Almeida update

[maintenanceguy 510]

Part of the state's defense in Drake was that NJ already issues 97% (I might have than number wrong but it's close) of the permits applied for.  THIS is why a large group is needed.  If 300 apply and are denied, the state only gets to say they issue 65% of permits issued.  If it's 600 that apply, the state now only approves less than 35%.

[maintenanceguy 510]

A large group applying also has media power, and will excite people to join in financial support.   But there needs to be something to support first.  Few people are going to fund an idea.

[jackandjill 683]

And if 600 people can let one of their ARs go .. thats like $600,000 in funding.  For that kinda money, I bet you will have large 2A organizations line up,  like flies on sh**.

[Ramup422 18]

I like the motivation I see here, this project still has hope?

 

One of the "justifiable Need" reasons on the application was to be the:

NJSA: 59:5-4 failure to provide police protection law.

 

My concern would be making sure we have FULLY committed participants that would participate till the very end and also the cost of appeals and eventually taking it up to the federal level as a class action.

 

That is where we are looking at $50k plus.

 

A go fund me site is possible but we would need professional help (attorney) to help establish it correctly.

 

can we still do this? I am hopeful that the project is not dead yet. 

[DeerSlayer 241]

And if 600 people can let one of their ARs go .. thats like $600,000 in funding. For that kinda money, I bet you will have large 2A organizations line up, like flies on sh**.

We should ask the state to hold an AR buyback at $1,000 per rifle, to fund the campaign lol... we can all buy a PSA $599 special to turn in

 

[wooly bugger 1]

I like the motivation I see here, this project still has hope?

 

One of the "justifiable Need" reasons on the application was to be the:

NJSA: 59:5-4 failure to provide police protection law.

 

My concern would be making sure we have FULLY committed participants that would participate till the very end and also the cost of appeals and eventually taking it up to the federal level as a class action.

 

That is where we are looking at $50k plus.

 

A go fund me site is possible but we would need professional help (attorney) to help establish it correctly.

 

can we still do this? I am hopeful that the project is not dead yet.

If this were to happen in an organized and credible manner (sorry NJ2AS,) I'd pledge $1000.

I don't doubt we can find 49 other people to match or exceed that.

[jackandjill 683]

a) Talk to a competent lawyer and see if he can show up for 30 minutes to discuss, may be while he is in NJ on some other business

b) Setup a simple get together, nothing fancy, a place, time and pizza and soda for $10

 

Advertise it on ALL 2A sites and ask people to show up. Best case, we will have folks willing to sell their ARs, worst case, we would have some pizza, good time and go our ways, never to complain about lack of NJ CCW on forums ever again.

[Newtonian 453]

I have emailed Nappen to request a telephone meeting. I'd  like to ask him how this idea might play out. If he responds I'll post his answers here. Meanwhile if anyone has any questions they'd like me to ask please post them here.

[jackandjill 683]

I have emailed Nappen to request a telephone meeting. I'd  like to ask him how this idea might play out. If he responds I'll post his answers here. Meanwhile if anyone has any questions they'd like me to ask please post them here.

Thanks Newtonian. PM me anytime if you need someone to show up alongside.

[Newtonian 453]

Thanks Newtonian. PM me anytime if you need someone to show up alongside.

The best way to keep the cost of his consultation down is to do it by phone, and to have a list of questions to ask. The first might be, "Is this a complete waste of time?"

[jackandjill 683]

Makes sense, should the conversation go past the first question:

 

We know the process involves multiple levels of approvals, appeals, jurisdictions etc..

 

(no particular order)

 

* Is there is an appropriate legal venue for the mass challenge (class action or something else)

* Will challenge be easier with uniformity among applicants when it comes to JN or should it be different

* Does participation by applicants who didnt encounter a threat yet (mugging etc) help or hurt the cause

* Can a standardized package be created for the process, making it easier for people to apply

* How many active plaintiffs would be required 

* What would be desired mix of gender, age, race, economic status, background, etc for the plaintiffs

* Does different jurisdictions create insurmountable challenge 

* How many volunteers (non legal aid) should we be looking at

* At what stage can this turn into a group effort rather than individuals appealing in own jurisdiction

* Total approx cost per applicant

[DeerSlayer 241]

This was the NJ2AS's original mass application idea, outlined in this Ammoland article.

http://www.ammoland.com/2013/12/nj2as-carry-license-application-submission-project/#axzz3TSnJZrSP

[maintenanceguy 510]

When NJ2AS came up with that idea, it was to appease those of us who wanted to tackle right to carry.  At the time, NJ2AS leadership was very clear that carry was not something they were interested in.  After hundreds of facebook posts demanding it and a mutiny of members at one of the monthly meetings, NJ2AS grudgingly (in my opinion) put an announcement on their website but never really promoted it or had a plan.    I wasn't interested under those circumstances.

 

But that doesn't mean I'm not interested.   I wonder if there are others in the same situation that might do this now.

[Norseman 2]

Right to carry is my ultimate hope/goal. I mean once we have that and people see crime drop and fewer victims, I think the war on the 2A will dry up in this state. (IMHO)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnnyB 4,322]

Please tell me if I am wrong, but we are all facing the following, obviously with differing results.

 

1) The application must be approved by the your local Police Chief or NJSP. The application can be denied at that level so you never get to see a Superior Court Judge.

 

2) Each application form must also be accompanied by a written certification of justifiable need to carry a handgun, under oath, that specifies in detail the urgent necessity for self-protection, as evidenced by specific threats or previous attacks which demonstrate a special danger to the applicant’s life that cannot be avoided by means other than by issuance of a permit to carry a handgun.

 

3) Those who make it past the local level will face many different County Justices, although I suspect they all follow the same rules and guidelines.

 

Given the NJ Statute that an applicant must provide what I outlined in #2, and we want to put down self defense as our URGENT NECESSITY, won't most if not all applications be rejected at the local level, never making it to a hearing before a Superior Court Judge?  If true , than how can we have a class action lawsuit against the state when it is in fact the individual municipalities that are stopping the permit effort because no urgency was provided?

 

I guess my question is. Would these rejections at the local level, not even making it to the state level, even count in NJ's statistics for denials???

[maintenanceguy 510]

Please tell me if I am wrong, but we are all facing the following, obviously with differing results.

 

1) The application must be approved by the your local Police Chief or NJSP. The application can be denied at that level so you never get to see a Superior Court Judge.

 

2) Each application form must also be accompanied by a written certification of justifiable need to carry a handgun, under oath, that specifies in detail the urgent necessity for self-protection, as evidenced by specific threats or previous attacks which demonstrate a special danger to the applicant’s life that cannot be avoided by means other than by issuance of a permit to carry a handgun.

 

3) Those who make it past the local level will face many different County Justices, although I suspect they all follow the same rules and guidelines.

 

Given the NJ Statute that an applicant must provide what I outlined in #2, and we want to put down self defense as our URGENT NECESSITY, won't most if not all applications be rejected at the local level, never making it to a hearing before a Superior Court Judge?  If true , than how can we have a class action lawsuit against the state when it is in fact the individual municipalities that are stopping the permit effort because no urgency was provided?

 

I guess my question is. Would these rejections at the local level, not even making it to the state level, even count in NJ's statistics for denials???

 

Your last question is an excellent point.  I'd like to know.

[CMJeepster 2,777]

Your last question is an excellent point.  I'd like to know.

Then does one have to sue for unjust due process?

[DirtyDigz 1,811]

In my view, it doesn't matter if local LEO or county judge or state judge denies it.  The denial will be documented and admissible as evidence that "self defense" (or whatever term is agreed upon to use in this effort) is not considered J.N. in New Jersey.

[DeerSlayer 241]

You appeal the Chiefs denial to the courts, then they deny you.

[JohnnyB 4,322]

Then does one have to sue for unjust due process?

