Almeida update

[JohnnyB 4,321]

I am curious about one point. I would assume that since "self defense" is NOT considered a "justifiable need", won't all or most applications not even be accepted,

or at most be denied by our local Police Chief or local State Police Barracks?  Even though my local chief may be pro 2A, perhaps he has orders from the county or state

not to approve and forward any applications that clearly do not show justifiable need "as defined by the PRNJ"!

 

Anyone have any insight on this question?

 

 

Also, since this thread started out as "Almeida update" and has since been "justifiably Hijacked", should the Mods or could Newtonian go back and edit his OP to change the title of the thread

to something that describes it's current topic? I don't know if an OP can edit the thread title after the fact as I have never tried it.

 

[gleninjersey 2,139]

Because the courts will laugh your suit straight to the trash can if you don't apply. There reason would be "If you didn't apply, how did you know they would deny you?"

 

As far as meeting up, getting together, doing something, anything group wise I'm in. I'll even volunteer my free time after work to help with this. Everyone that wants CCL's in NJ needs to be willing to help out. This can't be just a handful of people trying to buck the system. We need enough people where New Jersey hear's our voice, and can't silence it. 

 

Why would the courts laugh at such a suit?  We KNOW we will denied if we put "self defense" as our reason for applying.  NJ law states "self defense" is not a sufficient reason and anyone applying with "self defense" as their reason WILL be denied.  Not may, might or we'll think about it.  0% chance of denial.  It is a post de facto ban.  Other courts have held self defense is a valid reason and must be honored.  Am I missing something? 

 

If 100 or 200 or 500 people (pick what ever number you want) form together and say, "We want to have a concealed carry permit for the purpose of self defense but NJ law says we MUST be denied. NJ law is in contradiction to other federal rulings.  We believe our 2nd Amendment rights are being violated and want the issue addressed."  That's the standing. 

 

By  your reasoning gay couples will never be able to get married.  There are state laws that require them to BE DENIED a marriage license.  So they don't have standing to sue because they won't apply....because they must be denied per state law.  So it will never happen.....OH WAIT.  It has happened.  And happened rather quickly, at least in a historical context.

 

I say cut to the chase.  Consult with an attorney that specializes in the field and pose the question to them.  I'll gladly donate to that.

 

[1LtCAP 4,262]

 

I am curious about one point. I would assume that since "self defense" is NOT considered a "justifiable need", won't all or most applications not even be accepted,

or at most be denied by our local Police Chief or local State Police Barracks?  Even though my local chief may be pro 2A, perhaps he has orders from the county or state

not to approve and forward any applications that clearly do not show justifiable need "as defined by the PRNJ"!

 

Anyone have any insight on this question?

 

 

Also, since this thread started out as "Almeida update" and has since been "justifiably Hijacked", should the Mods or could Newtonian go back and edit his OP to change the title of the thread

to something that describes it's current topic? I don't know if an OP can edit the thread title after the fact as I have never tried it.

 

 

i think that by law, he has to.

[JohnnyB 4,321]

i think that by law, he has to.

Do you mean he has to approve and forward, or he has to deny such an application?

[mipafox 438]

 

I am curious about one point. I would assume that since "self defense" is NOT considered a "justifiable need", won't all or most applications not even be accepted,

or at most be denied by our local Police Chief or local State Police Barracks?  Even though my local chief may be pro 2A, perhaps he has orders from the county or state

not to approve and forward any applications that clearly do not show justifiable need "as defined by the PRNJ"!

 

No.

[JohnnyB 4,321]

 

No.

Okay fox,

               I assume from your "no" that the CPD has the right to deny a FPID or P2P but has no say in the CCW permit process? Does a CPD have an obligation to sign all FPID, P2P and CCW applications as long as he feels

that you meet the requirements for each?  He runs the criminal and mental checks and the references, he sees all is good and whamo, you get your FPID or P2P since as far as he is concerned, you are good to go!

 

               Now you apply for a CCW License, Uh Oh, You clearly stated "self defense" which by NJ Statute is not acceptable to show "justifiable need",  Yet he has to approve it even if the law states you as the applicant

did not pass the requirements to be able to apply for CCW. It's like a convicted Felon applying for a FPID. It ain't gonna happen.

