Almeida update

[JohnnyB 4,326]

It is a chicken vs. the egg scenario. We file in Superior Court, any Superior Court. Indicating that the justifiable need is illegal and denies our right to carry. A judge is going to say, "sight the examples of anyone being denied". Unless the attorney can have stats and facts to back up the denial percentages, I think it would be thrown out of court since a judge will say that no one has been denied since they haven't applied. Hasn't those stats been denied for FOIA requests?

 

Problem is we know 98% of the people who apply get denied. Yet can we get the supporting facts of those denials?

 

What I don't like is when I talked the Trooper responsible for processing firearms applications told me that if I apply for CCW and when, not IF, I get denied, I will have to mark off question#  27 "Have you ever had a firearms purchaser identification card, permit to purchase a handgun, permit to carry a handgun or any other firearms license or application refused or revoked in New Jersey or any other state?" as a "yes" on any future P2P applications. Why take that risk when you know you will be denied? Especially when you have to write a paragraph why you feel the need to CCW.

This! 

 

The people that we let run our state are libtards but they are not stupid. The cards are stacked against us! SCOTUS is our only hope as we are a blue state and many retards get to vote Democrat to save their subsidies!

[maintenanceguy 510]

I emailed the governor's office asking specifically if a denial of an application for a permit to carry a handgun was cause to be denied a FID or P2P.

 

I received a call from a Lieutenant Genova from the NJSP Firearms Investigation Unit.   He told me that being denied a carry permit because you lack justifiable need is not a reason to deny a FID or P2P applicaiton.  He said that you would need to list the denial on line 27 of the application but if you explain that it was because you lacked justifiable need, it would not matter.

[ChrisJM981 924]

I emailed the governor's office asking specifically if a denial of an application for a permit to carry a handgun was cause to be denied a FID or P2P.

 

I received a call from a Lieutenant Genova from the NJSP Firearms Investigation Unit. He told me that being denied a carry permit because you lack justifiable need is not a reason to deny a FID or P2P applicaiton. He said that you would need to list the denial on line 27 of the application but if you explain that it was because you lacked justifiable need, it would not matter.

Then I'm in to change their approval rating.

[Recon Racoon 49]

 

I received a call from a Lieutenant Genova from the NJSP Firearms Investigation Unit. He told me that being denied a carry permit because you lack justifiable need is not a reason to deny a FID or P2P applicaiton. He said that you would need to list the denial on line 27 of the application but if you explain that it was because you lacked justifiable need, it would not matter.

It seems we have an answer to your concerns gentlemen. You won't be denied fid's or p2p's for being denied a ccl.

 

So can we stop pretending it's about the possible denial? Can we finally get our mass application going and tank those numbers?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnnyB 4,326]

It seems we have an answer to your concerns gentlemen. You won't be denied fid's or p2p's for being denied a ccl.

 

So can we stop pretending it's about the possible denial? Can we finally get our mass application going and tank those numbers?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Okay, I'm in!

[A-Tech 8]

It seems we have an answer to your concerns gentlemen. You won't be denied fid's or p2p's for being denied a ccl.

 

So can we stop pretending it's about the possible denial? Can we finally get our mass application going and tank those numbers?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also in

[maintenanceguy 510]

I propose the following game plan. I would be willing to help set this up but it would take more than just me.  Since this plan involves raising money, I don't know if we would need to set up an organization.   It would be nice if an established organization was interested in tackling this.

 

A possible plan:

1. Fund Raise for Initial Legal Advice - Set up a go fund me site.  I don't think we'll collect much until we show a commitment but it will be enough to talk to someone who understands the process and can guide us.
2. Estimate Individual Costs - Get a good estimate of the individual cost to apply, including: qualifying at the range, any necessary training, and the cost of the applications. It seems that Albert already has this figured out.  Each individual participating bears their own cost of qualifying and applying.
3. Get Commitments to Participate - Set up a website with a brief explanation of the plan with a form people can fill out who are willing to participate.  Set a goal of the number of participants needed and when we reach that goal, we move to step 3.  We also use this site to collect donations toward continuing legal advice.  At this point, I think donations will still be small.
4. Apply - We all apply en masse with a well thought out and "lawyer approved" letter for "justifiable need".  (thus the fundraising)
5. Fund Raise For the Eventual Court Challenge - Once a large group has applied we have something news worthy.  We'll need the right spokesperson for interviews and we'll do press releases, social media blitz, etc.  The goal is to get all 2A loving people inspired so they will....donate money to our new "go fund me" site.  I believe we will have success in fund raising once we can show that several hundred have already applied and are committed to stand up against NJ and fight.   In fact, we might even attract really big money.  The NRA threw big money into the recall fight in CO once it was shown that there was a commitment.
6. Collect Statistics on Denials - We use the same website for each participant to update as they pass milestones toward approval or denial.   These stats are what we need for the challenge to NJ's laws.
7. Challenge in Court - Use the funds collected to fund the court challenge(s).

[1LtCAP 4,264]

wouldn't it be nice if nra, anjrcp, saf, goa, or any of the other organizations would back that?

[jackandjill 683]

 

Déjà vu

 

[maintenanceguy 510]

wouldn't it be nice if nra, anjrcp, saf, goa, or any of the other organizations would back that?

 

They might.  But not if we're sitting around waiting for them to show up.  

[jackandjill 683]

With weather warming up, how about we setup a get together / meet for simple lunch or dinner ? Advertise everywhere and see how many actually show up.

[gleninjersey 2,141]

It is a chicken vs. the egg scenario. We file in Superior Court, any Superior Court. Indicating that the justifiable need is illegal and denies our right to carry. A judge is going to say, "sight the examples of anyone being denied". Unless the attorney can have stats and facts to back up the denial percentages, I think it would be thrown out of court since a judge will say that no one has been denied since they haven't applied. Hasn't those stats been denied for FOIA requests?

 

Problem is we know 98% of the people who apply get denied. Yet can we get the supporting facts of those denials?

 

What I don't like is when I talked the Trooper responsible for processing firearms applications told me that if I apply for CCW and when, not IF, I get denied, I will have to mark off question#  27 "Have you ever had a firearms purchaser identification card, permit to purchase a handgun, permit to carry a handgun or any other firearms license or application refused or revoked in New Jersey or any other state?" as a "yes" on any future P2P applications. Why take that risk when you know you will be denied? Especially when you have to write a paragraph why you feel the need to CCW.

 

This is why it doesn't make sense to waste time and energy applying.  Get a group of people who want CCW and start a suit.  No need to organize a campagn of hundreds of people applying "to bring the approval rating down".  It won't matter.  They will all be denied.  Cut staight to the chase.

 

If other court's have ruled and upheld "self defense" as enough "justifiable need" for the issuance of a CCW what makes NJ different?  Either NJ's wrong or the other states are wrong.  It cannot be both ways.

[Recon Racoon 49]

This is why it doesn't make sense to waste time and energy applying.  Get a group of people who want CCW and start a suit.  No need to organize a campagn of hundreds of people applying "to bring the approval rating down".  It won't matter.  They will all be denied.  Cut staight to the chase.

 

If other court's have ruled and upheld "self defense" as enough "justifiable need" for the issuance of a CCW what makes NJ different?  Either NJ's wrong or the other states are wrong.  It cannot be both ways.

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. 

[maintenanceguy 510]

I'll show up for lunch - anywhere in the state.   I'm ready to do this.

 

I really don't want this to become yet another splinter 2A group.  Seems like there have been a rash of those in the last few months.  I'd rather see an established group pick this up but it seems like we've been waiting long enough.

 

I'll take a leap of faith and suggest a time to get together.  Lets give everyone 2 weeks to clear their calendars.  Let's make it a weekend so most are available.  I know Albert and others have already done a lot of leg work and research.  Hopefully Albert and others with real knowledge will make themselves available. 

 

I'll propose that anyone interested in discussing how we pull this off meet on Saturday, March 28th for lunch. 

 

We'll pick a place to meet after we see where everyone is from - most likely somewhere in the middle of the state.  If you're in - please respond here and give your town so so we can choose a place to meet that's convenient to everyone.  If no one responds, I'll just take my ball and go home - and we'll know why we don't have ccw in NJ.

 

I'll start:  I'm in!   And I'm from Bridgeton - Cumberland County.

[jackandjill 683]

I suggest you open a new thread with appropriate title in Events & Meet Ups category. Also post on other forums so folks know the prelim get together is happening.

[1LtCAP 4,264]

They might.  But not if we're sitting around waiting for them to show up.  

yea, i agree with ya on that. but they shouldn't be waiting for us to all jump into action, then come in and try to take credit. i see a couple that seem to try that, most recently, concerning the xm855 ban. people were mobilized, doing everything necessary.....and suddenly, it was the nra that stopped it. no. it was the people.

[1LtCAP 4,264]

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<can't get off of work on saturdays.

[Recon Racoon 49]

I have this weekend and next off, so I'm down for when ever. I just don't want to drive further north than say cherry hill, and would even prefer to not drive in the city. No other reason than I just hate driving around there. But I'd do it if we got enough people involved. 

 

I'll even be the first to offer to help organize the lunch too. Like pick a time and place, and get a ball park figure of how many will attend. 

[Rysdad 5]

I'm in for Saturday.

[gleninjersey 2,141]

The very first thing we should be doing is.joining SAF. I joined the NRA last year. I know there are many 1st Amendment organizations out there and was thinking about joining an additional one.

 

SAF has thrown their support behind Almeida's case. They have stepped up to help push back against NJ's restrictive gun laws. I'll be joining SAF later today. I would encourage others to do the same.

 

I will also be telling at least 2 other people about this case and SAF. While gun owners neither of them have yet joined a 2nd Amendment group. I'll ask them to join SAF.

[mipafox 438]

 

As I have posted before, I can only see three possible outcomes from carrying illegally, none of them good:

 

1.) You carry for years, never have to use your CCW, and never get caught.  That's your best case, but it means you risked a long prison term

for no reason.

 

2.) You carry, use your CCW to save your life, then get put in prison for many years.  You will come out a broken person (in many ways), but at

least you saved your life.

 

And your worst case scenario is:

3.) You carry, get caught before you need to use your CCW, and have all of the problems of #2, but without even having benefited from it.

I'm not recommending it, but for the sake of completeness, you missed one:

 

2.5.) You carry, use your CCW to save your life, then don't call the cops and go on with your life. Chances of a non-criminal being identified after a random encounter with few or no people around is very low. Even with video.

 

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/10Clearance.gif

 

64% of murders are cleared, less of them result in convictions. Most are between people who know each other, including criminals and non-criminals alike. Some are random attacks by criminals, though those go unsolved more often. A random encounter of self defense would have the lowest chance of being solved, and much less without something pointing to you.

 

5th Amendment protects you from self-incrimination - that's why criminals cannot be convicted of failure to register a firearm (U.S. v. Haynes 1968). Not calling the police does not discredit a self-defense argument if it is necessary later* (according the the preeminent firearms attorney in my region). Throw in the fact that you are facing 10 years in jail for carrying illegally and the reason for not calling police and admitting guilt is readily evident and the fact might not even be allowed into evidence by the judge.

 

 

 

*Note: If there is a high chance of being caught, it is still a pretty good idea to call the police. I'm not recommending you don't under any circumstances, and I'm not giving any legal advice. Just sayin'.

[Newtonian 453]

5th Amendment protects you from self-incrimination - that's why criminals cannot be convicted of failure to register a firearm (U.S. v. Haynes 1968). Not calling the police does not discredit a self-defense argument if it is necessary later* (according the the preeminent firearms attorney in my region). Throw in the fact that you are facing 10 years in jail for carrying illegally and the reason for not calling police and admitting guilt is readily evident and the fact might not even be allowed into evidence by the judge.

I looked up this case. Happy to see the court was loony even back then. It's like saying an illegal alien can never be charged for driving without his papers if he lives in a state that does not issue them to illegals. In a sane world he'd be deported for announcing at DMV that he was not here legally. E.g. self-incrimination. I assume that in this case possession was still illegal, correct? I couldn't find anything on that.

