CCW in PA, transporting to state line

[Spartiati 63]

Because the laws have been clarified concerning airports.

 

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

 

Therefore in a court of law it would be tough for a Jury to decide that there is something different about driving out of the state in the same manner you drove to airport in order to take your firearm out of state. Do what you want, never take your guns out of state but I think this notion that you can't drive out of state with guns properly transported is not correct and I will continue to do so. In fact I am going to Lehigh Valley sporting clays tomorrow to kill some clays with my own shotgun and I'll be sure to stop and get an egg sandwich in Bethlehem before I go to the range.

[Malsua 1,422]

Therefore in a court of law it would be tough for a Jury to decide that there is something different about driving out of the state in the same manner you drove to airport in order to take your firearm out of state. Do what you want, never take your guns out of state but I think this notion that you can't drive out of state with guns properly transported is not correct and I will continue to do so. In fact I am going to Lehigh Valley sporting clays tomorrow to kill some clays with my own shotgun and I'll be sure to stop and get an egg sandwich in Bethlehem before I go to the range.

 

Once again, someone misses my point. Re-read my posts.

[Spartiati 63]

Once again, someone misses my point. Re-read my posts.

No thanks.

[Malsua 1,422]

No thanks.

 

That's probably for the best. When someone can't understand a concept it makes them confused and angry.

[Spartiati 63]

That's probably for the best. When someone can't understand a concept it makes them confused and angry.

 

As you have obviously demonstrated.

 

I simply indicated I'd rather not continue in a fruitless dialogue. You have your postition and I mine. It is you who must be angry as you feel the need to insult my intelligence when you know absolutely nothing about me. I get your position and I simply don't agree with.

[Malsua 1,422]

As you have obviously demonstrated.

 

I simply indicated I'd rather not continue in a fruitless dialogue. You have your postition and I mine. It is you who must be angry as you feel the need to insult my intelligence when you know absolutely nothing about me. I get your position and I simply don't agree with.

 

You clearly cannot distinguish that I am talking about a legal distinction, not a practical one. As has been repeated ad nauseum, that because I'm trying to clarify WHAT THE LAW SAWS, not how it is interpreted by police or how it is followed by citizens, that somehow I'm some kind of coward, jumping at my own shadow. That somehow you can never leave the state with your property is again something I never said. You yourself repeated this canard a few posts up. If it's a fruitless debate, so be it, I assert the question is not satisfactorily answered. That it is not enforced is immaterial to the question.

 

As for knowing who people are, people here know me, in person. You ascribed all sorts of behavior to me based on an question that you seem to think has been satisfactorily answered.

[unclenunzie 3]

At the risk of minor thread hijack:

 

Has there never been an inquiry made to the NJ Attorney General's office on the out of state transport question? I do realize there is risk in just asking but it would seem insane that no hard and fast answer can be had. Or has this question been asked and the AG simply ignores it?

 

For what it is worth, I have in the past flown to Florida with a handgun per the transport rules, and will do so again. I'd just love to have a letter from the AG's office stating something similar to the Don Young letter but specific to NJ residents starting their journey within NJ.

 

Is there no friendly state assemblyman or state senator willing to pose the question to get an answer?

[vladtepes 1,060]

At the risk of minor thread hijack:

 

Has there never been an inquiry made to the NJ Attorney General's office on the out of state transport question? I do realize there is risk in just asking but it would seem insane that no hard and fast answer can be had. Or has this question been asked and the AG simply ignores it?

 

For what it is worth, I have in the past flown to Florida with a handgun per the transport rules, and will do so again. I'd just love to have a letter from the AG's office stating something similar to the Don Young letter but specific to NJ residents starting their journey within NJ.

 

Is there no friendly state assemblyman or state senator willing to pose the question to get an answer?

 

the closest scenario that I can comment on is asking the NJSP firearms division how to transport my gun to PA that I was just taking with me for an undisclosed reason..

 

they said.. unloaded in the trunk.. once I said I was going to PA.. they made no reference to exempted places..

[BigHayden 77]

Vlad,

 

I know I'm jumping in this late, but I had to comment about FOPA. It says 'if possession in the origin state is legal' (I'm on my iPhone, so I can't see the exact wording), then you're covered. The grey area comes from the fact that firearms possession is illegal in NJ unless you fall into one of the specific exemptions, which do include your home. But, the minute you leave your home and are not heading to a range/gun store/place of business/etc, you are technically not legal in the state of origin and would not be covered under FOPA in any state along the way. Is it stupid? Absolutely. But as Mark pointed out, there is no court precedence for this, so we don't have anything legal to stand on. Maybe the trooper you talked to has some common sense (which dictates that yes, we should be able to leave the state with a firearm), but maybe the one that stops one of us won't have any. Same goes for the prosecutor. Our definition of common sense and an anti's definition are two different things, and too many antis are in positions of power in the Soprano State.

