New HG transport exemption law?

[siderman 1,137]

Did that proposed bill that expands the allowed exemptions to transport hg's get passed or just die somewhere? The one that defined its ok stopping to pee, get gas or lunch....Not finding info on it.

[Howard 538]

It was not a bill, it was an edict that came down from the executive branch through the state police.

[jackandjill 683]

When you got to go, you got to go

[COLTGUY 0]

I woke up and feel like my finger is in warm water, now I have to go....

[siderman 1,137]

It was not a bill, it was an edict that came down from the executive branch through the state police.

Oh, an edict. So that means it should be currently in effect? And by "should" I know its still quite possible to be hassled by un-informed or cautious leos and such and all the fun associated with that.                                                                                                                                                                                                   

[Cereza 106]

http://nj.gov/governor/news/news/552016/approved/20160408b.html

 

•    The Attorney General is providing guidance through this directive to law enforcement and prosecutors to ensure the law is administered uniformly throughout the state.  The directive sets forth a balanced approach for law enforcement and prosecutors to employ to determine whether a deviation in the course of direct travel between two points with a lawfully-possessed firearm is “reasonably necessary,” considering the nature, purpose and extent of the deviation from the firearm owner’s direct route.
 

•    While not an exclusive list, some examples of stops or detours in the course of travel to or between locations that would qualify as reasonably necessary include: collecting and discharging passengers; purchasing fuel, food and beverages, medication, or other needed supplies; using a restroom; contending with an emergency situation; or driving around a traffic jam.

 

[kirk2022 43]

The above quote of revisions from earlier this year is still in limbo!!! Christie put it in effect as A directive. But the Senate then proposed Bill SCR117 which if read, It will nullify Christies action, Basicly because they don't like it.

 

The Bill to kill Christies action passed the Senate yesterday by A 22-15 vote so now it goes to the legislature for vote.

 

The R in the bill means Review which is how they will kill it.

[Cereza 106]

The above quote of revisions from earlier this year is still in limbo!!! Christie put it in effect as A directive. But the Senate then proposed Bill SCR117 which if read, It will nullify Christies action, Basicly because they don't like it.

 

The Bill to kill Christies action passed the Senate yesterday by A 22-15 vote so now it goes to the legislature for vote.

 

The R in the bill means Review which is how they will kill it.

 

Does the proposed bill invalidate all of the directive or just the "justifiable need" portion?

[GRIZ 3,369]

Has anyone here ever been arrested or hassled because they stopped to use the bathroom, eat, stop for gas, etc on the way to or from a range? Know anyone this has happened to? The law says reasonable deviation and I've never seen or heard of any issues with this. I agree the law is stupid as written.

 

I think too many make an issue of this.

[siderman 1,137]

Has anyone here ever been arrested or hassled because they stopped to use the bathroom, eat, stop for gas, etc on the way to or from a range? Know anyone this has happened to? The law says reasonable deviation and I've never seen or heard of any issues with this. I agree the law is stupid as written.

 

I think too many make an issue of this.

 In a state that is so anti like NJ, the term "reasonable" is dangerously ambiguous. It would go a long way to have something in writing to help define reasonable. If a situation arises where "reasonable" has to come into play every word in the exemptions counts and can help stop the case from being pushed deeper into a costly time consuming legal system. Not to mention that having the democrats purposly void any clarification is in of itself damning of their anti agenda (no news there) and they want to keep the ambiguity to work in their favor.

[kirk2022 43]

Does the proposed bill invalidate all of the directive or just the "justifiable need" portion?

 

It will if it passes the Legislature, The bill seeks to nullify everything that can to be from Christies Committee.

[GRIZ 3,369]

In a state that is so anti like NJ, the term "reasonable" is dangerously ambiguous. It would go a long way to have something in writing to help define reasonable. If a situation arises where "reasonable" has to come into play every word in the exemptions counts and can help stop the case from being pushed deeper into a costly time consuming legal system. Not to mention that having the democrats purposly void any clarification is in of itself damning of their anti agenda (no news there) and they want to keep the ambiguity to work in their favor.

Do you really think a prosecutor wants to take a case to court where the defendant was on their way home to the range and they stopped to use the bathroom? Or should you run out of gas? Or you shot a match in Cape May and headed home to Sussex County and stopped for coffee.

 

Please find me a case where this has happened.

[GRIZ 3,369]

Reasonable is reasonable.

[kirk2022 43]

+1 For Griz's posts above.  It is great for everyone to know the law. But there are lots of times that things are very over thought.

[siderman 1,137]

Reasonable is reasonable.

stupid is as stupid does.  Like you said its a stupid law and if nothing else by not clarifying it its intimidation. The state ideology of not clarifying is not reasonable. heck, the entire 2A law system here in not reasonable, why would I expect otherwise?  

Anyway I didnt mean to get into the worthiness of the proposal just to see the status of it.  it appears that the edict -revision- bill- directive is.......maybe I'll send an email to ANJRPC....                                                               

[jackandjill 683]

Defendant:   "Judge, no one ever was prosecuted under this reasonable statue"

 

Judge:  "Congratulations, there is first for everything".

 

We just dont get to hear all the stupid cases that come into NJ court system.  And when something prominent does get out, everybody argues "But he was also doing <<this-other-thing-also>> and deserve to be prosecuted under every charge they can throw book at".  

 

On the recent GFH radio, Nappen quoted an ongoing case involving "Assault Weaspon" charge for a Ruger 10/22 found in the home. True, "we dont know all the details yet", but there is lot of proof as to how ridiculous NJ system is in practice. 

[W2MC 1,699]

And how many thousands of YOUR dollars will you be spending before you even get in front of the judge? 

 

The local prosecutor may be stuck on stupid, but YOU are the one who's feeding the meter!

[GRIZ 3,369]

Defendant:   "Judge, no one ever was prosecuted under this reasonable statue"

 

Judge:  "Congratulations, there is first for everything".

 

We just dont get to hear all the stupid cases that come into NJ court system.  And when something prominent does get out, everybody argues "But he was also doing <<this-other-thing-also>> and deserve to be prosecuted under every charge they can throw book at".  

 

On the recent GFH radio, Nappen quoted an ongoing case involving "Assault Weaspon" charge for a Ruger 10/22 found in the home. True, "we dont know all the details yet", but there is lot of proof as to how ridiculous NJ system is in practice.

 

 

 

 

 

And how many thousands of YOUR dollars will you be spending before you even get in front of the judge? 

 

The local prosecutor may be stuck on stupid, but YOU are the one who's feeding the meter!

"Reasonable" is a term often used in our legal system in this country. Yes, in this country, not only NJ.

 

If you want to believe you will be arrested because you didn't want to crap your pants on the way home from the range go ahead. If you want to believe you will be arrested because you stopped at Wawa on the way home from the range go ahead.

 

Cops don't want to make arrests that don't stick. Prosecutors don't want to manufacture cases they can't win. Neither builds their career on bs arrests and cases. You are free to believe whatever you want.

[Oakridgefirearms 224]

 

 

 

 

"Reasonable" is a term often used in our legal system in this country. Yes, in this country, not only NJ.

 

If you want to believe you will be arrested because you didn't want to crap your pants on the way home from the range go ahead. If you want to believe you will be arrested because you stopped at Wawa on the way home from the range go ahead.

 

Cops don't want to make arrests that don't stick. Prosecutors don't want to manufacture cases they can't win. Neither builds their career on bs arrests and cases. You are free to believe whatever you want.

THIS^^^^^^^ some people are overthinking this. I have never worried about stopping for food or fuel on the way to the range. Better yet, keep your guns out of sight and don't tell the cops you have firearms in the vehicle if you get stopped.

[W2MC 1,699]

 

 

 

 

"Reasonable" is a term often used in our legal system in this country. Yes, in this country, not only NJ.

 

If you want to believe you will be arrested because you didn't want to crap your pants on the way home from the range go ahead. If you want to believe you will be arrested because you stopped at Wawa on the way home from the range go ahead.

 

Cops don't want to make arrests that don't stick. Prosecutors don't want to manufacture cases they can't win. Neither builds their career on bs arrests and cases. You are free to believe whatever you want.

 

Do you really believe that? 

 

Tell it to this guy:  http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/16/beware-of-new-jersey-72-year-old-man-facing-10-years-in-prison-over-a-gun-but-not-just-any-gun/

 

or this guy:  http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/02/12/new-jerseys-gun-laws-are-so-strict-that-an-actor-is-facing-charges-for-using-prop-gun-while-filming-movie/

 

or this guy:  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/18/new-jersey-man-hopes-for-pardon-after-legally-owned-gun-makes-him-convict.html

 

or this guy:  http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/02/19/corrections-officer-with-gun-permit-faces-charges-for-illegally-carrying-his-gun-and-you-wont-believe-how-it-all-went-down/

 

or this guy:  http://abcnews.go.com/US/jersey-man-imprisoned-gun-charge-appeals-governor-clemency/story?id=12287484

 

or this guy:  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/18/traveling-mans-gun-arrest-appealed-supreme-court.html

 

 

What is the common thread connecting these stories?  They all are NJ gun law "violations" that never should have been arrested or gone to court.  Most of them beat the rap, but not until they spent thousands upon thousands defending themselves from charges that should never have been brought.  Has there been anyone brought up on charges under the 'reasonable deviation' law?  I cannot point to one, but I have no doubt that someone has in this ridiculous state.  So I will happily take Christie's relaxed interpretation of a stupid law.

[GRIZ 3,369]

Do you really believe that?

 

Tell it to this guy: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/16/beware-of-new-jersey-72-year-old-man-facing-10-years-in-prison-over-a-gun-but-not-just-any-gun/

 

or this guy: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/02/12/new-jerseys-gun-laws-are-so-strict-that-an-actor-is-facing-charges-for-using-prop-gun-while-filming-movie/

 

or this guy: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/18/new-jersey-man-hopes-for-pardon-after-legally-owned-gun-makes-him-convict.html

 

or this guy: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/02/19/corrections-officer-with-gun-permit-faces-charges-for-illegally-carrying-his-gun-and-you-wont-believe-how-it-all-went-down/

 

or this guy: http://abcnews.go.com/US/jersey-man-imprisoned-gun-charge-appeals-governor-clemency/story?id=12287484

 

or this guy: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/18/traveling-mans-gun-arrest-appealed-supreme-court.html

 

 

What is the common thread connecting these stories? They all are NJ gun law "violations" that never should have been arrested or gone to court. Most of them beat the rap, but not until they spent thousands upon thousands defending themselves from charges that should never have been brought. Has there been anyone brought up on charges under the 'reasonable deviation' law? I cannot point to one, but I have no doubt that someone has in this ridiculous state. So I will happily take Christie's relaxed interpretation of a stupid law.

I'm not defending NJ gun laws. But they are what they are. However none of your examples deal with "reasonable deviation" going to or coming from a range.

 

Many of the examples you list are someone who through their own stupidity got arrested. Most of them deal with someone violating NJ gun laws which thousands of people deal with without getting arrested.

 

If a permit was acquired for filming the movie the "actor" would not have been arrested.

 

The security guard who "forgot" he left the loaded gun in his glovebox would not have been arrested if he were more responsible about knowing where his loaded gun was.

 

The PA Correction Officer was not covered under LEOSA and did not have a NJ permit.

 

People need to stop making Brian Aitken a poster boy. He told conflicting stories at times, "I was moving" and "my roommate was having a party and wanted the guns out of the house". He said something to his mother that worried her so much she called police because she was afraid "he was going to hurt himself". If he didn't say something stupid to his mother, none of it would have happened. He returned to his mother's house knowing the police were there. He talked with them over an hour and then let police search his car without a warrant.

 

No poster boy here. Just someone who whined to his mother and created a situation that resulted in his arrest.

 

I agree the gun with the antique gun and the guy from Utah shouldn't have been arrested considering the facts of those cases.

 

Still no cases of someone who stopped at Wawa after the range for gas, a coffee, and to use the bathroom.

[NJGF 375]

99.99% of the time no one knows you have a firearm in your vehicle so end of story.

 

Just because no one has been charged under a statute doesn't mean your action is "legal".

 

What is a reasonable deviation? Where does the line get drawn? How far from the most direct route is reasonable? This is not defined in the statutes so it becomes something that a jury decides if one ever gets charged with it.

 

So I have a handgun locked in my trunk and I stop to go to the bathroom. I am traveling in an area with not many stores. I don't know where a bathroom is located so I am effectively looking for one when I am driving. I travel x miles where x can be in feet or miles. While I am in the bathroom some one breaks into my car, takes my gun, hijacks another car, and kills the driver of the other car.

 

Was my trip of x miles to go to the bathroom a reasonable deviation? Up to a prosecutor to charge me and a jury to decide if I am guilty.

 

So what distance should I consider reasonable: .25 miles, 1 mile, 5 miles, 100 miles?

 

It is up to every individual to decide the risk they are willing to take (this is true for lots of things in life). No one is right or wrong.

 

It has been said that we are our own worst enemy in NJ in relation to gun laws. Maybe.

 

Lots of law abiding gun owners want to take as little chances with New Jersey gun laws as possible so they don't deviate at all. I would rather be a little hungry and skip the bathroom as a trade off of facing NJ's draconian gun laws even if the odds are almost nonexistent.

[jackandjill 683]

 "Reasonable" is a term often used in our legal system in this country. Yes, in this country, not only NJ.

 

If you want to believe you will be arrested because you didn't want to crap your pants on the way home from the range go ahead. If you want to believe you will be arrested because you stopped at Wawa on the way home from the range go ahead.

 

Cops don't want to make arrests that don't stick. Prosecutors don't want to manufacture cases they can't win. Neither builds their career on bs arrests and cases. You are free to believe whatever you want.

 

You mean like the "Justifiable" thats used across the Country in one context but in a radically different context in NJ ? 

 

I am sure someone will post account of how they and their out-of-state shooting buddies stop for an hour long, hearty lunch after range, every week and no one ever got arrested.  And I believe them.  But should there be a serious incident at the said Diner parking lot, I bet those involved will be charged appropriately, including for violating the "reasonable deviation" clause.  

 

Legal system does make cases even when there is no (or partial) basis. Call it incompetence, pressure, simple mistake or sometimes a strategy of piling stuff to see what sticks or as bargain chip.  There was a PD who put the following on their website. I assume this was reviewed by appropriate folks before posting. So how do you think local cops are trained to deal with someone transporting firearms with no FPID ? 

 

The note has since been removed after notifying them of appropriate NJ Law. 

 

------

Note: Although you are not required to possess a New Jersey Firearms Purchaser Identification Card to inherit 

firearms, you WILL NOT be able to transport, purchase ammunition or fire the weapons at a qualified firearms 

range unless you possess a New Jersey Firearms Purchaser Identification Card. 

-------

 

 

Now, I do not go paranoid thinking some Cop is going to follow me for an hour drive to range, looking for opportunity to jam me. I dont wrap my long guns in three layers of blanks and lock them up.  I transport in manner I think is within law.  You bet I stop by to eat, coffee, gas, take dump,  because chance of losing control of my firearms is greater if I get stranded, faint or just soil in my pants :-). And I think thats reasonable. 

 

But if its on the books, it will be used. 

[siderman 1,137]

I did email Scott Bach about the expanded exemption status,he was kind enough to reply: 

AG issued a directive in April in accordance with Gov's recommendations, it is in place and undisturbed (unlike the regs on right to carry)

 

So I guess thats the answer to my question. 

[Oakridgefirearms 224]

Good to know, thanks for the update.

[Rob0115 1,105]

While it may not happen it doesn't mean you aren't running afoul of the law--do so at your own peril.  

[GRIZ 3,369]

Many overlook the hazard of asking the state to define what is "reasonable". If the state doesn't do so reasonable stays open to interpretation by the citizen, police, the prosecutor, the judge, appeals courts, etc. Somewhere along the line you will probably find someone who agrees with you.

 

IIRC, at some point Sweeney offered to go along a list of what was considered reasonable in the statute. If it wasnt on this list you would have been in violation.

 

If going to the emergency room from the range because your mother called you and said your father had a heart attack wasn't listed you're screwed.

The current AG directive still leaves other "reasonable" deviations up to judgement. It lists a few "reasonable" deviations but doesn't limit reasonable to these. The deviation I listed above could be included.

 

Be careful of what you ask for.

[Smokin .50 1,907]

New Jersey Gun Law is filled with too much lawyer-written, high-faluten' legalese phrases as it is, and most of you don't stop to understand the meaning of PUNCTUATION, so..............

 

"Be careful what you ask for" is GREAT advice!

 

Aitken's case was the "Perfect Storm" of a loophole in the laws not allowing you to MOVE with hollow point bullets, an incompetent over-zealous Judge (that was censured and/or disbarred) that wouldn't allow proper readings/ interpretations of REASONABLE law ( a 20-something's way of "moving" one car-load at a time, and crashing on friend's couches while in limbo), and a naive Jury that never heard of Jury Nullification because let's face it, Jurors sometimes aren't the sharpest tool in the shed!

 

In 45+ years of enjoying the shooting sports I've never worried about "reasonable deviation", 'cept when my Newbie shooting friends tell me they're shit-scared of going for a snack or a beer.....  After missing-out month after month for YEARS, they all seem to take that pill called "Growacet" and learn to control their adolescent outbursts.

 

Can you be jacked-up for being "reasonable"?  Yep, you sure can!  But the odds are extremely LOW as Griz said!

 

Rosey

[fishnut 2,358]

Growacet...........lmao.........hahahaha

[CMJeepster 2,778]

Growacet...........lmao.........hahahaha