NJ Judge says we have the right to use handguns outside the home for self defense (RPO permits for arson investigators)

[ryan_j 0]

Don't get too excited yet though.

 

She then goes on to say that justifiable need balances against that requirement.

 

But it was nice to see this:

 

Based upon the broad reasoning of Heller and McDonald, we 

think the Second Amendment right to carry a handgun for the 

purpose of lawful self-defense exists or extends beyond the 

home. Nevertheless, we have no reason to decide that question. 

 

Here is the decision:

http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/a3704-11.pdf

 

 

And some linkage from the SL:

 

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/12/chris_christies_administration_declines_to_defend_gun_laws_in_court_battle.html#incart_river_default

 

[ChrisJM981 924]

Doesn't that set precedent?

[Iggyort 44]

Hmm, the decision makes for a good read.

 

This might help

[mipafox 438]

So, is she issuing?

[n4p226r 105]

cliff notes?

[millsan1 3]

I just read all 85 pages.  What a crock of shit.

 

Basically, NJ long standing laws are based on the legislature knowing what is best.

No fact, no science, no evidence.  Just the dipshits in Trenton "knowing" that it would be unsafe to allow guns in public.

This is further eveidenced by a few cops going before a committee and saying that they don't know of any defensive uses of fireamrs in public in nj.  No shit.  It has been illegal to carry in public in NJ for 75 years.  So law abiding people don't carry.  So they can't defend themselves.  This is akin to saying that there are have been no orange and green tiger striped cars involved in a DUI.  Yeah.  Cause there are no orange and green tiger striped cars.

Additionally, in 1966, 15 people showed up and said "we are for guns, but not concealed guns", so therefore gun rights activists agree with the legislature.

They also found that safety training and knowledge of gun law should be required.  But even if you have both, you still shouldn't be able to carry, well, just because.

 

[millsan1 3]

Here is another gem.

 

Some cop said that acts of violence are quick and random, so no one would have time to defend themselves if they were attacked.

 

And since an attack could happen in certain places (schools and public buildings) where it is constitutionally OK to ban guns, then that ban extends to all places.  Basically says you are not allowed to carry in school, and you could be attacked in school, so the fact that you could be attacked outside of school doesn't apply.

 

HOLY SHIT

[NicePants 58]

The retardation is far too strong.

[PDM 91]

And even better, the primary rationale for retired cops carrying is that they MAY be targeted by people they arrested.  Their prior training isn't really the primary reason they can carry, according to this court.  So, in other words, they get a pass on justifiable need -- under the standard applicable to the rest of us you need to show an actual, imminent threat.

[illy 1]

^yup.

There was nothing good in that ruling. Right after "extends outside the home" comes this:

 

We are confident that New Jersey's "justifiable need" standard would not impermissibly burden the right. We can reject this challenge to the carry permit law on that ground.

[diamondd817 828]

Holy shit is right. It is unbelievable how out of touch these people are.

[revenger 473]

This is the first I am hearing of this case,  What about the Mueller v. Maenza case and the SAF.    how does this case fall in.    I also don't get a quote from that bryan miller jerkoff on NJ.com that  that this a bad thing.    Anytime that jerk says something is bad for him that means its good for us so what am I missing.    We all know that any right to carry in NJ will be coming from the federal level and none of these justices in NJ.

[Albanian 121]

^yup.

There was nothing good in that ruling. Right after "extends outside the home" comes this:

 

We are confident that New Jersey's "justifiable need" standard would not impermissibly burden the right. We can reject this challenge to the carry permit law on that ground.

Because I said so.... In other words.

[Nikos 31]

 This is akin to saying that there are have been no orange and green tiger striped cars involved in a DUI.  Yeah.  Cause there are no orange and green tiger striped cars.

 

 

 

Maybe there is hope!

 

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

So 47 states allow their citizens to defend themselves and others with concealed carry weapons, but our godforsaken state insists that none of us are capable of handling that kind of responsibility.

[Nikos 31]

Holy shit is right. It is unbelievable how out of touch these people are.

Are they really out of touch? Our lawmakers hold, control and usurp the positions that allows them to make up any far-fetched excuse to deprive us from our basic rights. In a state where corruption runs rampant and a well armed & regulated militia would be a serious threat to them, their actions would be considered more conniving than out of touch. Or maybe I'm just giving them the benefit of the doubt. 

[Reddog87 0]

If guns don't make you safe why do cops carry them?

[siderman 1,139]

Move along folks...nothing to see here......Unless the NJ AG is told to part the seas and allow any form of public carry it will never be legislated or adjucated from inside this state. Just aint happenen. We are barely holding on to whats left of our basic 2A rights-such as they are. And I dont see that fight getting better or easier.

[leahcim 680]

I think Bryan Miller is upset about the lack of defense from Christie and the AG. 

Bryan Miller, a gun-control advocate and executive director of the nonprofit group Heeding God's Call, said it was "unconscionable that the governor of the state of New Jersey would fail to actively defend life-saving laws that are in fact amazingly popular in the state."

