayden 77]

Funny. There are more gun owners than public union workers, but they are the feared class in NJ.

 

We'll get CC once the Federal courts step in and make us. We'll never get their voluntarily. Too many tax consumers feeding the political machines.

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

I would be willing to bet anyone $100 that we won't see it within the next 10 years (unless it's mandated by a federal decision, and that seems unlikely); and after that, I'll be too old to really care.

 

Oh and BTW, if you want to talk about CC, at the very least you should be a member of and/or a contributor to NRA and NJARPC, and possibly some other groups like NJ2SA.

[jcerillo70 16]

We're working on it... I say June 2012 we will be carrying.

 

Big things are happening and clicking into place in the NJ grassroots movement. especially this month.

[quikz 34]

NJ CCW: Well, THIS is the $6 Trillion dollar question now... Aint it ?

 

One things for sure. NJ, will go screaming, kicking and fighting TOOTH & NAIL(s) and til the last man standing, the last drop of legal blood, the last penny in state couffers (if theres a penny left) and THEN SOME. They will utterly refuse to go down short of a US Military blockade.

 

Those of you who know, know that this is NO exaggeration.

[NicePants 58]

NJ CCW: Well, THIS is the $6 Trillion dollar question now... Aint it ?

 

One things for sure. NJ, will go screaming, kicking and fighting TOOTH & NAIL(s) and til the last man standing, the last drop of legal blood, the last penny in state couffers (if theres a penny left) and THEN SOME. They will utterly refuse to go down short of a US Military blockade.

 

Those of you who know, know that this is NO exaggeration.

 

Oh yeah. The NJ legislature won't go down without fighting, and you can bet your a** that they won't go down without trying to spill some blood. I can already imagine the amount of BS legislation they'll put up to limit carry laws if the courts go in our favor.

[BigHayden 77]

I would be willing to bet anyone $100 that we won't see it within the next 10 years (unless it's mandated by a federal decision, and that seems unlikely); and after that, I'll be too old to really care.

 

Oh and BTW, if you want to talk about CC, at the very least you should be a member of and/or a contributor to NRA and NJARPC, and possibly some other groups like NJ2SA.

 

NRA, ANJRPC? Yeah, they are good ones to belong to (I belong to both + NJ2AS). But SAF is where the money needs to go. SAF brought Heller, McDonald, and Ezell (sp?). The NRA was against Heller (not against the ruling, but against bringing it to court), ripped off time from Alan Gura in McDonald, and just handed us a really tough loss in Heller II. The NRA is great for lobbying and writing legislation, but they utterly suck at litigation. We need good court decisions to stand on and get our rights back.

[Soju 153]

Will we ever have Concealed Carry in NJ?

 

There already is. Go to Camden, Newark, and Trenton for the full experience. But of course you aren't talking about that I assume...

[Njgunowner 2]

The NRA is great for lobbying and writing legislation, but they utterly suck at litigation. We need good court decisions to stand on and get our rights back.

 

It's easier to buy politicians than judges... the judges go to jail for it.

[diamondd817 828]

Oh yeah. The NJ legislature won't go down without fighting, and you can bet your a** that they won't go down without trying to spill some blood. I can already imagine the amount of BS legislation they'll put up to limit carry laws if the courts go in our favor.

 

I don't understand why the officials in this state are so against the people of NJ. Are we not on the same side? What are they trying to accomplish? Do they just want to show the people of NJ that they have the power to keep NJ a police state and control the its citizens? Wasn't the government created by the people for the people?

[vladtepes 1,060]

The problem is all about perception... I am in the process of moving to pa and have been spending a ton of time there... In pa carrying a gun is normal... Here it is obviously not... So that is the stumbling block... In pa getting a license to carry a gun is easier than getting car insurance... And people are not shooting each other left and right.. The perception. There is that this is totally normal... But then take NJ... Was talking to a very pro gun cop... And he was like... Yeah well I wouldn't want just anyone to be allowed to carry a gun... There is a logic break down there... People ignore the obvious fact that if you are going to commit a crime... U are going to just carry anyway.... But people ignore that simple fact... The mindset has to change before the laws will... People need to be educated in the facts that an armed public is not a dangerous public...

[Rifleman1 32]

Sent this to my Representatives this morning...

Pro self-defense champion Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) recently introduced a concealed carry recognition bill, H.R. 2900, which allows law-abiding citizens who can legally carry concealed in their home state to carry all across the country, as well.

 

Titled “The Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement (SAFE) Act,” this legislation recognizes that constitutional rights do not become null and void at the state line and will simply allow for interstate recognition of concealed carry provided that one can lawfully carry in his home state.

 

The SAFE Act respects the Constitution and states' powers in that it does NOT establish national standards for concealed carry, nor does it provide for a national carry permit or require a state like Vermont to move to a permit system (in order for its citizens to carry out-of-state).