 

I'm with you, I would make the argument that I'm covered under FOPA, but that argument would have to be made in front of a judge, who is also likely an anti. There are no guarantees in the legal world, even if the outcome should be logical.

 

Maybe you're right and FOPA applies. Maybe you're wrong and Loretta Weinberg's interpretation of states rights is correct when it comes to firearms laws (I know she's not, but I'm trying to illustrate a point). The fact remains that FOPA is not 100% clear, and NJ laws suck and are designed to be open to interpretation (see the "substantially identical" phrase in the NJAWB. Those two things together put gun owners in a precarious legal predicament.

 

I can see both sides. But I bet we can all agree that the laws suck and need to change.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Vlad,

 

I know I'm jumping in this late, but I had to comment about FOPA. It says 'if possession in the origin state is legal' (I'm on my iPhone, so I can't see the exact wording), then you're covered. The grey area comes from the fact that firearms possession is illegal in NJ unless you fall into one of the specific exemptions, which do include your home. But, the minute you leave your home and are not heading to a range/gun store/place of business/etc, you are technically not legal in the state of origin and would not be covered under FOPA in any state along the way. Is it stupid? Absolutely. But as Mark pointed out, there is no court precedence for this, so we don't have anything legal to stand on. Maybe the trooper you talked to has some common sense (which dictates that yes, we should be able to leave the state with a firearm), but maybe the one that stops one of us won't have any. Same goes for the prosecutor. Our definition of common sense and an anti's definition are two different things, and too many antis are in positions of power in the Soprano State.

 

I'm with you, I would make the argument that I'm covered under FOPA, but that argument would have to be made in front of a judge, who is also likely an anti. There are no guarantees in the legal world, even if the outcome should be logical.

 

Maybe you're right and FOPA applies. Maybe you're wrong and Loretta Weinberg's interpretation of states rights is correct when it comes to firearms laws (I know she's not, but I'm trying to illustrate a point). The fact remains that FOPA is not 100% clear, and NJ laws suck and are designed to be open to interpretation (see the "substantially identical" phrase in the NJAWB. Those two things together put gun owners in a precarious legal predicament.

 

I can see both sides. But I bet we can all agree that the laws suck and need to change.

 

the minute I leave my home I am in route.. at the start of my trip.. my home.. it is legal for me to have and carry my gun..

 

how many times has an individual boarded a plane.. with a handgun when they were not going DIRECTLY to one of the exempted locations?

how many times has a father and son driven to PA to stay at a relatives house and take in a little target practice.. while NOT going directly to an exempted location?

how many people transport to PA and bring a gun just because carrying is legal there?

and so on.. and of all those countless people? how many have you heard of who have been stopped and arrested for illegal possession? 100? 50? 10? ANY? I do not know of a SINGLE case..

 

IF NJ law.. restricted travel out of the state (UNLESS going to an exempted location) you would NOT be allowed to bring a gun onto a plane period.. state law would not allow it.. think about it.. lets just pretend that FOPA does NOT apply in the home state.. as some have argued.. that means until you get to the border you have to be satisfying an exemption.. that means that FOPA would NEVER apply to NJ residents unless going directly to and from... so if that were the case.. airlines flying out of NJ would not be allowed to let you transport a gun.. they would essentially be aiding your violation of the law..

 

the only reason an airline can even allow you to check a gun is because you are traveling.. (NOT directly to and from as NJ law demands)

so it does not IMHO matter if it is plain.. or car.. if you are leaving the state.. then you are leaving the state.. and as the NJSP told me directly.. there is no issue..

[BigHayden 77]

the minute I leave my home I am in route.. at the start of my trip.. my home.. it is legal for me to have and carry my gun..

 

how many times has an individual boarded a plane.. with a handgun when they were not going DIRECTLY to one of the exempted locations?

how many times has a father and son driven to PA to stay at a relatives house and take in a little target practice.. while NOT going directly to an exempted location?

how many people transport to PA and bring a gun just because carrying is legal there?

and so on.. and of all those countless people? how many have you heard of who have been stopped and arrested for illegal possession? 100? 50? 10? ANY? I do not know of a SINGLE case..