 

Maybe Gov. Christie and the AG do not believe they should support unconstitutional laws.

 

Miller says these are "Life saving laws that are amazingly popular?"

Life saving? Amazingly popular? Really???

 

And Ms. Whineberg is SHOCKED:

"To say I'm shocked would be an understatement," Weinberg said. "I have a few questions that need to be put directly to the attorney general. Does he decide which laws of the state of New Jersey he would like to defend or not defend?"

 

If the law is in violation of the U.S. Constitution, doesn't the AG have to consider that taking precedence?

[leahcim 680]

Even if the ruling sucks per se, to hear the reaction of Miller, Whineberg, et al is worth it.  Imagine how they will piss and moan when CCW is legalized!

Maybe even resign in protest.

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

How does Bryan Miller, who doesn't even live in this state, always manage to get himself quoted in gun legislation issues?

[leahcim 680]

That is their MO--just like Bloomberg spending wasting $350K to unsuccessfully fight the Colorado recall.

[Respect2A 0]

What I don't understand is how there is carrying in so many other states, some with training requirements, yet we literally have NOTHING. It's like they squash it just to be different. Even the mentality of the cops around here is anti gun, even when it comes to law abiding citizens who have passed god knows how many background checks (especially if we keep getting pistol permits). We are looked at as guilty until proven innocent and crazy if we are into guns.

 

How is it we are so far behind when it comes to this crap?

[Respect2A 0]

Even if the ruling sucks per se, to hear the reaction of Miller, Whineberg, et al is worth it. Imagine how they will piss and moan when CCW is legalized!

Maybe even resign in protest.

I don't see ccw being legalized for us commoners anytime soon or ever for that matter.

 

Want to ccw? Then do it illegally or move to a different state?

[n4p226r 105]

How does Bryan Miller, who doesn't even live in this state, always manage to get himself quoted in gun legislation issues?

 

 

he probably got too many death threats so he moved to PA where he could CCW legally

[leahcim 680]

I don't see ccw being legalized for us commoners anytime soon or ever for that matter.

 

Want to ccw? Then do it illegally or move to a different state?

I did say to imagine.

I pretty much agree with you, but I try to remain hopeful.  And there is still the Pantano case pending before the state supreme court and maybe decided by SCOTUS.

Probably more likely that the Congress will pass a CCW reciprocity bill before NJ does anything though.

[mipafox 438]

That cat is freaking me out.

[gleninjersey 2,141]

Seems that a large part of the State's reasoning for their "Justifiable Need" is that NJ is so densely populated and if concealed carry were allowed it would result in accidents due to improper handeling/training if handguns were allowed outstide the home.

 

One way to nullify that is to compare NJ's population density to other areas that allow conceal carry with similiar populations densities and correlate which have a higher or lower incident of violence/crime.  I would hope that the statistics show that states that allow it's citizens the capablity to defend themselves would have lower incidentns of violence/crime.

 

Another way to address this is to show that yes, the State is very densely populated which means that there will be more incidents of random acts of violence which law abiding citizens should have the right to defend themselves against.  And on page 61 the ruling says the the "justifiable need" requirement burdens law-abiding citizens:

 

"There is no question that New Jersey's "justifiable need" requirement burdens a law-abiding, responsible and adequately trained person's right to carry a handgun in the event a need to use it in lawful defense arises."

 

So logic dicatates that a higher population density would increase the chances law abiding citizens being victimized......but let's further burden them.  That makes no sense what so ever.

 

I should have never of read the ruling because the illogic thinking and condescending regard our lawmakers has for it's citizens is pretty disgusting.  Basically the ruling says we are too stupid to properly handle handguns and we would just end up accidently shooting people.  Thank God nobody in this State gets injured in automobile accidents......(dripping sarcasm).

[gleninjersey 2,141]

I just read all 85 pages.  What a crock of shit.

 

Basically, NJ long standing laws are based on the legislature knowing what is best.

 

No fact, no science, no evidence.  Just the dipshits in Trenton "knowing" that it would be unsafe to allow guns in public.

 

This is further eveidenced by a few cops going before a committee and saying that they don't know of any defensive uses of fireamrs in public in nj.  No shit.  It has been illegal to carry in public in NJ for 75 years.  So law abiding people don't carry.  So they can't defend themselves.  This is akin to saying that there are have been no orange and green tiger striped cars involved in a DUI.  Yeah.  Cause there are no orange and green tiger striped cars.

 

Additionally, in 1966, 15 people showed up and said "we are for guns, but not concealed guns", so therefore gun rights activists agree with the legislature.

 

They also found that safety training and knowledge of gun law should be required.  But even if you have both, you still shouldn't be able to carry, well, just because.

 

 

 

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.  "WE" know what's good for you....so don't hurt your brains trying to think about silly things like logic, statistics, facts....and don't question "US".

[leahcim 680]

That cat is freaking me out.

The Yamato Kuro neko?

If it offends you I can change it.