[1LtCAP 4,264]

 

I'm not recommending it, but for the sake of completeness, you missed one:

 

2.5.) You carry, use your CCW to save your life, then don't call the cops and go on with your life. Chances of a non-criminal being identified after a random encounter with few or no people around is very low. Even with video.

 

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/10Clearance.gif

 

64% of murders are cleared, less of them result in convictions. Most are between people who know each other, including criminals and non-criminals alike. Some are random attacks by criminals, though those go unsolved more often. A random encounter of self defense would have the lowest chance of being solved, and much less without something pointing to you.

 

5th Amendment protects you from self-incrimination - that's why criminals cannot be convicted of failure to register a firearm (U.S. v. Haynes 1968). Not calling the police does not discredit a self-defense argument if it is necessary later* (according the the preeminent firearms attorney in my region). Throw in the fact that you are facing 10 years in jail for carrying illegally and the reason for not calling police and admitting guilt is readily evident and the fact might not even be allowed into evidence by the judge.

 

 

 

*Note: If there is a high chance of being caught, it is still a pretty good idea to call the police. I'm not recommending you don't under any circumstances, and I'm not giving any legal advice. Just sayin'.

i'm confused about this? if they said "i didn't register my gun", that would be self incrimination. if they have a gun that isn't registered, then that in itself is not self incrimination.

[mipafox 438]

Possession is not the government requiring you to inform them of your illegal behavior. Registration is, if doing so would be an omission of guilt.

 

Law abiding citizens, of course, could be convicted of not registering a firearm if you could legally own it and did not register it.

[Newtonian 453]

Guys, have a meeting and I'll be there. I don't want to drive 90 miles but I will if I have to.

 

Ask one of the people in central NJ if their local range will host this. If you can't find one I'm sure the "TRIPLE THUMBS DOWN" range I go to will happily help. We have a nice big meeting room with a babbling brook outside, free coffee, and all the jokes Ed & Earl can tell while we're there. 

 

If any attendees have a normal sized keyboard or a full-sized keyboard we can plug in I can take notes (60 wpm typing). We can also record the meeting. I'm psyched, if only for the reason of meeting you guys in person. 

 

Please let me know if you need Cherry Ridge. I will get in touch with Mr. Bach, etc. ASAP.

 

We need, at least, to start thinking about this stuff.

 

Newt

[maintenanceguy 510]

I just posed some info and an invite to lunch in the "events and meetups" section here.  If you're in - please "RSVP" there.

[jackandjill 683]

@Newtonian, can you post that info into the Event post that Ryan created ?   I dont have farcebook account, but can someone post the link to Events forum to farcebook and also in other forums like nj hunter site ?

[JohnnyB 4,326]

NJ Hunter done! We even got one "I'M THERE"!

[Newtonian 453]

This is why it doesn't make sense to waste time and energy applying.  Get a group of people who want CCW and start a suit.  No need to organize a campagn of hundreds of people applying "to bring the approval rating down".  It won't matter.  They will all be denied.  Cut staight to the chase.

 

If other court's have ruled and upheld "self defense" as enough "justifiable need" for the issuance of a CCW what makes NJ different?  Either NJ's wrong or the other states are wrong.  It cannot be both ways.

As the poster formerly known as Phosgene notes, if we don't get denied we have no standing in any lawsuit of this kind. It would be like me suing the NY Yankees for not making me their shortstop when I haven't even asked for a tryout.

[bhunted 887]

I guess nobody addressed my long ago post. So I will ask again. If you are planning on showing in court in numbers, how do you plan on accomplishing the numbers thing when so many people here are spread out. Whichever county you are in dictates what court you will enter. So for example, Passaic County gets 10 participants in this endeavor. I see a couple problems. One, not everyone may be scheduled at the same time and two, this will not show crowds of people trying to get appoved all at once. I hope you understand what I'm saying, because I still don't see this as a viable solution... But if you are trying just to gather a large lump of denials so you can complile a list.... that I get. I also see folks in this thread saying they'd have problems getting off work. You'll realize this is a 9-3PM endeavor... Anyway, it's the show of physical presence I don't get or see. Please clarify...