 

IF NJ law.. restricted travel out of the state (UNLESS going to an exempted location) you would NOT be allowed to bring a gun onto a plane period.. state law would not allow it.. think about it.. lets just pretend that FOPA does NOT apply in the home state.. as some have argued.. that means until you get to the border you have to be satisfying an exemption.. that means that FOPA would NEVER apply to NJ residents unless going directly to and from... so if that were the case.. airlines flying out of NJ would not be allowed to let you transport a gun.. they would essentially be aiding your violation of the law..

 

the only reason an airline can even allow you to check a gun is because you are traveling.. (NOT directly to and from as NJ law demands)

so it does not IMHO matter if it is plain.. or car.. if you are leaving the state.. then you are leaving the state.. and as the NJSP told me directly.. there is no issue..

 

But a prosecutor trying to make a name for him/herself could argue against those points successfully. Look at Brian Aitken. He was satisfying the NJ exemptions and still landed in jail for 8 years. NJ law doesn't restrict transportation out of state, but it does spell out very clearly where gun ownership is legal (i.e. the exemptions) and where it isn't (i.e. everywhere else), and FOPA only covers you if your "legal in the state of origin", which you are until you leave your house.

 

Is it your contention that the airlines (and perhaps more laughably, the TSA) are all experts on NJ and federal firearms laws?

 

And all of your examples fall into the same category as this: How many drug dealers carry guns on Camden's streets and don't get stopped and arrested? If they do it, it must be legal, right?

 

The more appropriate question would be, How many people have been stopped by police doing one of the things you described, and were let go by police because of FOPA or NJ law? I would argue that none have been stopped, but that doesn't mean what they were doing is legal under NJ law.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not contesting your logic, but I think you're overlooking the fact that all NJ firearms laws are designed to ensnare law abiding people so as to discourage gun ownership as much as possible without completely banning possession. The fact that threads like this exist suggests they are fulfilling their stated task beautifully.

 

To correct a post from earlier, it was actually a judge that said "When it comes to firearms in NJ, the citizen acts at his own peril".

[Dan 177]

FOPA was designed to protect people from traveling from one state to another, to offer protection while en-route through states that may have stricter gun laws than the origination and destination states. I believe the interpretation of "legal where you begin" or origination is considered to be your starting state. I feel you must be in possession and transporting under your origination state's laws, and FOPA kicks in once you leave its borders. Then once you pass your destination state's border, you must be in possession and transporting legally according to that state's laws.

 

Also, with plane travel, as I've said it before... this could be construed to be a reasonable deviation under NJ transportation exemptions. If you purchased a plane ticket to travel to a place where you are going to go target shooting , I'm pretty sure it is "reasonably necessary" "deviation" to go to the airport with your gun in order to catch your plane.

 

All weapons being transported under paragraph (2) of subsection b., subsection e., or paragraph (1) or (3) of subsection f. of this section shall be carried unloaded and contained in a closed and fastened case, gunbox, securely tied package, or locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is being transported, and in the course of travel shall include only such deviations as are reasonably necessary under the circumstances.

[vladtepes 1,060]

But a prosecutor trying to make a name for him/herself could argue against those points successfully. Look at Brian Aitken. He was satisfying the NJ exemptions and still landed in jail for 8 years. NJ law doesn't restrict transportation out of state, but it does spell out very clearly where gun ownership is legal (i.e. the exemptions) and where it isn't (i.e. everywhere else), and FOPA only covers you if your "legal in the state of origin", which you are until you leave your house.

 

 

no offense.. but where have you been.. Brian is a criminal.. who broke the law.. high capacity magazines while living in NJ are NOT going to work... period.. Brian was not innocent in any way.. and is lucky to be free..

 

Is it your contention that the airlines (and perhaps more laughably, the TSA) are all experts on NJ and federal firearms laws?

 

this statement is irrelevant because it is NOT the TSA.. it is the Police and the state.. if the act described was illegal.. cops would be lined up to lock you up the second you tried to board a plane with your illegally transported firearm..

 

And all of your examples fall into the same category as this: How many drug dealers carry guns on Camden's streets and don't get stopped and arrested? If they do it, it must be legal, right?

 

you obviously completely missed the point.. but ironically illustrated it at the same time...

people transport guns out of NJ ALL the time.. how many have you heard of being arrested? give ONE example of a law abiding NJ resident who was incarcerated for the SOLE reason of transporting a gun to PA..

drug dealers carrying guns on the other hand are locked up all the time.. on the news..

it is logical to think if you are drug dealing street thug carrying a gun you will be arrested.. it is further reinforced by the fact that we hear about that happening all the time..

it is illogical to believe someone transporting in a way that mirrors NJ requirements and according to FOPA while committing no other crime is going to be arrested.. and this is further illustrated by the lack of a single case..