If State law dictates you must provide urgent necessity for self-protection, as evidenced by specific threats or previous attacks.

The local LE would not be denying you due process. You simply did not provide them with the proper documentation to allow them

to approve it and send it to the next level! In effect, their hands are tied!

 

Kind of like applying for a Drivers License with no ID. Incomplete documentation means you can't proceed!

[JohnnyB 4,322]

You appeal the Chiefs denial to the courts, then they deny you.

I don't think they would hear the appeal based on lack of proper documentation as stated in the above post.

 

If you refused to show sufficient ID when applying for your DL, I doubt appeal is an option! You either meet the requirements or you don't it's that simple.

 

If the state denies your case to even be heard by a Superior Court Judge, then your case was still decided at the local PD level. That's the way I think the decision would be recorded. Thus, no effect on the

state's record on denials of CCW.

[DeerSlayer 241]

I don't think they would hear the appeal based on lack of proper documentation as stated in the above post.

 

If you refused to show sufficient ID when applying for your DL, I doubt appeal is an option! You either meet the requirements or you don't it's that simple.

 

If the state denies your case to even be heard by a Superior Court Judge, then your case was still decided at the local PD level. That's the way I think the decision would be recorded. Thus, no effect on the

state's record on denials of CCW.

Where is Ryan_J when we need him? That guy is a wealth of knowledge on this subject. I haven't seen him around in a while, hope he is doing ok?

 

[Newtonian 453]

If State law dictates you must provide urgent necessity for self-protection, as evidenced by specific threats or previous attacks.

The local LE would not be denying you due process. You simply did not provide them with the proper documentation to allow them

to approve it and send it to the next level! In effect, their hands are tied!

 

Kind of like applying for a Drivers License with no ID. Incomplete documentation means you can't proceed!

Yes, yes, yes. This has been in the back of my mind since reading the first post on this crazy idea.

 

They tell you to produce A, B, and C. You produce only A. They just turn you down. At the next stage they ask if you met all three criteria and you say no. End of case.

 

That's why I wanted to speak with Nappen. But he hasn't responded, even though I offered to pay for his time. Let's give him a few more days.

 

Right to carry is my ultimate hope/goal. I mean once we have that and people see crime drop and fewer victims, I think the war on the 2A will dry up in this state. (IMHO)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This notion is a frail reed on which to base any kind of legal challenge. Serious crime has been going down everywhere, including in NJ, especially in NYC, since the "shall issue" craze began. Viewed nationally, yeah this is a valid point. Viewed at level of individual states the case is not so strong. The basis has to be experience in shall-issue states, and maybe 4th down the list individual rights.

 

I know this will anger some of you but it's reality.

[jackandjill 683]

We are going back in circles. and may be this is why none of the previous attempts made progress.

 

We all know they ask for A, B, C and will deny without producing. They will deny AFTER producing all three telling you whatever you produced doesnt match their definition of A, B, C.

 

Agreed that there are some narrow cases (such as Almeida) that fit the later case.  And this mass action is to address/fit the former.

 

At the end of the day, the whole point of the exercise is to prove requiring A, B, C is so high of a bar that its against 2A.  If every law State makes asking for A, B, C to exercise a fundamental right, can never withstand legal challenge (atleast as some seem to think), then God have mercy on us.

 

Social and Political solutions are good at preventing or reversing things to certain extent. But if the current NJ law is so cleverly crafted  that it cannot be challenged in Courts all the way to SCOTUS, then you can bet your life that SOMEONE in future will bring it back to life not only in NJ but in other states too.

 

 

@Newtonian: Carcano mentioned couple of times that he was able to reach Nappan to make calls to PD on his behalf. May be phone call to his office ?

[1LtCAP 4,262]

We are going back in circles. and may be this is why none of the previous attempts made progress.

 

We all know they ask for A, B, C and will deny without producing. They will deny AFTER producing all three telling you whatever you produced doesnt match their definition of A, B, C.