[mipafox 438]

 

Okay fox,

               I assume from your "no" that the CPD has the right to deny a FPID or P2P but has no say in the CCW permit process? Does a CPD have an obligation to sign all FPID, P2P and CCW applications as long as he feels

that you meet the requirements for each?  He runs the criminal and mental checks and the references, he sees all is good and whamo, you get your FPID or P2P since as far as he is concerned, you are good to go!

 

               Now you apply for a CCW License, Uh Oh, You clearly stated "self defense" which by NJ Statute is not acceptable to show "justifiable need",  Yet he has to approve it even if the law states you as the applicant

did not pass the requirements to be able to apply for CCW. It's like a convicted Felon applying for a FPID. It ain't gonna happen.

 

 

All examples of NJ carry license applications I have read about resulted in the police qualifying and approving the applicant after he or she submitted all the documents and passed the qualification.

[Newtonian 453]

Okay fox,

               I assume from your "no" that the CPD has the right to deny a FPID or P2P but has no say in the CCW permit process? Does a CPD have an obligation to sign all FPID, P2P and CCW applications as long as he feels

that you meet the requirements for each?  He runs the criminal and mental checks and the references, he sees all is good and whamo, you get your FPID or P2P since as far as he is concerned, you are good to go!

 

               Now you apply for a CCW License, Uh Oh, You clearly stated "self defense" which by NJ Statute is not acceptable to show "justifiable need",  Yet he has to approve it even if the law states you as the applicant

did not pass the requirements to be able to apply for CCW. It's like a convicted Felon applying for a FPID. It ain't gonna happen.

The system has no reason to turn you away before the last possible moment. Think about it: The judge, the court officers, the clerk, whoever may or may not represent the state, reviewers. $$$$ ka-ching. I'm speaking from ignorance though. Maybe they do turn people away.

 

One thing that continues to nag me is that justifiable need has never been overturned on its merits or legality, and that is what "Apply to Be Denied" is trying to achieve. Has anyone ever challenged it? Win, lose, kicked upstairs?

 

I'm not talking the half-hearted obsequious pussified cases like this one where petitioners grovel with their asses in the air to demonstrate that their clients did indeed empty cash machines in Harlem at 3 in the morning and were accosted numerous times and had the scars to prove it and "please please please your honor cut our client a break." 

 

[DeerSlayer 241]

Latest Almeida update, copied from Facebook 2A group this evening.

 

 

 

Status update/Information Release

 

Some of you may have heard of the latest developments involving the DC carry case win and the Almeida v NJ case that was practically a non-issue and dead due to the lack of work, not being performed by the powers to be in NJ.

 

Due The hard work of the “Party of Six” in not giving up with fighting for us all in NJ, not taking a “NO” for an answer, and eliminating the “WHEEL CHOCKS”, it is finally taking a positive step forward. Due to a serious lack of communication (non-existent is a better word), I have discontinued my pursuit with my case with the Previous Law firm that was spare heading it. In my opinion, we had a perfect opportunity to take a serious 2A case, that not only challenged the “Justifiable need” extra burden and unclear wording with a case that should have Cleary meet the “JN standard, but did not, but it also was an opportunity to challenge violations to NJ’s and the United States of America constitution.

 

This was the original plan since the beginning of the Almeida case. But after the Appellate Courts decision, the case seemed to disappear without further explanation from those hired to handle it.

We had a guaranteed funding source that was eager to help take this new case all the way up to the SCOTUS, it was by a National 2A organization. But that funding stopped suddenly after the case failed to move forward. What is even more disturbing, the Appellate court ruling on the Almeida case was brought to my attention by Mark Cheeseman, not the law firm retained to handle this case. Until this day, we still await a call, email or explanation as to why the “plan” was terminated. In the mean time, the threats have increased, some very serious incidents have actually taking place and the NJ Law firms and all of the 2A organizations in NJ are ignoring our requests for help

 

We have our 3rd party sources that tell us it was due to influence from Scott Bach allegedly, the back room deals with the soon to be failed EO180, and also the relationship with those parties involved and the Governor CC running for POTOUS, so that it not make him upset and jeopardize EO 180 or the POTUS RUN. Of course this is all 3rd party, unverified allegations, so I make no claims to its legitimacy, and I accuse none of these individuals of wrong doing, I am only relaying 3rd party information that was given to me as possible reasons, but none-less, seems suspect due to the timing.

 

We have now hired a law firm that is NOT affiliated in any way with anyone, any Business or organization in NJ. We did this for a reason, there can be no corruption, no influence, and no political interference. Only the best interest for you and I, the people of NJ.