 

The more appropriate question would be, How many people have been stopped by police doing one of the things you described, and were let go by police because of FOPA or NJ law? I would argue that none have been stopped, but that doesn't mean what they were doing is legal under NJ law..

 

if they are stopped.. and let go.. it is unlikely you would ever hear about it.. lets face it.. "man stopped on his way to PA with legally transported gun was let go after a brief motor vehicle stop" is not exactly front page news..

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not contesting your logic, but I think you're overlooking the fact that all NJ firearms laws are designed to ensnare law abiding people so as to discourage gun ownership as much as possible without completely banning possession. The fact that threads like this exist suggests they are fulfilling their stated task beautifully.

 

I think that this is a grossly paranoid statement... while the NJ government does not want you to own guns.. while police are going to enforce the law.. the government (even in NJ) is less of a machine than you are making it to be.. even the NJSP were confused about my question.. I called them and told them I was going to PA for a few days and wanted to transport my gun there... was intentionally vague and made no reference to target shooting or anything..they told me exactly what FOPA says.. the gun had to be unloaded away from the driver..they suggested the trunk... they did however mention that I should check PA and make sure I could have it there.. but they were accommodating.. never once indicated I was breaking the law.. and this was the firearms division..

 

you should be concerned about NJ government.. they are crazy.. and your gun rights are still far behind.. but with that said.. you should not live in fear.. and allow it to control you.. you can bring your gun to another state.. brian is a moot point since he was a criminal.. are you a criminal? do you have hi cap mags? if so I suggest you leave them home.. if you put your gun.. in the trunk.. unloaded.. and drive to PA.. I bet you wont have a problem... just like the thousands and thousands who have done it before you.. and well this horse has been beat to death... if you don't believe that.. just leave your gun home...

 

**can we stop referring to brian when talking about gun rights.. he IS a criminal.. with illegal magazines.. he was very fortunate to get out.. so lets forget that we rallied behind a criminal, and stop talking about him when talking about how NJ will prosecute the innocent**

[Soju 153]

vladtepes,

 

Why are you making it as if he is arguing with you? He isn't. He understands your point, and is just trying to illustrate a possible scenario and interpretation that he may or may not even agree with! I think you need to try and get passed what is logical, because we all know NJ laws are far from that!

[vladtepes 1,060]

Then once you pass your destination state's border, you must be in possession and transporting legally according to that state's laws.

 

I disagree..

you must be transporting in compliance with FOPA.. nothing else.. that is the point.. to have a uniform system of compliance.. FOPA SPECIFICALLY discusses HOW the gun must be transported..

 

and with the plane.. it is not a reasonable deviation if you are staying in the state you are going to shoot in for 6 days..

how do you argue that you went directly to and from the range in FL while you are getting off the plane with your bags of Disney goodies.. lol

 

also in your statement.. "legal to carry" meaning the entire state.. I am not so sure about that.. when I read about FOPA.. the word hunter comes up a lot.. is it legal for a hunter to walk around the grocery store with a loaded rifle? I think that by saying what you said you are assuming an awful lot..

 

they DO actually discuss the originating state also.. but the concern was so that you could not use FOPA to circumvent state law of possession of an illegal gun.. this is why the gun had to be "legal to have" in the home state.. they did not want you to get stopped in your home state with an evil featured AR and use FOPA as a defense.. as in.. "I am transporting my gun to another state therefore you can not arrest"

 

2. Interstate Transportation of Firearms

 

In response to reports of hunters being arrested for firearms law violations while passing through a state with tight controls,[488] FOPA's drafters inserted provisions to offer protection for such travel. S. 49 as introduced provided that any provision of state or local law "which prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the transportation of a firearm or ammunition in interstate commerce through such state, when such firearm is unloaded and not readily accessible, (p.677)shall be null and void."[489] On the Senate floor, an amendment was accepted which changed this in two respects: (1) the protection was extended only to persons not prohibited by the Gun Control Act from transporting, shipping or receiving a firearm; and (2) the provision that an infringing law was to be null and void was dropped in favor of a simpler declaration that the transportation was allowed notwithstanding any such law.[490] The rationale for the former change should be apparent. The rationale for the latter was a concern that, if the provisions that "have the effect" of inhibiting interstate transport were declared "null and void," entire sections of state law might be challenged and voided as to all purposes.[491] In this form the provisions passed the Senate,[492] and an identical provision was inserted in the bill that passed the House.[493]

[vladtepes 1,060]

vladtepes,

 

Why are you making it as if he is arguing with you? He isn't. He understands your point, and is just trying to illustrate a possible scenario and interpretation that he may or may not even agree with! I think you need to try and get passed what is logical, because we all know NJ laws are far from that!

 

when people take someone who clearly broke the law.. and use it to illustrate that NJ is out to get you.. you are already off in the wrong direction..

 

and I get his point.. I get it completely.. it is the same point I have heard over and over again.. and that is NJ is out to get you.. lock you up.. throw away the key...

 

and well my reaction is because I CARE.. it is no secret that I in the process of moving to PA.. but that doesn't change how I feel about YOUR rights.. I have read the law.. up and down.. left and right.. and searched.. searched.. searched.. and could not find a single instance of someone arrested for transporting a gun out of NJ in accordance with FOPA.. so then on a whim I called the machine themselves.. the NJSP.. the firearms division and went fishing.. asked them about transport to a non exempted location in PA.. they told me the same as FOPA..

 

so after all that looking.. and seeing the same thing (no problems) I get tired of us as a community living in fear.. you SHOULD be afraid to own a 30 round mag.. you SHOULD be afraid to put a pistol grip on your semi auto shotgun.. you SHOULD be afraid to CCW without a license in NJ..

 

But you should IMO NOT be afraid to take your own gun with you to another state...

 

it is upsetting to see how many laws and regulations we DO have.. I am just against making more up.. living afraid of things for no reason.. that's all..

[vladtepes 1,060]

just to ad.. I am certainly not the end all authority to anything.. I am not a lawyer.. I am a gun owner just the rest of us.. my point is just with all the looking.. reading.. calling.. it appears that you can take an unloaded gun.. put it in the trunk of your car.. and drive to another state..

 

at the end of the day you either believe that.. or you don't..

[Soju 153]

You are preaching to the choir mate! Where is that beating th....never mind, I found it.

 

:thsmiley_deadhorse:

 

[BigHayden 77]

just to ad.. I am certainly not the end all authority to anything.. I am not a lawyer.. I am a gun owner just the rest of us.. my point is just with all the looking.. reading.. calling.. it appears that you can take an unloaded gun.. put it in the trunk of your car.. and drive to another state..

 

at the end of the day you either believe that.. or you don't..

 

From State vs Pelleteri, 1996

We are concerned here with a statute dealing with gun control.

"New Jersey has carefully constructed a 'grid' of regulations" on

the subject. In re Two Seized Firearms, 127 N.J. 84, 88, 602 A.2d

728, cert. denied sub nom Sholtis v. New Jersey, 506 U.S. 823, 113

S.Ct. 75, 121 L.Ed.2d 40 (1992). This is an area in which

"regulations abound and inquiries are likely," and where the

overarching purpose is to insure the public safety and protect

against acts and threats of violence. State v. Hatch, 64 N.J. 179,

184, 313 A.2d 797 (1973); see also Burton v. Sills, 53 N.J. 86, 248

A.2d 521 (1968). "[T]he dangers are so high and the regulations so

prevalent that, on balance, the legislative branch may as a matter

of sound public policy and without impairing any constitutional

guarantees, declare the act itself unlawful without any further

requirement of mens rea or its equivalent." State v. Hatch, 64 N.J.

at 184-85, 313 A.2d 797. When dealing with guns, the citizen acts

at his peril. In short, we view the statute as a regulatory measure

in the interests of the public safety, premised on the thesis that

one would hardly be surprised to learn that possession of such a

highly dangerous offensive weapon is proscribed absent the

requisite license.

 

Not the kind of people I want to take my chances in front of...

 

The difference between you and me is that you see this issue as black and white, while I see a lot of almost black, almost white, but definitely grey. I'm not suggesting that nobody in NJ should be afraid to take their guns out of state, but I do believe that all of us need to be aware that anytime we do anything with a gun in NJ we are acting "at [our] peril", and that the system is setup to presume guilt when it comes to firearms. That is a statement of fact, not a belief. Is it a huge risk? That's for each of us to decide. But to suggest that there is no risk at all is

[BigHayden 77]

I think that this is a grossly paranoid statement... while the NJ government does not want you to own guns.. while police are going to enforce the law.. the government (even in NJ) is less of a machine than you are making it to be.. even the NJSP were confused about my question.. I called them and told them I was going to PA for a few days and wanted to transport my gun there... was intentionally vague and made no reference to target shooting or anything..they told me exactly what FOPA says.. the gun had to be unloaded away from the driver..they suggested the trunk... they did however mention that I should check PA and make sure I could have it there.. but they were accommodating.. never once indicated I was breaking the law.. and this was the firearms division..