 

Agreed that there are some narrow cases (such as Almeida) that fit the later case.  And this mass action is to address/fit the former.

 

At the end of the day, the whole point of the exercise is to prove requiring A, B, C is so high of a bar that its against 2A.  If every law State makes asking for A, B, C to exercise a fundamental right, can never withstand legal challenge (atleast as some seem to think), then God have mercy on us.

 

Social and Political solutions are good at preventing or reversing things to certain extent. But if the current NJ law is so cleverly crafted  that it cannot be challenged in Courts all the way to SCOTUS, then you can bet your life that SOMEONE in future will bring it back to life not only in NJ but in other states too.

 

 

@Newtonian: Carcano mentioned couple of times that he was able to reach Nappan to make calls to PD on his behalf. May be phone call to his office ?

it doesn't matter how high the bar is. it is against the 2a. period.

[bhunted 887]

Just to reiterate. Your ideas may work if you can compile a ton of people at the same police dept. same court... IF the chief says yes, you still MUST go before a judge. It's a lengthy process that will just leave you more pissed! I've been down this road before and I've had several NJ CCWs in various capacities... Take it from experience. You will be feeling ill in front of the Judge and Prosecutor when they look at you like you are an alien and say NO! You have no reasonable cause. Have a nice day! Next applicant! The numbers are too spread out for this to make a difference. But have at it if you think it will work. Credit for trying but I already know the out-come.

 

FYI.... You realize it's not just the PD you must get past correct?
Ex: Passaic County -
- Police Chief accepts app. You go through all the BS paperwork.
- Next step, you set up a court date in Superior Court and appear before the Prosecutor and Judge.
- They call your name and you rise to the microphone and state your need.
- After the Judge and Prosecutor asks you a bunch of questions, they scratch their heads and either say yes or no... Usually no...
- You go home....
It's not a one day process. You'll go through the usual paperwork, wait times, nut forms, etc. However long it takes the court to see you then an answer. That is all. You will 99.9% walk away already knowing what the answer would be. In most cases, no.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[DeerSlayer 241]

 

 

 

That's why I wanted to speak with Nappen. But he hasn't responded, even though I offered to pay for his time. Let's give him a few more days.

 

He is doing another seminar at GFH within the next month. Sign up for a seat and you can ask him your questions face to face. And any other gun law related questions as well. His seminars are worth the nominal entry fee.

 

 

[DirtyDigz 1,811]

... You will be feeling ill in front of the Judge and Prosecutor when they look at you like you are an alien and say NO! You have no reasonable cause. Have a nice day! Next applicant! ...

 

Uh, isn't that the immediate goal? To get a denial?

 

As I see it, the goal of this "movement" is to kill the state's misleading argument that "99% of CCW applications are granted" that they've used in previous cases.

 

I haven't seen anyone arguing that coordinating a mass CCW application is going to result in most applicants getting a CCW immediately.  The denial is EXPECTED.

[bhunted 887]

I understand that...but a couple per county won't persuade them or any statistics. I'm sure there are more applications out there getting denied than we know about. If you get denied persay, what will be the next move? Do like Almedia is doing? Does people really have the money for a court battle? If so, good luck and I wish you all the best. I'm not trying to be negative here. Just stating facts.

 

 

Uh, isn't that the immediate goal? To get a denial?

 

As I see it, the goal of this "movement" is to kill the state's misleading argument that "99% of CCW applications are granted" that they've used in previous cases.

 

I haven't seen anyone arguing that coordinating a mass CCW application is going to result in most applicants getting a CCW immediately.  The denial is EXPECTED.

[DirtyDigz 1,811]

... what will be the next move? ...

 

Compile the denials as a direct rebuttal to the "99% approved" argument, and start a new suit or sign on as additional plaintiffs to an existing suit.

 

Do people have the money? Can't answer that one, but the more who sign on to one case, the cheaper it is for all.

 

Or we can continue to just bitch and moan on forums and facebook, readily poke holes in anyone else's efforts but never make any efforts of our own.