 

This out of State law firm has teamed up with 2 other firms. 1 in Pennsylvania and the other in California. All 3 law firms have had success in winning 2A cases nationally, one of the firms is involved with winning Baker v. Kealoha (at the same time Peruta v. San Diego was won. These 3 are teaming up to help us win in NJ, because they believe if we fight the good fight, and continue that fight, we will win!

But we need all of your help in making this possible, because if we wait for the non-believers, the wheel chocks in NJ, or those that only fight hard on the “criminal prosecution” side of the gun rights battle, we will NEVER WIN our individual 2A rights in NJ.

 

The most recent case against DC started by the plaintiffs filing a complaint with the Federal Courts including an injunction, their case was much less severe than mine. WE PLAN ON ALSO FILING A COMPLAINT WITH THE FEDERAL COURTS, a Restraining order against the State of NJ, along with additional legal arguments. The goal is to have part of the JN wording, and burden, If not all of it unconstitutional as it is being applied. It will not be like the DRAKE case, where the 3rd circuit ruled that “Justifiable need was constitutional” it will be attacking it in a different angle. Similar to how the recent DC Plaintiffs won.

 

Now, we could have been there at the Federal level already, but we are getting no Support from the NJ Laws firms, the NJ2AS leadership, the ANJRPC and their leadership or the NRA. (Well, the NRA would support us, but the only way to get their support is with a request coming from the NJ NRA Rep. and that has proven to be useless. Ask yourself, WHY is NO NJ 2A organization supporting NJ cases, either logistically, financially, or with any other supportive role…it is as if they want nothing to do with winning or fighting for a carry case. Why is that? I have no answer for you, but the Party of Six has tried to get those answers from everyone I mentioned, for a long time and we have all been ignored.

 

They have refused to help, they have refused to answer our emails, or phone calls, so we must fight this good fight alone and start all over again. But we will use two existing cases and have two more as a backup and build on it, The case that has just been confirmed to be consolidated with mine is of a Veteran, Michael Tummeneli. He has been requesting for help for over a year now, but only to be ignored. Why?

 

Ironically, I just read there is a similar case being started for a Veteran out of Picatinny Arsenal, that faces the same challenges as Mike, a fund me site has been created and is being controlled, not by the Plaintiff, but by the Law firm. They control the funds, regardless of the outcome. I sure hope that outcome is a positive one for the Plaintiff…godspeed

 

I wish them luck, as our common goal is to bring down NJ’s unjust carry laws. Maybe whatever donated money is left over can be donated to help other Veterans in obtaining their NJ carry License?

 

I ask that you read what I am telling you with an open mind, and Judge for yourself. Why haven’t we won in NJ? Why have we been ignored and why are we now forced to terminate our relationship with these NJ lawyers and 2A organizations, but hire from the outside, hire law firms that believe in us and that we can win! They are shocked at the lack of results and the lack of trying in NJ…meanwhile, they are winning in the COURTS in other parts of the country?

 

We hope to win in NJ as well, with your help we will. In the next few short weeks, we will be publishing the outlined plan of action, including the first steps these 3 Law firms are taking to file the process. Between the main members of the Party of six, and these lawyers, we have spent many, many hours on conference calls and planning meetings together. I can honestly say I’ve spent more hours communicating in the last 3 weeks with these firms, than I had in almost 2 previous wasted years dealing with NJ firms. That means a lot to us.

 

Visit us at www.partyof6.org to learn more, please consider donating to help make this fight a good one. And we shall see you at the prevailing party!

 

Thank you,

Albert Almeida

[n4p226r 105]

I love the "I'm not saying I have any proof but Scott Bach did this "

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

I can't help having a nagging feeling that these guys are going to be granted their CCW permits due to meeting the "justifiable need" standard, and the rest of us will still be screwed. 

[A-Tech 8]

I can't help having a nagging feeling that these guys are going to be granted their CCW permits due to meeting the "justifiable need" standard, and the rest of us will still be screwed.

I don't know. Maybe not considering he's been denied twice already. Seems like they really have a point to prove.

[CMJeepster 2,777]

I love the "I'm not saying I have any proof but Scott Bach did this "

Isn't that organization running a pro 2A advertisement campaign right now, or did I mishear the past 60 or so radio commercials?

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Isn't that organization running a pro 2A advertisement campaign right now, or did I mishear the past 60 or so radio commercials?