 

In fact, the Broun bill will do nothing to change what the states already do in terms of allowing or denying their citizens their right to carry firearms. Rep. Broun’s bill does not establish national standards or in any way dictate what states do with respect to concealed carry. This bill simply allows citizens who are able to carry in their home state, to also carry in every other state that allows concealed carry.

 

Another important distinction of Rep. Broun's bill is that it does not rely on an expansive, erroneous interpretation of the Commerce Clause for justification and it includes interstate carry even for states that do not require government issued permits. The SAFE Act instead recognizes the "full faith and credit" protection that is guaranteed in Article IV of the Constitution.

 

Rep. Broun's legislation simply will protect the right of any U.S. citizen to carry out-of-state, as long as he is authorized to carry in his home state.

 

As my representative, I implore you to contact Rep. Broun's office and become a cosponsor or H.R. 2900.

 

 

[mikelets456 78]

The problem is all about perception... I am in the process of moving to pa and have been spending a ton of time there... In pa carrying a gun is normal... Here it is obviously not... So that is the stumbling block... In pa getting a license to carry a gun is easier than getting car insurance... And people are not shooting each other left and right.. The perception. There is that this is totally normal... But then take NJ... Was talking to a very pro gun cop... And he was like... Yeah well I wouldn't want just anyone to be allowed to carry a gun... There is a logic break down there... People ignore the obvious fact that if you are going to commit a crime... U are going to just carry anyway.... But people ignore that simple fact... The mindset has to change before the laws will... People need to be educated in the facts that an armed public is not a dangerous public...

 

We are a phone call away (negotiating) from selling our house and moving to PA. Main reason, I fear for this state over the next few years. it is a tough decision as we have teenage kids and one that is 20, but the unions, taxes, mentality, loss of freedoms, etc make NJ a bad state to bring up a family.

[diamondd817 828]

"mentality"

 

 

It's a "NJ State of Mind".

[djg0770 481]

I thought this was a thread about credit cards in NJ.

 

Concealed Carry? Certainly you kid.

[mrjam2jab 9]

Sent this to my Representatives this morning...

Pro self-defense champion Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) recently introduced a concealed carry recognition bill, H.R. 2900, which allows law-abiding citizens who can legally carry concealed in their home state to carry all across the country, as well.

 

Titled “The Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement (SAFE) Act,” this legislation recognizes that constitutional rights do not become null and void at the state line and will simply allow for interstate recognition of concealed carry provided that one can lawfully carry in his home state.

 

The SAFE Act respects the Constitution and states' powers in that it does NOT establish national standards for concealed carry, nor does it provide for a national carry permit or require a state like Vermont to move to a permit system (in order for its citizens to carry out-of-state).

 

In fact, the Broun bill will do nothing to change what the states already do in terms of allowing or denying their citizens their right to carry firearms. Rep. Broun’s bill does not establish national standards or in any way dictate what states do with respect to concealed carry. This bill simply allows citizens who are able to carry in their home state, to also carry in every other state that allows concealed carry.

 

Another important distinction of Rep. Broun's bill is that it does not rely on an expansive, erroneous interpretation of the Commerce Clause for justification and it includes interstate carry even for states that do not require government issued permits. The SAFE Act instead recognizes the "full faith and credit" protection that is guaranteed in Article IV of the Constitution.

 

Rep. Broun's legislation simply will protect the right of any U.S. citizen to carry out-of-state, as long as he is authorized to carry in his home state.

 

As my representative, I implore you to contact Rep. Broun's office and become a cosponsor or H.R. 2900.

 

How does any of that differ from HR822?

[matty 810]

I have doubt it will happen absent a court decision and a LOT of expensive challenges. Its more cultural than anything else. There just is NOT an ingrained firearms culture in NJ.

[jcerillo70 16]

How does any of that differ from HR822?

 

For us) It will let an NJ resident carry with a FL CCW license

 

Great job Rifleman1 !

[quikz 34]

Doesn't the President, need to 'sign-off' on HR822 etc...?

[reloaderguy 30]

Will we ever have Concealed Carry in NJ?

 

Not in our lifetime!

[Babyface Finster 45]

I don't see it coming to pass in NJ as long as the average citizen is so terrified of weapons. I carry a tiny little Kershaw Leek clipped to my pocket. Most people don't really notice it, but those that do are generally very intimidated when they ask me why I need it. I use it throughout the day as a tool yet the most common comment I hear is, "Are you going to stab someone with it?" Imagine how many times that fear is amplified when they think of a gun.

 

A guy in my office recently came back from vacation in Yellowstone. He was horrified that there were people in some of the surrounding areas they passed through who openly carried.