 

You say my statement is "grossly paranoid"....

 

From State vs Valentine, 1973:

"Furthermore, the overriding philosophy of the Legislature and of the judiciary is to limit the use of guns. E.g., State v. Hatch, 64 N.J. 179, 184-86, 313 A.2d 797 (1973) (applying New Jersey Gun Control Law to a Massachusetts resident driving through New Jersey on his way to Pennsylvania); *587State v. Wright, 155 N.J.Super. 549, 553, 383 A.2d 122 (App.Div.1978) (court, relying on the strong legislative policy in this state with respect to gun control, refused to merge the defendant's conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon with that for carrying a pistol without a permit). Moreover, exemptions from gun statutes should be strictly construed to better effectuate the policy of gun control. See Service Armament Co. v. Hyland, 70 N.J. 550, 559, 362 A.2d 13 (1976) (since exception to the gun control law must be narrowly construed, the Court found that "replicas" of antique guns were not "antique firearms" exempted from the statute); State v. Marques, 140 N.J.Super. 363, 366, 356 A.2d 399 (App.Div.1976) (holding inapplicable the statutory exception for guns kept in a dwelling house to guns kept in a college dormitory); State v. Valentine, 124 N.J.Super. 425, 426-27, 307 A.2d 617 (App.Div.1973) (statutory exception permitting one to carry a firearm at his or her place of business inapplicable to the manager of a bar owned by another). We have no doubt that the Legislature intended that N.J.S.A. 2C:39-9d should apply to private individuals as well as to commercial dealers."

 

99 N.J. 581, 494 A.2d 309

 

Doesn't sound like I'm being paranoid at all. I'm just repeating jurisprudence in NJ.

[vladtepes 1,060]

From State vs Pelleteri, 1996

 

 

Not the kind of people I want to take my chances in front of...

 

The difference between you and me is that you see this issue as black and white, while I see a lot of almost black, almost white, but definitely grey. I'm not suggesting that nobody in NJ should be afraid to take their guns out of state, but I do believe that all of us need to be aware that anytime we do anything with a gun in NJ we are acting "at [our] peril", and that the system is setup to presume guilt when it comes to firearms. That is a statement of fact, not a belief. Is it a huge risk? That's for each of us to decide. But to suggest that there is no risk at all is

 

when I drive a car I act at my own peril.. like I said.. no big deal.. people will do what they do.. and I get the concern.. I just don't see anything that prohibits it... like you said.. at the end of the day people will decide what they want to do..

[vladtepes 1,060]

You say my statement is "grossly paranoid"....

 

From State vs Valentine, 1973:

 

 

Doesn't sound like I'm being paranoid at all. I'm just repeating jurisprudence in NJ.

 

 

it is one thing to limit use.. it is another to lock up law abiding citizens... and my concern is that we look at people like Brian who broke the law.. and use those situations to assume we are at risk.. the best you can do is to just follow the law as you understand it..

[BigHayden 77]

I think, ultimately, we're on the same page.

[Dan 177]

I disagree..

you must be transporting in compliance with FOPA.. nothing else.. that is the point.. to have a uniform system of compliance.. FOPA SPECIFICALLY discusses HOW the gun must be transported..

 

and with the plane.. it is not a reasonable deviation if you are staying in the state you are going to shoot in for 6 days..

how do you argue that you went directly to and from the range in FL while you are getting off the plane with your bags of Disney goodies.. lol

 

also in your statement.. "legal to carry" meaning the entire state.. I am not so sure about that.. when I read about FOPA.. the word hunter comes up a lot.. is it legal for a hunter to walk around the grocery store with a loaded rifle? I think that by saying what you said you are assuming an awful lot..

 

they DO actually discuss the originating state also.. but the concern was so that you could not use FOPA to circumvent state law of possession of an illegal gun.. this is why the gun had to be "legal to have" in the home state.. they did not want you to get stopped in your home state with an evil featured AR and use FOPA as a defense.. as in.. "I am transporting my gun to another state therefore you can not arrest"

 

 

 

NJ law stops once you pass the NJ border. When you are traveling to your destination such as a target shooting range out of state, all NJ laws apply while in NJ, that is you are transporting to the range which is out of state via air travel. Once you pass the NJ border, NJ jurisdiction stops. When you are returning home from your 6 day trip, as soon as you pas back into NJ, you must go directly home, to a range, or other exempted place listed in the statutes since being back in NJ, you must be traveling with the firearm according to its laws.

 

I didn't say "legal to carry" anywhere, what do you mean by that. Don't put words in my mouth please. I'm saying that the whole FOPA concept of legal where you begin and legal where you arrive is referring to state and local (municipality within those states) levels. IMO, the firearm you are transporting while in NJ must adhere to NJ transport laws. Lets say you are leaving your house with your HG to go to PA for CCW activities. Sure your HG is legal while in your house on your property, but once you hit the road, you are no longer legal as you are not traveling with the HG for an exempted travel activity according to NJ law. So while in NJ , your HG in your trunk is no longer legal. So how can FOPA help you now? You are no longer legal while in NJ. I feel the gun has to be legal according to the origination state's laws under all circumstances of your possession while you are in that state, which includes while driving on public roads, etc.

 

Here is my post again:

 

FOPA was designed to protect people from traveling from one state to another, to offer protection while en-route through states that may have stricter gun laws than the origination and destination states. I believe the interpretation of "legal where you begin" or origination is considered to be your starting state. I feel you must be in possession and transporting under your origination state's laws, and FOPA kicks in once you leave its borders. Then once you pass your destination state's border, you must be in possession and transporting legally according to that state's laws.

 

Also, with plane travel, as I've said it before... this could be construed to be a reasonable deviation under NJ transportation exemptions. If you purchased a plane ticket to travel to a place where you are going to go target shooting , I'm pretty sure it is "reasonably necessary" "deviation" to go to the airport with your gun in order to catch your plane.

 

 

[PK90 3,570]

So the FOPA does not apply when traveling into bordering states? I did not know that.

[vladtepes 1,060]

I didn't say "legal to carry" anywhere, what do you mean by that. Don't put words in my mouth please. I'm saying that the whole FOPA concept of legal where you begin and legal where you arrive is referring to state and local (municipality within those states) levels. IMO, the firearm you are transporting while in NJ must adhere to NJ transport laws. Lets say you are leaving your house with your HG to go to PA for CCW activities. Sure your HG is legal while in your house on your property, but once you hit the road, you are no longer legal as you are not traveling with the HG for an exempted travel activity according to NJ law. So while in NJ , your HG in your trunk is no longer legal. So how can FOPA help you now? You are no longer legal while in NJ. I feel the gun has to be legal under all circumstances of your possession while you are in NJ since it is your origination state, which includes while driving on public roads, etc.

 

Here is my post again:

 

the law.. in NJ does not say "directly to and from place of exemption UNLESS you are going to another state and then it changes at the border.." so if you read the law literally.. as you want to.. you have to be going DIRECTLY to and from place of exemption.. it is not "I am going directly to the range..(till I cross the border then I am not.. ha ha..)" the NJ law says.. DIRECTLY to and from place of exemption.. so again.. if you want to adhere to NJ law as it is LITERALLY written.. the airport would be impossible (unless of course you were flying directly to a match and then directly back home).. because the airport is not a place of exemption.. neither is a 4 day stay in West Virginia.. neither is CCW in PA..

 

BUT if FOPA takes over because you are traveling between states.. then that trumps NJ law..

 

you simply can not have it both ways.. it seems as if you want to pick and choose... and say things like airports are OK because I say I am going to the range but then when I fly out I don't have to be going to the range anymore... but places like PA are not ok because FOPA does not apply in your home state..

 

there is NO NJ exemption to travel out of state for several days with a gun.. so if FOPA does not apply in NJ.. there is NO way to take your gun anywhere unless you lie and say you are going directly to a place of exemption.. because directly is just that.. directly..

[Dan 177]

I do not believe so. Again IMHO IMNAL and all that.... Origination and Destination states are bordering each other, you just have to follow each state's laws regarding possession and transportation while you are in each state. It is my opinion that FOPA is specific to protecting travelers from being snared by states in which you are traveling through to get from point A to F (origination and destination).

 

Point A (origination state, follow all local and state laws on possession and transport until you pass the border), b, c, d, e (states where FOPA protects while you are traveling through), F (destination state, when you cross the border into it, all its local and state laws now apply for it)

[Dan 177]

the law.. in NJ does not say "directly to and from place of exemption UNLESS you are going to another state and then it changes at the border.." so if you read the law literally.. as you want to.. you have to be going DIRECTLY to and from place of exemption.. it is not "I am going directly to the range..(till I cross the border then I am not.. ha ha..)" the NJ law says.. DIRECTLY to and from place of exemption.. so again.. if you want to adhere to NJ law as it is LITERALLY written.. the airport would be impossible (unless of course you were flying directly to a match and then directly back home).. because the airport is not a place of exemption.. neither is a 4 day stay in West Virginia.. neither is CCW in PA..

 

BUT if FOPA takes over because you are traveling between states.. then that trumps NJ law..

 

you simply can not have it both ways.. it seems as if you want to pick and choose... and say things like airports are OK because I say I am going to the range but then when I fly out I don't have to be going to the range anymore... but places like PA are not ok because FOPA does not apply in your home state..

 

there is NO NJ exemption to travel out of state for several days with a gun.. so if FOPA does not apply in NJ.. there is NO way to take your gun anywhere unless you lie and say you are going directly to a place of exemption.. because directly is just that.. directly..

 

Why do you keep forgetting the reasonable deviations under the circumstances clause? The airport/plane is a reasonable deviation for traveling purposes. If the "directly" thing has you hung up regarding interstate travel, join a rifle or pistol club that adheres to the statute's rules, it gets rid of the "directly" word:

 

(1)A member of any rifle or pistol club organized in accordance with the rules prescribed by the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice, in going to or from a place of target practice, carrying such firearms as are necessary for said target practice, provided that the club has filed a copy of its charter with the superintendent and annually submits a list of its members to the superintendent and provided further that the firearms are carried in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section;

[vladtepes 1,060]

Why do you keep forgetting the reasonable deviations under the circumstances clause? The airport/plane is a reasonable deviation for traveling purposes. If the "directly" thing has you hung up regarding interstate travel, join a rifle or pistol club that adheres to the statute's rules, it gets rid of the "directly" word:

 

I am so hung up on it because it illustrates that your theory is not enforced in any capacity.. and if it was you would NOT be allowed to fly out of an airport with a gun unless you could demonstrate you were within exemption..

 

why?

 

because the law in NJ states directly to or from.. the airport is a reasonable deviation.. as long as your flight home is the next available flight after whatever shooting you are doing in the "other state"

 

NJ law does not allow for an extended out of state stay with regards to transportation of firearms exemption.. why? because it is obvious that if you are traveling to another state you can bring your firearm.. it is obvious in that FOPA spells it out.. and it is obvious in practice due to the complete lack of ANY SINGLE case that points to prosecution based solely on transportation (to PA for example)

 

are hi cap magazines illegal in NJ?

YES.. and I bet you could trip over dozens of arrests based on them..

 

is CCW illegal without permit in NJ?

YES.. and I bet there are countless cases prosecuting those illegally carrying..

 

are "sawed off shotguns" illegal in NJ?

YES.. and yet again I am sure there are stacks of cases involving them...

 

is traveling to PA with an unloaded gun in the trunk transported in manner described under FOPA illegal in NJ?

if it is show me the cases.. I know.. you don't want to be the test case.. I get it.. but seriously.. EVERYTHING in NJ that is gun related and illegal has been tried to death.. assault weapons.. illegal carry.. you name it and I am sure you can find a case to go along with it.. but yet I have yet to hear of a case involving an individual.. transporting a cased unloaded gun in his trunk to another state, being arrested and charged when no other crimes had been committed.. not a small amount.. not 10.. or 5.. or even 2.. but not a SINGLE case.

 

so when I read FOPA...

when I see a complete lack of any prosecution ever...

when the state police tell me it is fine..

 

then yeah.. I am going to assume that it is a pretty safe activity..

[Dan 177]

It appears to be a safe activity due to lack of evidence of anyone ever getting in trouble. As anyone going to or from PA or other states who was ever pulled with guns over most likely says I'm going shooting, or coming home from shooting, or if they are really smart keep their mouth shut. The odds of getting into trouble taking your HG to PA for CCW appear to be very slim. My argument is that it is not due to FOPA, as so much as with people not getting caught, or LE deciding not to pursue the issue if they do pull over someone going to or coming home from another state where they were CCW'ing with their guns.

 

I do agree without a specific test case, this argument would go on forever. It works both ways, give me a case where FOPA protected someone pulled over in NJ where they stated they were going to PA to CCW. Since there aren't any that we are aware of or can find, we can't say FOPA has been protecting people under this circumstance until we do. Perhaps NJ law has been? No, I think we both agree there are no travel exemptions for it.

 

I still feel FOPA works in the way I outlined above in my state A to F example. How others interpret it is up to them, along with everything gun law related in NJ.