A lot of smoke and mirrors from the pro 2A NJ groups.

[maintenanceguy 510]

Isn't that organization running a pro 2A advertisement campaign right now, or did I mishear the past 60 or so radio commercials?

They've got a bill board up in Bridgeton, Cumberland county that says "restore the right to carry in NJ".  But no call to action, no instructions on how to help, nothing about it on their webpage. It doesn't seem like they even have a project working on the right to carry.   I'm not sure why the billboard is even there unless it's just PR to make NJARPC look like they're fighting for something.

[kirk2022 43]

They've got a bill board up in Bridgeton, Cumberland county that says "restore the right to carry in NJ".  But no call to action, no instructions on how to help, nothing about it on their webpage. It doesn't seem like they even have a project working on the right to carry.   I'm not sure why the billboard is even there unless it's just PR to make NJARPC look like they're fighting for something.

 

Talk about A waste of money for that one, Everybody already carries in that area of town. They target practice in the streets all the time.

[CMJeepster 2,777]

Talk about A waste of money for that one, Everybody already carries in that area of town. They target practice in the streets all the time.

Mountain lion attacks?

[DeerSlayer 241]

I love the "I'm not saying I have any proof but Scott Bach did this "

BREAKING DEVELOPMENT:

 

A 2nd source has come forward with one of our Po6 members and also confirmed the allegations of the 1st source. That during a private meeting last year at the NJSAFE conference, it was discussed and agreed on by the Law firm retained to handle the Almeida v NJ carry case, and the NJ 2nd Amendment leadership, aka as Scott Bach to quietly shut down the Case and not push it forward to FEDERAL COURTS, where it was widely believed to be successful due to the nature of the case and the burden imposed on the Plaintiff,

 

It is said that these discussions also included attempts to convince those behind the recall Sweeney campaign to not proceed forward with the plan.

 

This was all in an attempt to protect the CC POTUS run and THE NOW, SOON TO BE FAILED EXECUTIVE ORDER 180 backroom deals.

 

This is the 2nd source with inner circle involvement and knowledge that has provided the same information and validated the allegations of the 1st source.

 

Well, there you have it. It is safe to say that our lives, the safety of our loved one's, the rghts given to us under the U.S constitution to keep and BEAR arms....but most importantly, our rights to defend the lives of our loved ones and self against these criminals that rule the streets have been gambled with and our safety is kept in jeopardy by our own people that are spineless lawyers, and political hacks.

 

All for their political gain/status, Finacial security/gain and for backroom deals that from the beginning was giving you meatless bones, but is destined to be a failure due to the hard work of the anti gun crowd in Trenton.

 

Now, of course we will not allow these cases to just disappear.

 

Michael Tumminelli and Almeida v NJ have been consolidated and lives on to move forward with the hired out of State law firms.

 

We need your help to make sure this momentum continues..

 

Visit us and consider supporting it.

 

Www.partyof6.org

[Smokin .50 1,907]

They've got a bill board up in Bridgeton, Cumberland county that says "restore the right to carry in NJ".  But no call to action, no instructions on how to help, nothing about it on their webpage. It doesn't seem like they even have a project working on the right to carry.   I'm not sure why the billboard is even there unless it's just PR to make NJARPC look like they're fighting for something.

I'm helping to design CNJFO's first billboard RIGHT NOW.  Please send me a PM with your email so I can forward some prospective billboards to you.  Would love to get your viewpoint.  Thanks!

 

Dave "Rosey" Rosenthal, VP

Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners

http://www.cnjfo.com 

[DeerSlayer 241]

Permit Issued to Albert Almeida today!

[carl_g 568]

Awesome! So they gave him a permit to not let this case go forward? Regardless, I am happy for him!

[DirtyDigz 1,811]

I am sincerely happy for him. 

 

Now I am watching intently, as a donor,  to see what the actions by P.O.6 are from the point forward to eliminate the justifiable need requirement for every NJ citizen.

[bhunted 887]

Happy schmappy. It better be more than just that....

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[maintenanceguy 510]

Good for Albert.  I really mean that.  He's put a lot of hours and money into this.  But I'm waiting to find out how this helps anyone else.

[DeerSlayer 241]

Awesome! So they gave him a permit to not let this case go forward? Regardless, I am happy for him!

He's not the sole plantiff on this case. The lawsuit moves forward.