 

You can paint the politicians as being anti-gun (most are) but the average NJ citizen is far from pro-gun himself. I've met numerous long gun owners who are against concealed carry. If you want to CC in NJ, you had find a way to live a long, long time.

[Rifleman1 32]

How does any of that differ from HR822?

 

My understanding is that HR 822 would not let us CCW in NJ with a FL non-resident permit since we may not be issued a NJ CCW permit but HR 2900 would.

 

 

I came across this comparison on the web by Gun Rights Examiner Chris Woodard.

 

HR 822 vs. HR 2900

 

"There appears to be a lot of emotion, from both sides about HR 822. Putting emotion aside lets look at not only HR 822 but also HR 2900 and compare them.

 

In regards to firearms, for decades the Federal government (Congress) has severely abused the Constitution via the Commerce Clause. (Article 1 § 8 Clause 3). For decades, the States have abused the Constitution via the 10th Amendment.

 

HR 822 is yet another attempt at the continued abuse of the Commerce Clause. As such, if HR 822 were to become law, it is open to challenge on Constitutional grounds by the several states (CA), and these states have a good chance of winning in the Supreme Court. Consequently, I don’t believe HR 822 would remain on the books for very long.

 

HR 2900 is completely different in that the Constitutional Authority cited for this bill is the 2nd Amendment. Not only does it have the correct citation, but is also a much simpler and stronger bill. Of course, if the several states challenge HR 2900, the chances of the challenge being a success are almost non existent, mainly because of the correct citation.

 

HR 2900 has the potential to severely rock ALL federal and state firearm laws.

 

Article 6 Clause 2 states that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Both Federal and State governments appear to cherry pick this bit.

 

The 10th Amendment allows the states to pass laws that are not prohibited to them. They have taken this to mean they can legislate firearms as the wish.

 

Then there just happens to be the pesky 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment is an integral part of the Constitution. Therefore combining Article 6 Clause 2 and the 2nd Amendment means neither the Federal or State governments have the authority to legislate firearms. Make no mistake. The 10th Amendment does NOT negate the 2nd Amendment as many states have done. Likewise Federally, the abuse of the Commerce Clause does NOT negate the 2nd Amendment.

 

HR 2900 could be the wake up call for entire country. "

 

H.R. 822 would allow any person with a valid state-issued concealed firearm permit to carry a concealed firearm in any state that issues concealed firearm permits, or that does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes. A state's laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within its borders. The bill applies to D.C., Puerto Rico and U.S. territories. It would not create a federal licensing system; rather, it would require the states to recognize each others' carry permits, just as they recognize drivers' licenses and carry permits held by armored car guards.

 

H.R.2900, Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement (SAFE) Act of 2011, amends the federal criminal code to provide for reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms in different states by persons who are not prohibited by federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm and who are: (1) carrying a valid state license or permit for carrying a concealed firearm, or (2) otherwise entitled to carry a concealed firearm in their state of residence.

 

 

[mrjam2jab 9]

For us) It will let an NJ resident carry with a FL CCW license

 

Great job Rifleman1 !

 

 

My understanding is that HR 822 would not let us CCW in NJ with a FL non-resident permit since we may not be issued a NJ CCW permit but HR 2900 would.

 

 

 

I understand and agree with that. My point was that you didn't mention that in the letter to the Rep. You were "selling" HR2900, fine job by the way...and other than the Full Faith and Credit, the 2 bills sound exactly the same when reading your letter. I know you weren't trying to compare 822 and 2900 in the letter, but if your Rep is already familiar w/822 expect him/her to ask the same question I did.

 

 

H.R. 822 would allow any person with a valid state-issued concealed firearm permit to carry a concealed firearm in any state that issues concealed firearm permits, or that does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes. A state's laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within its borders. The bill applies to D.C., Puerto Rico and U.S. territories. It would not create a federal licensing system; rather, it would require the states to recognize each others' carry permits, just as they recognize drivers' licenses and carry permits held by armored car guards.

 

822 does NOT apply to DC as DC does not have a permitting process. They repealed that law right after Heller.

[Rifleman1 32]

I understand and agree with that. My point was that you didn't mention that in the letter to the Rep. You were "selling" HR2900, fine job by the way...and other than the Full Faith and Credit, the 2 bills sound exactly the same when reading your letter. I know you weren't trying to compare 822 and 2900 in the letter, but if your Rep is already familiar w/822 expect him/her to ask the same question I did.

 

822 does NOT apply to DC as DC does not have a permitting process. They repealed that law right after Heller.

 

Good point. Thank you for the clarification.

 

I'll be prepared when and if the question arises. I was trying to keep my letter from being confusing by comparing both bills that sound so similar and to instead request support for the one that would let us CCW in NJ and would have the most chance for long lasting sucess on the books.