CCW in PA, transporting to state line

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Just being sure and the search function wasnt working for me when i created the thread sorry for the repost...

 

Actually other than this subject is hashed out as much as oil threads are to bike forums, or Ford vs Chevy on car forums I don't completely get the question being asked again being a problem if you don't see it in the current list of active threads, or in the past month or so depending on the amount of traffic on a particular forum.

 

I see it as most people who join a forum don't go back and read every post, a lot just start fresh and hit the big topics and may mark the old ones read.

 

Now if a Forum as a set number of members and they were the only ones in the forum then yes, bringing up past topics wouldn't be too good, however this is a public forum with over 2500 members and probably 2 to 3 times the number of visitors day to forum members that check in. So I see brining up something keep the forum posting active, while they may not be new topics to long time members of the forum, they do provide information to the new people or one who haven't seen it. or as we start to get older, forgot about the topic.

 

It may get old on some topics and maybe some of the long time members have seen it all int he past, but I'd bet a majority of the people haven't seen it yet, plus a dead stale forum doesn't survive, they may for a while, but they will go under.

 

Just my view on it.

[Spartiati 63]

I am not sure if I am missing something, but I am not sure why there is an issue driving to PA with my firearm when I can easily got to Newark airport check my firearm in without any issue and fly to Philly or Pittsburgh etc. Is this not the same thing?

[Soju 153]

I am not sure if I am missing something, but I am not sure why there is an issue driving to PA with my firearm when I can easily got to Newark airport check my firearm in without any issue and fly to Philly or Pittsburgh etc. Is this not the same thing?

 

No, you are right, it is essentially the same thing. You are not missing anything. It is other people who are missing things, mainly the simple concept that NJ laws can only govern things in, you know, NJ. A tough concept to grasp apparently.

[vladtepes 1,060]

I am not sure if I am missing something, but I am not sure why there is an issue driving to PA with my firearm when I can easily got to Newark airport check my firearm in without any issue and fly to Philly or Pittsburgh etc. Is this not the same thing?

 

I covered all that in post 20...

 

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/28966-ccw-in-pa-transporting-to-state-line/page__view__findpost__p__379679

 

 

I agree with your statement.. which is exactly the point I was making..

[TheLugNutZ 21]

No, you are right, it is essentially the same thing. You are not missing anything. It is other people who are missing things, mainly the simple concept that NJ laws can only govern things in, you know, NJ. A tough concept to grasp apparently.

 

i dont think that its that tough to grasp, the issue is UNTIL you reach the boarder, you ARE STILL IN NJ.

I do agree with what the majority have said now tho and am confident when traveling to PA.

[PK90 3,570]

The only problem I foresee that may occur is if one were travelling to another state with their handgun, got lost, turned around, or had to return. They were then confronted by police in some circumstance about their destination, and somehow was found to have a handgun in their trunk. Then the officer came upon something else that indicated the suspect was lieing about his destination. He then would decide if the totality of the circumstances gave rise to probable cause to make an arrest.

 

 

This is what some people are hanging their hat on. Others refuse to accept that the FOPA covers said travel.

[Malsua 1,422]

Others refuse to accept that the FOPA covers said travel.

 

It's not that there is a refusal to accept that FOPA covers it, it's that it is unknown that FOPA covers it. There is _ZERO_ case precedence. There have been no tests. It is not spelled out in the 1986 legislation anthat clearly denotes that you are covered in your state of origin. FOPA covers _INTERSTATE_ travel. You have not engaged in interstate travel until you have left the state! You may have intent, but you have not. State of destination it much more easily explainable because you are not a resident, origin isn't. Furthermore, the authority under which the Feds claim under this legislation is from the commerce clause, found in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the US constitution. The commerce clause cannot have authority for a resident in his own state before he has engaged in any interstate commerce.(which was expanded in further legislation giving the feds, all sorts of un-enumerated powers).

 

My argument is and has always been that it currently not clarified and the possibility of being charged is not zero. Close to zero? Sure. Zero? I don't think anyone can conclusively say that, despite all the chest beating I see about this topic.

[vladtepes 1,060]

It's not that there is a refusal to accept that FOPA covers it, it's that it is unknown that FOPA covers it. There is _ZERO_ case precedence. There have been no tests. It is not spelled out in the 1986 legislation anthat clearly denotes that you are covered in your state of origin. FOPA covers _INTERSTATE_ travel. You have not engaged in interstate travel until you have left the state! You may have intent, but you have not. State of destination it much more easily explainable because you are not a resident, origin isn't. Furthermore, the authority under which the Feds claim under this legislation is from the commerce clause, found in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the US constitution. The commerce clause cannot have authority for a resident in his own state before he has engaged in any interstate commerce.(which was expanded in further legislation giving the feds, all sorts of un-enumerated powers).

 

My argument is and has always been that it currently not clarified and the possibility of being charged is not zero. Close to zero? Sure. Zero? I don't think anyone can conclusively say that, despite all the chest beating I see about this topic.

 

 

sometimes.. there is no case precedence.. because there is no case to be made...

[Malsua 1,422]

sometimes.. there is no case precedence.. because there is no case to be made...

 

Or more likely, it's because the case pool will only affect states where ownership of a handgun requires permission, such as NJ. Where travel requires exemptions, such as NJ. Where the prosecutor has an entire laundry list of charges that he can use that are NOT covered under FOPA, so instead of making a federal case of it, he will change the charges to something else and stick it to you that way.

 

It is not defined in FOPA or case law that the Safe Passage provision of the Firearms Ownwer Protection act covers anyone in the state of origin. It just isn't clarified. Suggesting it does cover the state of origin because it's not been tested is foolheardy.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Or more likely, it's because the case pool will only affect states where ownership of a handgun requires permission, such as NJ. Where travel requires exemptions, such as NJ. Where the prosecutor has an entire laundry list of charges that he can use that are NOT covered under FOPA, so instead of making a federal case of it, he will change the charges to something else and stick it to you that way.

 

It is not defined in FOPA or case law that the Safe Passage provision of the Firearms Ownwer Protection act covers anyone in the state of origin. It just isn't clarified. Suggesting it does cover the state of origin because it's not been tested is foolheardy.

 

I think it far more foolish to relinquish all of your rights as a law abiding citizen to the state... to empower them to limit your free travel with your property.. the NJSP told me POINT BLANK to transport them unloaded in the trunk when I told them I was "going to PA for a few days"... I am sorry and I do not mean to be rude.. but assuming that NJ can limit your free travel with your own property? come on... the notion of that is absurd... call the NJSP yourself.. while they can not issue you legal advice.. they can certainly guide you.. aid you in understanding the law.. tell them exactly what I did and prepare for the shocker of an answer... tell them.. "I am going to visit PA and want to bring my handgun with me.. can you advise me on how the gun should be stored in the vehicle while traveling there.." mention NOTHING about ranges.. or any other exempted location.. the truth is.. the notion that you can not bring your OWN gun to another state is SO abstract that I would be shocked if LEO would even have an issue with it.. I have asked this question of several LEOs that I am friends with.. in casual conversation.. with NO prepping.. they ALL told me similar versions of the same thing.. unloaded.. in the trunk.. and not a SINGLE one brought up the fact that I was not going to an exempt location..that mindset only exists because the law abiding gun owners of NJ have been conditioned to feel like criminals.. and that my friend.. is bs...follow the laws that are there..

 

http://www.nj.gov/njsp/about/fire_trans.html

 

they talk about through the state of NJ... well I have to go THROUGH NJ to get to PA.. there is no way to go around it..

 

and if FOPA did not cover you when traveling through, that would mean the entire time you transported in NJ it would HAVE to be an exempted location.. a hotel in FL is not an exempted location.. your uncles cabin in WV is not an exempted location.. the ONLY exempted locations are DIRECTLY to and from.. so if FOPA did not cover in state of origin NO ONE flying out would be legal unless they were going DIRECTLY to and from.. as NJ words it.. again not trying to be a jerk.. but how can you not get that NJ is not able to prohibit you from leaving with yoru legally owned property..

 

word for word from NJSP website..

 

This federal law permitting interstate transportation of a firearm applies only if all of the following requirements are met:

 

A.The person's possession of the firearm was lawful in the state in which the journey began;

 

TRUE.. nothing prevents me from carrying any firearm about my home in NJ.. therefore the firearm is legal to have at the origin of my journey..

 

 

 

B.The person's possession of the firearm will be lawful in the state in which the journey will end;

 

TRUE.. PA recognizes my FL permit..

 

 

C.The person is transporting the firearm for lawful purpose

 

TRUE.. I am carrying the firearm as a tool of self defense... self defense is a lawful purpose..

 

 

D.The firearm is unloaded

 

TRUE the firearm IS unloaded while in NJ

 

E.The firearm is not directly accessible from the passenger compartment of the vehicle

 

F.The ammunition is not directly accessible from the passenger compartment of the vehicle

 

G.If the vehicle does not have a compartment separate from the passenger compartment, the firearm and ammunition must be in a locked container other than the vehicle's glove compartment or console;

 

TRUE the firearm and ammunition are in my trunk..

 

H.The person is not

1.a convicted felon

 

2.a fugitive from justice an addict or unlawful user of drugs, or

 

3.an illegal alien

 

IThe person has not

 

1.been adjudicated to be a mental defective

 

2.been committed to a mental institution

 

3.been dishonorably discharged from the armed forces, or

 

4.renounced his United States Citizenship

 

TRUE none of those apply to me..

 

 

SO.. I am transporting my gun THROUGH NJ to PA for a lawful use.. and ALL of the qualifiers NJSP list as qualifiers are met.. so really besides creating some unjustified paranoia.. I do not see where you have ANY solid grounds to make the point you make.. I could SAY anything.. I could SAY that if you transport a loaded magazine in NJ NJ might consider that a loaded gun and they will arrest you.. I COULD say that.. but then I would be just making things up without any grounds to stand on.. of the COUNTLESS people who transport to PA from NJ JUST to carry how many have been arrested for that fact ONLY.. someone gets arrested on an adjustable stock charge (Burlington county) and we hear about it.. so if this WAS happening we would know about it.. it would be on our radar.. I am familiar with NO NJ resident who was transporting to PA in accordance with FOPA who was charged with illegal possession of a firearm.. ever.. are you?

[Soju 153]

Did you know that it illegal to have a 30 round AR magazine in PA, because that is illegal in NJ?

 

Did you know that you cannot transport your AR that has a collapsible stock and bayonet lug through NJ if you are from NH and going to Florida because it is illegal in NJ?

 

Did you know you cannot transport you legally owned and possessed handgun from your house in NJ to PA because PA is not one of the exempted locations in the NJ statues where you can have a handgun?

 

Did you know that Federal law does not apply in these cases but NJ law does?

 

I know I already said that this thread was ridiculous, but the more I think about it, I think I underestimated the amount of absurdity. It is actually significantly more ridiculous that I had originally thought.

 

It is like saying anything is illegal anywhere because NJ law doesn't say it is legal. How it can somehow apply but Federal law doesn't? Well I guess I haven't drank that koolaid yet.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Did you know that it illegal to have a 30 round AR magazine in PA, because that is illegal in NJ?

 

Can you show the law that states this what if I kept them the mags out of state, what does NJ have to do withe this??

Did you know that you cannot transport your AR that has a collapsible stock and bayonet lug through NJ if you are from NH and going to Florida because it is illegal in NJ?

 

So FOPA doesn't exist if your in NJ, are we some sort of time warp??

Did you know you cannot transport you legally owned and possessed handgun from your house in NJ to PA because PA is not one of the exempted locations in the NJ statues where you can have a handgun?

 

How do people ever leave the state of NJ with a gun, are we trapped in the state??

Did you know that Federal law does not apply in these cases but NJ law does?

 

How do arrive at this??

I know I already said that this thread was ridiculous, but the more I think about it, I think I underestimated the amount of absurdity. It is actually significantly more ridiculous that I had originally thought.

 

I think that just made the understatement winner in the thread..

 

It is like saying anything is illegal anywhere because NJ law doesn't say it is legal. How it can somehow apply but Federal law doesn't? Well I guess I haven't drank that koolaid yet.

 

Am I reading this wrong or were all the above just facetious comments, if so forget it, if not

 

See 2 Posts Down

 

Even added a +1 for that to ya Bones

[Jon 264]

Harry, way to be owned by sarcasm.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

As Sheldon says, "Bazinga!"

 

Can we just end this thread now? :thsmiley_deadhorse:

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Harry, way to be owned by sarcasm.

 

Damn,, :facepalm: I hang my head in shame..

[Malsua 1,422]

It is interesting that upon re-reading the FOPA statutes, the one part that jumps out is this:

Upon transmittal of the House bill to the Senate, the Senate passed both it and an amendatory bill, S. 2414, which greatly affected this section. S. 2414 narrowed the right of travel by providing that it was a right "to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearms"; moreover, both firearm and ammunition must not only be not "readily accessible" but also not "directly accessible from the passenger compartment."494 The restriction to transport to and from areas where the arms might be lawfully possessed was apparently a counter to criticisms that the bill might otherwise bar arrest of the owner in his own state, under that state's laws, if he argued he was beginning a permitted transportation.

 

I'm trying to decypher the above in red but it looks like the "to/from is legal" was to counter that the bill would disallow arrests if he argued he was beginning a permitted transporation. Which sorta suggest to me the bill is not supposed to prevent arrests under the state's laws while beginning a permitted transportation.

 

 

Now someone in Maryland, who's rules essentially mirror NJ, asked the Assistant Attorney General of Maryland this exact question.

You can read the response here: http://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=850500&postcount=45

You'll note that he states that if you are not within the legal exemptions inside of Maryland, you're violating the law and not protected by FOPA. Not an official position and he also notes there is no appellate case on which to relay.

 

I know you think you've got it all answered, and that's all well and good. You seem to think that arguing this unsettled distinction means I'm running around in fear with my arms raised in the air or something equally ludicrous. If I plan to go to PA and I carry when I do, I can assure you, FOPA and the asinine NJ laws aren't going to weigh on my decision whatsoever. I'll put the gun in the back and go, so can we stop the ridiculous hyperbole? Or not, whatever, have fun with it but I still assert that it's not settled. The argument 495 above, during the debate on the bill clearly shows this was discussed. I want clarification on that point before I can say with certitude that it is covered under FOPA.

 

Enforcement by the state police or Barney fife makes no difference. You can call the state police and they can tell you one thing and a local prosecutor can make you life hell, all the same.

[vladtepes 1,060]

It is interesting that upon re-reading the FOPA statutes, the one part that jumps out is this:

 

 

I'm trying to decypher the above in red but it looks like the "to/from is legal" was to counter that the bill would disallow arrests if he argued he was beginning a permitted transporation. Which sorta suggest to me the bill is not supposed to prevent arrests under the state's laws while beginning a permitted transportation.

 

 

Now someone in Maryland, who's rules essentially mirror NJ, asked the Assistant Attorney General of Maryland this exact question.

You can read the response here: http://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=850500&postcount=45

You'll note that he states that if you are not within the legal exemptions inside of Maryland, you're violating the law and not protected by FOPA. Not an official position and he also notes there is no appellate case on which to relay.

 

I know you think you've got it all answered, and that's all well and good. You seem to think that arguing this unsettled distinction means I'm running around in fear with my arms raised in the air or something equally ludicrous. If I plan to go to PA and I carry when I do, I can assure you, FOPA and the asinine NJ laws aren't going to weigh on my decision whatsoever. I'll put the gun in the back and go, so can we stop the ridiculous hyperbole? Or not, whatever, have fun with it but I still assert that it's not settled. The argument 495 above, during the debate on the bill clearly shows this was discussed. I want clarification on that point before I can say with certitude that it is covered under FOPA.

 

Enforcement by the state police or Barney fife makes no difference. You can call the state police and they can tell you one thing and a local prosecutor can make you life hell, all the same.

 

your questioning of policy is fair.. and when I stated what I stated maybe it was partially out of frustration.. and all all that.. as to the question as to if it covers you "in between" it just seems like such an absurd concern.. and maybe that is why you are reading my frustration..

 

I feel it is illogical as to be concerned about leaving the state with my gun.. I have explained why I feel that way.. and I guess people will continue to make their own choice..

 

as long as there is no history of arrests.. as long as there is at least a semi logical argument (FOPA) then I fail to see any course of action OTHER than assuming I can bring my unloaded cased gun to another state..

[vladtepes 1,060]

also..

 

The restriction to transport to and from areas where the arms might be lawfully possessed was apparently a counter to criticisms that the bill might otherwise bar arrest of the owner in his own state, under that state's laws, if he argued he was beginning a permitted transportation.

 

could mean something as simple as.. I drive around with a handgun for days...

get pulled over headed to cape may south on the parkway.. and I argue that I am carrying the gun via FOPA and headed to PA..

 

they dont want you to just always drive around with a handgun claiming a FOPA exemption?

[Malsua 1,422]

also..

 

 

 

could mean something as simple as.. I drive around with a handgun for days...

get pulled over headed to cape may south on the parkway.. and I argue that I am carrying the gun via FOPA and headed to PA..

 

they dont want you to just always drive around with a handgun claiming a FOPA exemption?

 

I agree. So what does that mean in the larger sense? How do they differentiate? Does this mean it disallows Fopa protections in the origin state or simply that an officer has to rely on the totality of the circumstances and determine you were coming from home? Which is it? It could be either unless we can find some clarity somewhere.

 

I do know that some folks were arrested in NY at the airports and that the PAPD were told to knock it off by the US Attorney general. I don't know if they were NY residents or not, I do not believe they were.

 

Edit to add: This could also suggest that if you are not 100% legal in NJ at any point during your NJ journey, you fail FOPA protections. The only way to be legal inside of NJ is within the exemptions.

Edited November 19, 2011 by Malsua

[vladtepes 1,060]

I agree. So what does that mean in the larger sense? How do they differentiate? Does this mean it disallows Fopa protections in the origin state or simply that an officer has to rely on the totality of the circumstances and determine you were coming from home? Which is it? It could be either unless we can find some clarity somewhere.

 

I do know that some folks were arrested in NY at the airports and that the PAPD were told to knock it off by the US Attorney general. I don't know if they were NY residents or not, I do not believe they were.

 

Edit to add: This could also suggest that if you are not 100% legal in NJ at any point during your NJ journey, you fail FOPA protections. The only way to be legal inside of NJ is within the exemptions.

 

NJSP directive explains that if the officer believes that the gun is being transported in compliance with FOPA he is to make a reasonable inquiry into the situation... if the information shows that it is in fact FOPA then the officer should allow the individual to proceed.. if the officer believes FOPA is not a factor an arrest should be made.. that is again right off of NJSP website.. I get what you are saying and all but I will simply refuse to believe that they state government can stop me from leaving the state.. AND if FOPA does not apply in home state that opens up an enormous box of problems.. as stated.. you could literally NEVER go to ANY gun even outside of NJ unless you were going DIRECTLY there.. which si obviously absurd..

[Malsua 1,422]

Just for giggles, I posed this question to NRA-ILA. If they respond, I'll post it.

 

you could literally NEVER go to ANY gun even outside of NJ unless you were going DIRECTLY there

 

I don't think anyone expects NJ law to apply once you are not in NJ. I don't think anyone suggested as such. We're talking about the gray twilight from the time you are on a public street until you enter freedom. Must you be NJ Legal(under NJ laws, fed laws aside) 100% of the time during your journey? I would love for the answer to be a definite NO. Not a probably no, not a maybe no, not a "it would be ridiculous if it's not no", I want a definite NO!. heh

[Spartiati 63]

It is interesting that upon re-reading the FOPA statutes, the one part that jumps out is this:

 

 

I'm trying to decypher the above in red but it looks like the "to/from is legal" was to counter that the bill would disallow arrests if he argued he was beginning a permitted transporation. Which sorta suggest to me the bill is not supposed to prevent arrests under the state's laws while beginning a permitted transportation.

 

 

Now someone in Maryland, who's rules essentially mirror NJ, asked the Assistant Attorney General of Maryland this exact question.

You can read the response here: http://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=850500&postcount=45

You'll note that he states that if you are not within the legal exemptions inside of Maryland, you're violating the law and not protected by FOPA. Not an official position and he also notes there is no appellate case on which to relay.

 

I know you think you've got it all answered, and that's all well and good. You seem to think that arguing this unsettled distinction means I'm running around in fear with my arms raised in the air or something equally ludicrous. If I plan to go to PA and I carry when I do, I can assure you, FOPA and the asinine NJ laws aren't going to weigh on my decision whatsoever. I'll put the gun in the back and go, so can we stop the ridiculous hyperbole? Or not, whatever, have fun with it but I still assert that it's not settled. The argument 495 above, during the debate on the bill clearly shows this was discussed. I want clarification on that point before I can say with certitude that it is covered under FOPA.

 

Enforcement by the state police or Barney fife makes no difference. You can call the state police and they can tell you one thing and a local prosecutor can make you life hell, all the same.

 

Get what you are saying but one question remains, if this true why am I not arrested everytime I transport my firearms from home to the airport (a non exempt) place in NJ, when I am flying out of state to hunt? Because it in a non issue. Now change the situation, I decide to drive to my out of state hnting destination instead of fly. I am suddenly in jeopardy. It simply does not make sense.

[Malsua 1,422]

Get what you are saying but one question remains, if this true why am I not arrested everytime I transport my firearms from home to the airport (a non exempt) place in NJ, when I am flying out of state to hunt?

 

Because the laws have been clarified concerning airports.

 

http://www.anjrpc.org/resource/resmgr/docs/travelwithguns.pdf

[vladtepes 1,060]

this about this..

 

we ALL agree that you are allowed to take guns away on trips.. even those guys over at the PA forums agree with that..

we all agree that there are events far away that people have brought handguns to...

well here is the catch..

FOPA either protects you in your home state OR it does not.. you can't have it both ways.. it either does or it does not..

if it does NOT then there is literally NO way that you could EVER bring handguns out of NJ.. it would not matter if you were going to a top level competition in the midwest.. it would not matter if you were going to carry in PA.. if FOPA ONLY picks up in the "in between states" then you could NEVER get there because NJ would stop you while IN the state.. because regardless of NJ laws not reaching past the border while initiating your trip you would HAVE to be going DIRECTLY to and from..

as others have pointed out.. show up at the airport and check your gun for your 4 day long weekend in FL.. NOPE sorry.. you are under arrest.. you can not transport that gun to the airport because you are obviously not going directly to and from..

logic dictate that to get the gun out of state you must first travel through the state.. even if it is just for a fraction of a second if you live right on the tip of the border..

so with that said.. what grants you the ability to bring a gun ANYWHERE other than exempted places..

we all know the clarity of NJ law.. ILLEGAL UNLESS we say it is OK..

they list the IN STATE exemptions.. and stop there? so what? they do not even bother to discuss anything past the border because it is moot to them..

do they want you driving to PA every other weekend with a gun in the trunk? probably not.... but how can they possibly stop you?

again.. if it is the world finally shooting competition in state XYZ.. OR it is a day trip to PA.. it is covered.. because if it was not.. there is no logical way you could ever leave the state with a gun..

 

obviously I am not a lawyer.. but it is the only thing that makes sense..

something HAS to cover you from your house to the airport..

from your house to the border as you are driving "down south"

and that same something covers you on your way to PA..

 

IMO of course..

 

and if they do respond that it does NOT cover you.. ask them how the hell you are supposed to bring your guns to another state.. since it is done probably on an almost daily basis..

[vladtepes 1,060]

Because the laws have been clarified concerning airports.

 

http://www.anjrpc.org/resource/resmgr/docs/travelwithguns.pdf

 

 

so..

people traveling from state to state..

going through NY...

hassled by cops in NY... trying to impose NY laws..

and they are corrected to explain they were traveling and should not have been bothered..

 

sounds less about airports in particular... and more just about FOPA..

[Malsua 1,422]

if it does NOT then there is literally NO way that you could EVER bring handguns out of NJ

 

You've made this argument before but I don't understand how you get there. You are traveling to a range, you are covered under a NJ exemption, end of story.

 

The exemptions don't mention that your ultimate destination has to be within NJ. It just mentions exempted activity.

[vladtepes 1,060]

You've made this argument before but I don't understand how you get there. You are traveling to a range, you are covered under a NJ exemption, end of story.

 

The exemptions don't mention that your ultimate destination has to be within NJ. It just mentions exempted activity.

 

 

DIRECTLY...

 

so if you are

*going cross country and then coming directly home.. you satisfy the NJ exemption..

*going cross country to a range and staying a couple days.. you are NOT going directly and therefore NOT satisfying the exemption..

 

the rules don't say..

"going directly to a range till you cross the border than staying 5 days" they say DIRECTLY to and from..

[Malsua 1,422]

"going directly to a range till you cross the border than staying 5 days" they say DIRECTLY to and from.. it's no longer enforceable due to lack of jurisdiciton

[vladtepes 1,060]

"going directly to a range till you cross the border than staying 5 days" they say DIRECTLY to and from.. it's no longer enforceable due to lack of jurisdiciton

 

right but as you pick up your plane tickets for your 5 day stay in FL how do you pull that argument..

 

again.. while NJ law STOPS at the border.. IF FOPA does not apply.. then it still applies while IN the border..

 

"where are you going with that gun in the car"

"to a range in PA to shoot"

"oh yeah? at 9pm at night in the snow? what range is this? sir are you trying to hide something?"

 

"where are you headed with that gun in your trunk"

"heading home from the airport I was doing some target shooting in FL"

"did your kids get those mouse ears at the gun range? sir do you have something to hide?"

 

that is the issue I have with lying to LEO.. you dig holes... and at the point of the stop you are NOT going directly to or from anywhere..

so something MUST protect you in the interim..

 

"where are you headed with that gun in your trunk"

"I am headed out of state.."

 

yeah sure.. say you are going to a range to shoot.. providing it is a nice sunny Saturday afternoon.. but that **** is only going to carry you so far considering the circumstances.. that is why I prefer to believe I am permitted to go from state to state with my gun as long as it is transported in a manner consistent with FOPA....

[Soju 153]

You've made this argument before but I don't understand how you get there. You are traveling to a range, you are covered under a NJ exemption, end of story.

 

The exemptions don't mention that your ultimate destination has to be within NJ. It just mentions exempted activity.

 

It doesn't mention ultimate destination because as you have even said, it would have no jurisdiction outside of NJ. NJ laws are created to cover things in NJ, that is why it isn't mentioned. It is implied. Just like your house being an exempted location, it doesn't mention that your house must be in NJ either...because it is implied, you know, the law being NJ law and all.

 

That is how we have got to that conclusion, if we were to assume that federal law doesn't apply. It actually isn't our argument, it is our conclusion based on your argument. I completely think you can travel out of state.