[Ricky_Bobby 130]

Now I am watching intently, as a donor,  to see what the actions by P.O.6 are from the point forward to eliminate the justifiable need requirement for every NJ citizen.

 

But thats the problem - how I read it, thats not what the case was about - it was that Almeida claimed he met justifiable need after death threats and violence against him and his family, etc - I thought the other plaintiffs had similar complaints as well.

 

Doesn't help the other 99% of us gun owners in this state who consider our justifiable need to be our need for self and family protection outside of our home, but if I am wrong someone please correct me and if this case is truly present to crush the justifiable need mandate then I applaud and support them continuing to go forward.

 

 

If Albert was smart he'd get on every news cycle in the NJ/NY area - I'm sure the issuing PD and the state in general does not want the public to know that *gasp* a non LEO/non politician could actually be carrying a gun in THIS state for protection! 

 

Need to blow up the establishment thinking and get interviewed everywhere about it and speak out publicly about how we all deserve to have our rights back.

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

Well, like the rest of you, I'm happy for Albert Almeida, I really am.  He worked really hard to prove that he had justifiable need.

 

But unless there's something I'm missing, this does nothing to lessen or remove the impossible "justifiable need" standard (a modern-day Catch 22),

and does nothing to to help the rest of us.  

[Lambo2936 297]

But thats the problem - how I read it, thats not what the case was about - it was that Almeida claimed he met justifiable need after death threats and violence against him and his family, etc - I thought the other plaintiffs had similar complaints as well.

 

Doesn't help the other 99% of us gun owners in this state who consider our justifiable need to be our need for self and family protection outside of our home, but if I am wrong someone please correct me and if this case is truly present to crush the justifiable need mandate then I applaud and support them continuing to go forward.

 

 

 

If Albert was smart he'd get on every news cycle in the NJ/NY area - I'm sure the issuing PD and the state in general does not want the public to know that *gasp* a non LEO/non politician could actually be carrying a gun in THIS state for protection! 

 

Need to blow up the establishment thinking and get interviewed everywhere about it and speak out publicly about how we all deserve to have our rights back.

 

 

 

This 100%.

I Manage a property in Newark as well, and though i've had to show up quite a few times in the middle of the night for break ins only to wait 2+ hours for the police to show up to respond while people were stealing crap so that i can secure the property, i still dont have a shot in hell.. It got to the point where i wouldnt even wait for them to show up because they were breaking in so often when units are vacant... I've had both my life and my Fiance's life threatened at least once, and have had to call the police because someone was trying to assault my fiance, only to have them never show up. Fortunately some of the locals who know me got rid of the crazy lady, but i still see her around. My situation isn't nearly as dire as his, but any reasonable state would grant someone such as myself a CCP to carry when i was in Newark... I Can't say that is the case, though.

 

 

[DeerSlayer 241]

This 100%.

I Manage a property in Newark as well, and though i've had to show up quite a few times in the middle of the night for break ins only to wait 2+ hours for the police to show up to respond while people were stealing crap so that i can secure the property, i still dont have a shot in hell.. It got to the point where i wouldnt even wait for them to show up because they were breaking in so often when units are vacant... I've had both my life and my Fiance's life threatened at least once, and have had to call the police because someone was trying to assault my fiance, only to have them never show up. Fortunately some of the locals who know me got rid of the crazy lady, but i still see her around. My situation isn't nearly as dire as his, but any reasonable state would grant someone such as myself a CCP to carry when i was in Newark... I Can't say that is the case, though.

 

 

So apply, get denied. Then join the PO6 lawsuit.

[bhunted 887]

This 100%.

I Manage a property in Newark as well, and though i've had to show up quite a few times in the middle of the night for break ins only to wait 2+ hours for the police to show up to respond while people were stealing crap so that i can secure the property, i still dont have a shot in hell.. It got to the point where i wouldnt even wait for them to show up because they were breaking in so often when units are vacant... I've had both my life and my Fiance's life threatened at least once, and have had to call the police because someone was trying to assault my fiance, only to have them never show up. Fortunately some of the locals who know me got rid of the crazy lady, but i still see her around. My situation isn't nearly as dire as his, but any reasonable state would grant someone such as myself a CCP to carry when i was in Newark... I Can't say that is the case, though.

 

 

When I use to investigate B&Es in Newark back in the early to mid 80s, there was a 6-8hr PD response time even then.

Newark will never change and will remain the shit hole it has almost always been.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk