CCW in PA, transporting to state line

[Anselmo 87]

When I read the law it list exceptions to the laws prohibiting possession such as travel to/from the range. I don't see where the states that the listed exceptions are the only exceptions. Does the law state that the listed exceptions are the only exceptions?

[BigHayden 77]

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

 

Paul,

 

Do you agree that a law governing interstate travel does not apply until you actually leave the state where your journey originates? FOPA very clearly says that you have to be legal in the state where you originate your journey. The grey area exists because firearms possession in NJ is illegal unless you have a PTC or fall into one of the exceptions, which includes your home.

 

Vlad is arguing that you are legal under FOPA because your journey originates from your home, where you are legal to possess a firearm, therefore you are legal in your state of origin. The alternate argument that Dan, malsua, and I have made is that once you leave your home, and you're not heading to one of the specified legal exemptions in NJ law, then you are not legal to possess your firearm in NJ and, not only are you breaking NJ law, but are also not protected by FOPA since it only applies if you legally possess your firearm in the state where your interstate travel originates.

 

Personally, I get both arguments, and even if Vlad is wrong, it wouldn't stop me from taking my guns out of state because that would just be ridiculous to the Nth degree. But just because it's ridiculous doesn't mean it's legal.

[BigHayden 77]

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.

 

Yeah, what he said.

[Soju 153]

Paul,

 

Do you agree that a law governing interstate travel does not apply until you actually leave the state where your journey originates? FOPA very clearly says that you have to be legal in the state where you originate your journey. The grey area exists because firearms possession in NJ is illegal unless you have a PTC or fall into one of the exceptions, which includes your home.

 

Vlad is arguing that you are legal under FOPA because your journey originates from your home, where you are legal to possess a firearm, therefore you are legal in your state of origin. The alternate argument that Dan, malsua, and I have made is that once you leave your home, and you're not heading to one of the specified legal exemptions in NJ law, then you are not legal to possess your firearm in NJ and, not only are you breaking NJ law, but are also not protected by FOPA since it only applies if you legally possess your firearm in the state where your interstate travel originates.

 

Personally, I get both arguments, and even if Vlad is wrong, it wouldn't stop me from taking my guns out of state because that would just be ridiculous to the Nth degree. But just because it's ridiculous doesn't mean it's legal.

 

Very well stated. I however see it the first way, and here is why. I'll use nothing other than your words and what FOPA states.

 

you're not heading to one of the specified legal exemptions in NJ law, then you are not legal to possess your firearm in NJ

 

True.

 

but are also not protected by FOPA

 

Well, you say it is because...

 

it only applies if you legally possess your firearm in the state where your interstate travel originates.

 

Is that true? Let us see what FOPA actually says

 

any person who is not otherwise prohibited... shall be entitled 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

 

Ok. So it doesn't actually say that it applies to the state you can carry legally, it says place. So then...

 

you are legal under FOPA because your journey originates from your home, where you are legal to possess a firearm,

 

Exactly.

[Soju 153]

Let me ask this.

 

You used to live in TX. You take a year to tour Europe, and in the mean time, leave all your firearms/handguns at a friends house in PA. You return from your trip and move to NJ. A few weeks later you return to your friends house to bring your firearms (all NJ legal) to your new home in NJ. Can you legally do so?

 

I ask because using the same argument as before, you cannot, and it is illegal. How can that be though? Your new house in NJ, is one of those exemptions where you can legally carry and possess a firearm. So you are going to an exempted location and are good right? Using your own argument, that is wrong. It would be illegal, because your friends house is NOT an exempted location. So according to NJ law you are not legal, even though your house is one of the exempted locations. However it also says you can only travel in between exempted locations.

 

This is the exact same argument, but in reverse. Does it seem logical that FOPA wouldn't apply in this case? IMO, that doesn't make any sense. So what is different the other way around?

[BigHayden 77]

Ok. So it doesn't actually say that it applies to the state you can carry legally, it says place.

 

OK, moment of clarity (sort of). I was under the impression that FOPA said "state" (it helps to read the law sometimes). The fact that it says "place" changes the scope enough to where I believe that Vlad's interpretation is correct.

 

I'm still not convinced that there is no risk of landing in legal hot water due to an ignorant cop and an overzealous prosecutor. Hell, you might even win a case based on FOPA, but you'd go bankrupt doing it. So I still say be cautious and avoid any encounters with LEO just to be sure.

[BigHayden 77]

Let me ask this.

 

You used to live in TX. You take a year to tour Europe, and in the mean time, leave all your firearms/handguns at a friends house in PA. You return from your trip and move to NJ. A few weeks later you return to your friends house to bring your firearms (all NJ legal) to your new home in NJ. Can you legally do so?

 

I ask because using the same argument as before, you cannot, and it is illegal. How can that be though? Your new house in NJ, is one of those exemptions where you can legally carry and possess a firearm. So you are going to an exempted location and are good right? Using your own argument, that is wrong. It would be illegal, because your friends house is NOT an exempted location. So according to NJ law you are not legal, even though your house is one of the exempted locations. However it also says you can only travel in between exempted locations.

 

This is the exact same argument, but in reverse. Does it seem logical that FOPA wouldn't apply in this case? IMO, that doesn't make any sense. So what is different the other way around?

 

There is a specific exemption for moving. You're good to go under NJ law.

[Soju 153]

 

I'm still not convinced that there is no risk of landing in legal hot water due to an ignorant cop and an overzealous prosecutor. Hell, you might even win a case based on FOPA, but you'd go bankrupt doing it. So I still say be cautious and avoid any encounters with LEO just to be sure.

 

Nobody is arguing that.

 

(it helps to read the law sometimes)

 

And...

 

There is a specific exemption for moving. You're good to go under NJ law.

 

Maybe it would help to look up that one as well.

[this_is_nascar 162]

[vladtepes 1,060]

just to add in some of the reading I have done..

 

you have to remember "safe passage" was in part a means of addressing unfair prosecution of hunters in traveling states.. so with that said in many instances the target was long guns... I do not know too many states where it is lawful to "carry" a loaded long gun down the street... sure you can hunt with proper licensing.. but can you "carry" it..

 

in regards to the "place" there never seemed to be a concern about the traveling portion.. but the concern was that an individual could have a gun that is illegal to have in their home state.. and claim protection under FOPA..

meaning.. the concern was if I was pulled over with an "evil" AR15 on the parkway I could not use FOPA as an excuse...

this is my understanding of why the wording PLACE is in there.. that is stated so that the gun must be a legal gun in your home state..

 

Lawful Carrying at Origin and Destination

 

S. 2414 would require that the transportation be from an area where the person may possess "and carry" the arm to a place where he may do the same.[507] This raises the question of what manner of carrying is being addressed. Carrying restrictions can vary; in some states concealed carrying is banned, while open carrying is subject to no regulation.[508] Others require a permit to carry on or about the person, regardless of purpose,[509] while others only restrict carrying for non-sporting purposes.[510] The legislative history reflects an intention of a simple and pragmatic test: the transporter must be entitled to carry in the way he carries during the transportation; he must be legally qualified to carry an (p.680)unloaded, inaccessible firearm outside a vehicle's passenger compartment both where he begins and where he ends his journey.[511]

[vladtepes 1,060]

but you'd go bankrupt doing it.

 

I refuse to believe that..

 

did the guy in Burlington county who beat the collapsible stock charge go bankrupt getting out of it?

or the guy with the pistol grip shotgun on the backseat who posted here?

 

while it might cost you some money.. I don't think it is necessarily going to be a bankrupting situation.. hell I would take the public defender and just tell them how to defend me..

[PK90 3,573]

I am so done with this thread. FOPA covers every effin state in the USA. Starting and ending.

 

Are you supposed to prove where you were going? What if you were going to MT from NJ and were stopped in PA? Do you have to prove you were going to MT?

[Dan 177]

The wording in FOPA is "place" and this is what is causing all the hub-bub. Its all about definitions now. Is a "place" specific like your home, county, etc at the start of your journey? Or is it referring to the state level? Does FOPA protect you once you leave your property, or once you leave your state? That is the whole argument here.

 

If FOPA was as granular as to refer to "place" as being precisely where you are standing with your gun at the start of your journey, it could be used to circumvent intra-state laws as well. For example, if a large city in your state bans handguns without a special city permit, and state law has no provisions to allow you to bring your handgun through the city even if you are legal everywhere else in the state with it, FOPA could be used to circumvent this law. After all, you are taking your gun from one place in the state to another place in the same state both "places" where you are legal to posses and carry.

 

From Vlad's post:

Lawful Carrying at Origin and Destination

 

S. 2414 would require that the transportation be from an area where the person may possess "and carry" the arm to a place where he may do the same.[507] This raises the question of what manner of carrying is being addressed. Carrying restrictions can vary; in some states concealed carrying is banned, while open carrying is subject to no regulation.[508] Others require a permit to carry on or about the person, regardless of purpose,[509] while others only restrict carrying for non-sporting purposes.[510] The legislative history reflects an intention of a simple and pragmatic test: the transporter must be entitled to carry in the way he carries during the transportation; he must be legally qualified to carry an (p.680)unloaded, inaccessible firearm outside a vehicle's passenger compartment both where he begins and where he ends his journey.[511]

 

I'm reading here that the gun must be legally carried (transported) "during the transportation" "where he begins" and "where he ends". If FOPA protects at the start of the journey being a "place" as in your home here in NJ, then what is defined as "during transportation" "where he begins"? The "during transportation" phase must stop once you hit the street for FOPA to protect you while you are still in NJ, as transporting a HG off your property to go to PA for CCW does not fall under transport exemptions as we all know.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

:thsmiley_deadhorse: :thsmiley_deadhorse: :thsmiley_deadhorse: :thsmiley_deadhorse: :thsmiley_deadhorse: :thsmiley_deadhorse: :thsmiley_deadhorse: :thsmiley_deadhorse:

[Dan 177]

I know Bob, I just can't help myself. Its an addiction

[Malsua 1,422]

FOPA covers every effin state in the USA. Starting and ending.

 

 

FOPA was designed to protect travelers from MD, NY, NJ, IL and CA (DC?) for the most part. There are some other tough laws out there, but most states aren't jerks about it.

 

No one in those committees and other discussions while the bill was being created was advocating for residents IN the states that the rest wanted protection from.

 

For the record, I understand everyone's point. I would like for it to be settled. NRA-ILA did answer me...they told me to contact Gary Needleman. The thought did occur to me to start writing to the authors of the bill and those who were in congress at the time. Even Edwin Meese the AG at the time. I just don't have the time to spend on it though.

[vladtepes 1,060]

The wording in FOPA is "place" and this is what is causing all the hub-bub. Its all about definitions now. Is a "place" specific like your home, county, etc at the start of your journey? Or is it referring to the state level? Does FOPA protect you once you leave your property, or once you leave your state? That is the whole argument here.

 

If FOPA was as granular as to refer to "place" as being precisely where you are standing with your gun at the start of your journey, it could be used to circumvent intra-state laws as well. For example, if a large city in your state bans handguns without a special city permit, and state law has no provisions to allow you to bring your handgun through the city even if you are legal everywhere else in the state with it, FOPA could be used to circumvent this law. After all, you are taking your gun from one place in the state to another place in the same state both "places" where you are legal to posses and carry.

 

From Vlad's post:

 

 

I'm reading here that the gun must be legally carried (transported) "during the transportation" "where he begins" and "where he ends". If FOPA protects at the start of the journey being a "place" as in your home here in NJ, then what is defined as "during transportation" "where he begins"? The "during transportation" phase must stop once you hit the street for FOPA to protect you while you are still in NJ, as transporting a HG off your property to go to PA for CCW does not fall under transport exemptions as we all know.

 

STATE is a specific word PLACE is also a specific word.. if they wanted to discount the entire state they would have simply used the word STATE as opposed to PLACE..

legally carried at place.. think about it? if "place" meant "state" then for FOPA to apply to hunters.. you would have to be legally allowed to "carry" a loaded long guns throughout the entire state you are going to...

 

going to a hunting cabin for the week? well sorry FOPA doesn't apply because you can not carry a loaded long gun openly in the state you are going to..

and that is simply not the case.. I would assume that is the reason for the vagueness of the use of "place" as opposed to "state".. "place" allows for transporting of a gun that would be legal to have at a place where you were say attending a shooting competition.. but maybe not necessarily able to "carry"..

 

ex: I am going to a friends house in another state for a hunting trip.. the state does not restrict people from bringing an unloaded cased long guns there.. BUT I am not licensed to actually carry the long gun through the entire state.. does this mean that I can not transport my gun there? because I can not legally carry it throughout the entire state? NO of course not.. I am transporting it for a lawful purpose.. so even though I can not "carry" the gun opening through the state.. I can transport it there.. and FOPA applies..

 

as to circumventing state law.. FOPA is specific to trips only going from state to state...

 

in FOPA they use the word state.. they specifically chose to NOT use there word state where they used the word place.. there is a reason for that..and the reason seems more and more obvious as this is discussed..

[BigHayden 77]

I am so done with this thread. FOPA covers every effin state in the USA. Starting and ending.

 

Are you supposed to prove where you were going? What if you were going to MT from NJ and were stopped in PA? Do you have to prove you were going to MT?

 

I don't think anybody was really talking about states other than the state of origin, i.e. a NJ resident, still in NJ but heading out of state. Which law(s) apply and what protection are you afforded?

 

I, for one, made a mistake in my argument by not reading the actual text of FOPA.

 

And Bonesinium, here is the text from the law:

 

e. Nothing in subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent a person keeping or carrying about his place of business, residence, premises or other land owned or possessed by him, any firearm, or from carrying the same, in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section, from any place of purchase to his residence or place of business, between his dwelling and his place of business, between one place of business or residence and another when moving, or between his dwelling or place of business and place where such firearms are repaired, for the purpose of repair. For the purposes of this section, a place of business shall be deemed to be a fixed location.

 

I think the "moving" exemption is pretty clearly spelled out. I didn't read the text of FOPA, but I do know the exemption list for in the state.

[Soju 153]

I don't think anybody was really talking about states other than the state of origin, i.e. a NJ resident, still in NJ but heading out of state. Which law(s) apply and what protection are you afforded?

 

I, for one, made a mistake in my argument by not reading the actual text of FOPA.

 

And Bonesinium, here is the text from the law:

 

 

 

I think the "moving" exemption is pretty clearly spelled out. I didn't read the text of FOPA, but I do know the exemption list for in the state.

 

I appreciate the response. I think we are probably on pretty close to the same page now, even though you missed the point of my scenario.

 

I'm reading here that the gun must be legally carried (transported) "during the transportation" "where he begins" and "where he ends". If FOPA protects at the start of the journey being a "place" as in your home here in NJ, then what is defined as "during transportation" "where he begins"? The "during transportation" phase must stop once you hit the street for FOPA to protect you while you are still in NJ, as transporting a HG off your property to go to PA for CCW does not fall under transport exemptions as we all know.

 

Is this a serious question, comment, or concern? Is there something rhetoric here that I am missing? In case you missed it, here it is again.

 

any person who is not otherwise prohibited... shall be entitled 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

 

I guess I don't understand your post, or your confusion. Read into things less, and read what they actually say more. I have a feeling if you do that you will understand it better. It is almost as if you are so convinced you were initially correct that you try and interpret things in a way to agree with your own reasoning even if that isn't the case...it happens.

[BigHayden 77]

I appreciate the response. I think we are probably on pretty close to the same page now, even though you missed the point of my scenario.

 

I don't think I did. The law says you can transport your gun between residences when moving; it does not specify that it has to be your residence. If you move to NJ and have your guns stored at someone's house in PA, when you bring them into the state you are covered under the "moving" portion of the exemptions, so FOPA wouldn't have to apply.

[Soju 153]

Yeah see, you missed my entire point. The point I was getting at, and why I phrased it the way I did, was to try and avoid it being construed as transporting them in the process of moving. I was trying to give a scenario simply the opposite of what this thread is about. I guess I should have said, imagine you magically appeared in PA carrying a handgun in conformance with PA law. Then apply the rest of what I said. No matter though, it is :thsmiley_deadhorse: .

[BigHayden 77]

Yeah see, you missed my entire point. The point I was getting at, and why I phrased it the way I did, was to try and avoid it being construed as transporting them in the process of moving. I was trying to give a scenario simply the opposite of what this thread is about. I guess I should have said, imagine you magically appeared in PA carrying a handgun in conformance with PA law. Then apply the rest of what I said. No matter though, it is :thsmiley_deadhorse: .

 

I guess it's less that I missed the point and more that you suck at teh examples.

 

I did go back and read your scenario again, and if you look at the letter of the law, it does not say that you are exempt if you're transporting between your residences while moving, but it says between residences/businesses. The distinction is actually clear, because in the first part of the section it says "his ... residence".

 

I get what you were trying to say, but I'm not sure how it could've been worded better. Either way, I'm done beating this horse too.

[Soju 153]

It is hard to word an example that I think is entirely bogus to begin with, in a meaningful manner...

[Dan 177]

I was at the NJ2AS meeting last night. They had Evan Nappen as a speaker. There were two questions around this scenario, mine and another gentleman's.

 

The other gentleman asked if FOPA would protect a NJ resident while still in NJ transporting the HG to PA for CCW. Nappen indicated that he would use FOPA's safe passsage as a legal defense.

 

I then specifically asked him what he feels origination and destination "place" is defined as in FOPA, and if that would be the NJ resident's "home", or does it apply to something broader as the "state" level. He essentially stated that we don't know, since there is no case law of FOPA being applied in this manner.

 

In essence, we will not know until such a test case is tried, so it is up to each individual to interpret the law and follow it accordingly to their own risk appetite.

 

The good news is at least FOPA could provide for some kind of defense, where without it, transporting a HG to PA for CCW would be a mandatory 3-5 max 10 years in prison if caught under NJ law. The bad news is, it is not a sure thing until a test case takes place setting the precedent.

[vladtepes 1,060]

I was at the NJ2AS meeting last night. They had Evan Nappen as a speaker. There were two questions around this scenario, mine and another gentleman's.

 

The other gentleman asked if FOPA would protect a NJ resident while still in NJ transporting the HG to PA for CCW. Nappen indicated that he would use FOPA's safe passsage as a legal defense.

 

I then specifically asked him what he feels origination and destination "place" is defined as in FOPA, and if that would be the NJ resident's "home", or does it apply to something broader as the "state" level. He essentially stated that we don't know, since there is no case law of FOPA being applied in this manner.

 

In essence, we will not know until such a test case is tried, so it is up to each individual to interpret the law and follow it accordingly to their own risk appetite.

 

The good news is at least FOPA could provide for some kind of defense, where without it, transporting a HG to PA for CCW would be a mandatory 3-5 max 10 years in prison if caught under NJ law. The bad news is, it is not a sure thing until a test case takes place setting the precedent.

 

you know.. I am no great lawyer.. with a book out on the matter.. and all that and I understand that... but it is kind of frustrating to spend PAGES and PAGES on the issue telling people EXACTLY what you were told last night.. while I may not be a lawyer but I can read.. and am fairly logical.. the point of all this is.. we all beat our heads against the wall explaining how.. why.. and what.. we think.. turns out he tells you the exact same thing.. but now that he spoke those words it is like the word of god..

 

what Nappen thinks is useful.. his opinion in understanding law is helpful..

 

but unless he has a big fat check that you signed in his pocket.. and he is standing next to you in a court room.. his opinion is just that.. an opinion... one worth exactly what you paid for it.. while I would NEVER say "don't ask Nappen things.. don't listen to him" (because he IS a valuable source).. I think that people should invest a little more faith in ALL the information that is available.. I get it you want to be safe and out of trouble.. but at the end of the day in an actual legal situation it doesn't make the slightest bit of difference if I tell you to use FOPA.. Paul (PK90) tells you.. or Nappen tells you.. because it's your a** that is on the line.... so you should really take ALL of those opinions with a grain of salt.. because like I said.. they are JUST opinions.. you have to understand the law as best YOU can and draw your own direction..

[bry@n 195]

I was at the NJ2AS meeting last night. They had Evan Nappen as a speaker. There were two questions around this scenario, mine and another gentleman's.

 

The other gentleman asked if FOPA would protect a NJ resident while still in NJ transporting the HG to PA for CCW. Nappen indicated that he would use FOPA's safe passsage as a legal defense.

 

I then specifically asked him what he feels origination and destination "place" is defined as in FOPA, and if that would be the NJ resident's "home", or does it apply to something broader as the "state" level. He essentially stated that we don't know, since there is no case law of FOPA being applied in this manner.

 

In essence, we will not know until such a test case is tried, so it is up to each individual to interpret the law and follow it accordingly to their own risk appetite.

 

The good news is at least FOPA could provide for some kind of defense, where without it, transporting a HG to PA for CCW would be a mandatory 3-5 max 10 years in prison if caught under NJ law. The bad news is, it is not a sure thing until a test case takes place setting the precedent.

 

I was the guy that asked Evan Nappen about this. I did it because there is so much speculation of what is right and wrong. The truth is, I believe that it is perfectly legal to travel to PA with your gun for the purpose of carry. I asked to just get his POV on it but Vladtepes iis correct. If your called to the carpet by a cop, it's your a** on the line and you will be paying a lawyer out the wazoo to prove your correct. Since there is no case law on this previously (as Nappen said) you will be the test dumy for the rest of the people that were not stopped.

 

It's up to each person to do what they believe in. Generally, I rarely go to PA without going to a range or a gun shop. Therefore, I would technically fall under the exemptions locally, then fopa etc....