Election and National Carry Reciprocity

[bzer1 15]

well if residents of 49 other states are allowed to legally carry a firearm in and out of your state with impunity, i would imagine even the morons in nj legislature would have no choice but to start issuing. they'd have no reason to oppose at that point

Except for spite. Which is not really far fetched with the bunch we have in Trenton

[T Bill 649]

NJ elected politicians have always had an attitude.  We elect them but there must be something in the air in Trenton cause once they get there they become dictators, know-alls and generally feel they are "God-like".  They act more like kings and queens as they rule over us!  There are dozens of things I could mention that if you are born and raised here you do not realize how petty and distrusting Trenton is.

 

Here's a couple of examples.  We do not pump our own gas, why?  Not likely to see it either, why?  We pay real estate taxes 4 times a year, why?  Only state that does it.  Can trust us with our own money?  Or course not.  Wanna leave NJ, oh, leave some cash on the table when you go, just to make sure we get our stupid cut, that's bold.  It's just a nanny state.  Or more likely closer to a totalitarian government, because it's all about control.  

 

Time to bring Trenton around to the way the rest of the country thinks/

[louu 399]

Trump said at the beginning of the year he would fix it. Remember his plan?

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/constitution-and-second-amendment

[PDM 91]

I appreciate the responses, even though I didn't get the legal analysis I was hoping for.

 

What do you think Wineberg and friends will do the day after a national reciprocity bill passes?  Do you really think they will go quietly into the night.? They will point out that people with permits in states that require zero or virtually zero training (hello Florida and New Hampshire) could carry in NJ (and they will have a point).  They will propose and eventually pass an emergency bill banning carry outright in NJ.  As anyone who has read the reciprocity bills knows, reciprocity only would apply in a state that allows concealed carry.  NJ currently allows concealed carry officially, although we know that as a result of "justifiable need" it doesn't allow it at all.  So, a bill banning concealed carry (perhaps they would craft some new separate law not written as a concealed carry that would allow retired cops to still carry) effectively would nullify a reciprocity bill altogether.

 

But, but you will say -- the SUPREME COURT!! Yeah, good luck with that.  A "Drake II" case would need to be brought in Federal court seeking to strike down the outright ban.  Admittedly, it would be a stronger, perhaps much stronger case than the Drake case because outright bans have already been struck down (in the 7th circuit) and in Drake the state had the cover of the "justifiable need" standard and was able to argue that there isn't really a ban in place.  But still -- BEST CASE -- it will take another 2-3 years for such a case to make it through the District Court and Third Circuit Court of Appeals (which I strongly suspect would find some way to uphold the ban), and then we'd have to hope that the Supreme Court would grant cert and finally strike the law down; no guarantee whatsoever that would happen, even with Trump appointed justices on the Court.

 

A much, much better alternative is a National Carry Permit.  Let's stop beating around the bush and making equal protection arguments.  The right to bear arms -- carry and possess outside the home -- is a fundamental, civil right.  To the extent states don'e recognize that right, it should be protected by the Federal government.  National "constitutional" permitless carry is not in the cards because, no matter how much people like to simplistically scream the phrase "shall not be infringed", that is not what Heller says.  Background checks and training requirements for carry outside the home,  as part of a shall issue system (meaning no discretion outside of the objective criteria) would be upheld by the Supreme Court and every other court in the country.

 

A National Federal Carry Permit law could be crafted to meet the highest state standard -- eg NJ's -- requiring a background check and real training (say 10--20 hours) and a proficiency test.  It could also leave all existing, more permissive state laws in place to avoid any 10th amendment issue (eg, states like Vermont and Alska etc. would keep constitutional carry in their states) and also leave in place all existing interstate reciprocity.  So absolutely no one would be compelled to apply for a Federal permit.  But for those who want peace of mind in being able to carry in all 50 states, AND for those in may/no issue states like NJ, they would be able to get a carry permit as well.  

 

Such a law would be much less subject to challenge than a reciprocity law because it would 1) be predicated on the Second Amendment, incorporating all of the "reasonable restrictions" blessed by Heller; 2) would be politically hard to oppose because it would incorporate all of the objective criteria imposed by states like NJ (it would just eliminate the farcical "justifiable need standard"; and 3) would protect a civil right without infringing on state's rights by not forcing any state to adopt less stringent licensing requirements from other states.  It would also PUT THE BURDEN ON NJ to go to court to challenge the law, rather than forcing citizens to go to court to challenge a ban.

 

That is what we should all be advocating for.  NOT a reciprocity bill that 1) won't help us, 2) will be subject to some very valid states' rights challenges and 3) would be easily circumvented in states like NJ and NY who would just ban carry outright. 

[jackandjill 683]

^^^^ Sorry to disagree. National Carry Permit is more infringing for reasons that could take a book to elaborate. Least of which is any NCP crafted to serve NJ ridiculous "highest" standard would do nothing but validate the NJ "standard" and finally make that standard as a national standard.  NCP would further the "recording keeping" of firearm owners etc at the Fed level, not something many recommend to further handover to Feds.

 

Lets step back and remember, nothing can solve NJ problems, nothing should solve NJ problems but NJ itself.

 

National Carry bills proposed strike the balance of using existing Fed powers carefully while sticking it to states like NJ. They will put NJ in a bind. If NJ wants to get creative with it, then so be it. I dont advise handing the keys over to NJ in "anticipation" of what NJ might do. 

 

With NC, NJ existing justifiable-need WILL FALL. 

[bzer1 15]

NJ elected politicians have always had an attitude.  We elect them but there must be something in the air in Trenton cause once they get there they become dictators, know-alls and generally feel they are "God-like".  They act more like kings and queens as they rule over us!  There are dozens of things I could mention that if you are born and raised here you do not realize how petty and distrusting Trenton is.

 

Here's a couple of examples.  We do not pump our own gas, why?  Not likely to see it either, why?  We pay real estate taxes 4 times a year, why?  Only state that does it.  Can trust us with our own money?  Or course not.  Wanna leave NJ, oh, leave some cash on the table when you go, just to make sure we get our stupid cut, that's bold.  It's just a nanny state.  Or more likely closer to a totalitarian government, because it's all about control.  

 

Time to bring Trenton around to the way the rest of the country thinks/

Easier said than done. Corporations and jobs leaving doesn't convince people, highest taxes doesn't convince them, $2mil a mile road construction doesn't convince them, Highest cost of living doesn't convince them, most corrupt state doesn't convince them, people leaving on-mass doesn't convince them that this state is in a long death spiral, and the root cause is the leftist control over the state legislature. How do you convince people not to screw themselves when they seem bound and determined to do just that?

[PDM 91]

^^^^ Sorry to disagree. National Carry Permit is more infringing for reasons that could take a book to elaborate. Least of which is any NCP crafted to serve NJ ridiculous "highest" standard would do nothing but validate the NJ "standard" and finally make that standard as a national standard.  NCP would further the "recording keeping" of firearm owners etc at the Fed level, not something many recommend to further handover to Feds.

 

Lets step back and remember, nothing can solve NJ problems, nothing should solve NJ problems but NJ itself.

 

National Carry bills proposed strike the balance of using existing Fed powers carefully while sticking it to states like NJ. They will put NJ in a bind. If NJ wants to get creative with it, then so be it. I dont advise handing the keys over to NJ in "anticipation" of what NJ might do. 

 

With NC, NJ existing justifiable-need WILL FALL. 

I hear you, but I guess our disagreement is whether non-discretionary training, proficiency testing and background checks for carry outside the home violate the Second Amendment.  I don't think they do, and I don't think they are a bad idea.  And I also disagree that NJ will solve its own problems.  It won't.  Just like any civil rights violation, the federal government needs to get involved.  And we now have a federal government that will be willing to do so.

[jackandjill 683]

I hear you, but I guess our disagreement is whether non-discretionary training, proficiency testing and background checks for carry outside the home violate the Second Amendment.  I don't think they do, and I don't think they are a bad idea.  And I also disagree that NJ will solve its own problems.  It won't.  Just like any civil rights violation, the federal government needs to get involved.  And we now have a federal government that will be willing to do so.

I am not contending on the training, testing, bcs. What I am contending is pitfalls of letting Feds setup a "Permit System" with "highest standards" to satisfy NJ.  THAT would be heavy infringing of other 49 states. Leave the permitting (or constitutional) aspects to States, which is where it belongs.  Feds deal with interstate issues, which is where the Reciprocity Issue belongs. 

[PDM 91]

I am not contending on the training, testing, bcs. What I am contending is pitfalls of letting Feds setup a "Permit System" with "highest standards" to satisfy NJ.  THAT would be heavy infringing of other 49 states. Leave the permitting (or constitutional) aspects to States, which is where it belongs.  Feds deal with interstate issues, which is where the Reciprocity Issue belongs. 

Then I'm afraid you didn't read or understand what I wrote.  A national permit could be put in place that does not impact existing state constitutional carry, state permits, or state reciprocity WHATSOEVER.  It would be completely optional for those that want it.  If you live in Vt and don't want a federal permit, fine.  If you live in PA and want to rely on your PA permit and state reciprocity agreements, fine.  But if someone in PA or Florida or Vermont wants a permit that is definitively valid in all 50 states with no questions, they could also obtain a federal permit IN ADDITION to their state permit.  And someone in NJ could obtain a federal permit that is valid in all other states AND -- unlike under the reciprocity arrangements -- is valid in NJ as well.  If a subsequent Democrat controlled congress and Democrat president repealed the federal permit, nothing would change from the way it is today.  And keep in mind that any law -- including a reciprocity law -- can also be repealed in the future.  A national carry law would be less subject to challenge than a reciprocity law, would shift the challenge burden to the states, and would give us relief until, hopefully, we have a supreme court that can resolve the issue and protect our rights once and for all.

[Ricky_Bobby 130]

It sounds great in theory - but NJ allowing a federal carry permit in these communist borders is a LOL thought to me - Krispy Kreme and the gang would be suing the federal government so fast

[jackandjill 683]

Then I'm afraid you didn't read or understand what I wrote.  A national permit could be put in place that does not impact existing state constitutional carry, state permits, or state reciprocity WHATSOEVER.  It would be completely optional for those that want it.  If you live in Vt and don't want a federal permit, fine.  If you live in PA and want to rely on your PA permit and state reciprocity agreements, fine.  But if someone in PA or Florida or Vermont wants a permit that is definitively valid in all 50 states with no questions, they could also obtain a federal permit IN ADDITION to their state permit.  And someone in NJ could obtain a federal permit that is valid in all other states AND -- unlike under the reciprocity arrangements -- is valid in NJ as well.  If a subsequent Democrat controlled congress and Democrat president repealed the federal permit, nothing would change from the way it is today.  And keep in mind that any law -- including a reciprocity law -- can also be repealed in the future.  A national carry law would be less subject to challenge than a reciprocity law, would shift the challenge burden to the states, and would give us relief until, hopefully, we have a supreme court that can resolve the issue and protect our rights once and for all.

I read it but we are coming from two completely different angles. Short and sweet path here is to stay within the existing powers of Fed (interstate commerce clause or other) and get this done. Any additional Fed level "permitting" is further record keeping of firearm owners. That will put stake through whatever protections against record keeping we got today. That can further open up door for Feds to control what individuals may do with firearms within a state - such as buying / selling to each other.  

 

I do hear you, and I like some aspects of that idea.  But remember, your average 2A proponent outside NJ is VERY wary of any "permits" from Feds. They HATE the word "permit", specially at Fed level. 

 

Will be interesting to see what if anything happens at Fed level. 

[PDM 91]

It sounds great in theory - but NJ allowing a federal carry permit in these communist borders is a LOL thought to me - Krispy Kreme and the gang would be suing the federal government so fast

That's really funny.  Governor Kripsy Kreme is going to BE the federal government (Attorney General, director of DHS or something else).  NJ won't have a choice. And if they arrest someone with a federal permit, that person can go to federal court of a writ of mandamus or other relief forcing the state to obey federal law.  It would be delicious, and no more or less of a sh*t show than having NJ state police ignore the federal reciprocity law and arrest people with out of state permits.

[Zeke 5,504]

Did anybody use the drivers liscense analogy?

Or, the drinking age analogy?

Or the federal income tax analogy?

Or the social security analogy?

Or the Medicare/aid analogy?

Or the passport analogy?

[Zeke 5,504]

The constitution of the United States applies to all American Citizens.

[M1152 713]

It sounds great in theory - but NJ allowing a federal carry permit in these communist borders is a LOL thought to me - Krispy Kreme and the gang would be suing the federal government so fast

Edit:

 

If you are referring to our Gov and you were paying attention you would have realized he’s heading up Trump’s transition team which translates to  he’ll be carving out a spot for himself in the new administration.. Either way CC will be out of here and we will likely get the Lt. Gov for the rest of his term

[67gtonut 847]

If we CANNOT act like adults and refer to Chris Christie by name..... I will move this thread.....

 

freakin children...... 

[JohnnyB 4,322]

who's Krispy Kreme?

Troy answered your question FXDX.

 

This is an important subject.........Can we all behave and keep this one out of 1A?

[M1152 713]

Troy answered your question FXDX.

 

This is an important subject.........Can we all behave and keep this one out of 1A?

that what I figured, see edit..

[Indianajonze 379]

They will never let it happen here. I know he's old hat, but Sweeny said basically he will never allow it here. I'm sure any of his minions feel the same way.

Only way is to oust the dems and that has been an impossible endeavor.

 

 it doesn't matter what they will "allow". it would be federal law. not a damn thing they could do. also reading about rumblings of federal laws being crafted prohibiting gun bans (CA and MA) and ammo restrictions. i believe we are going to be entering the glory days of the republic soon my friends (at least for 2A rights)...

[Zeke 5,504]

it doesn't matter what they will "allow". it would be federal law. not a damn thing they could do. also reading about rumblings of federal laws being crafted prohibiting gun bans (CA and MA) and ammo restrictions. i believe we are going to be entering the glory days of the republic soon my friends (at least for 2A rights)...

Doesn't mean we can red Ass

[HBecwithFn7 296]

 it doesn't matter what they will "allow". it would be federal law. not a damn thing they could do. also reading about rumblings of federal laws being crafted prohibiting gun bans (CA and MA) and ammo restrictions. i believe we are going to be entering the glory days of the republic soon my friends (at least for 2A rights)...

 

I think they'd find some way around it. Either that, or they'll just blatantly ignore it, believing that no one would dare challenge them in federal court.  They might also attempt a challenge to the law, claiming "State's Rights."   These legislators have been at this a long time.  They aren't going to give up that easily.  The only thing that might get their attention is if the Feds tied federal funding for various projects to compliance with the federal law.  It's how they got all the states to raise their drinking ages to 21 - tying federal highway funds to that.

[PDM 91]

Well, whatever happens -- I have been on a natural high for the past few days.  I pretty much gave up any hope of change on 2A issues in NJ after the S Ct declined to hear Drake.  But this election is a game changer.  A complete repudiation of progressive overreach.  I am sure you are all right that a national carry permit will never get off the ground because in most other states people  see the federal government as a bigger danger than the state. I guess being in NJ changes one's perspective on that.  But I eagerly await a reciprocity bill.  It will be fun to see Senator Whineberg's reaction and will be quite interesting to see what comes next.  Whatever that is it will be better than what we have now.

[nnjrescue1 14]

This would be really nice, and I hope it does happen.  Unfortunately I personally doubt we will ever see this.  Sure, potus has power.... I just think people believe he has more power then he actually has.  With that said - Most of you here are much more politcal savy than myself...I would love to be wrong.  

[Zeke 5,504]

This would be really nice, and I hope it does happen. Unfortunately I personally doubt we will ever see this. Sure, potus has power.... I just think people believe he has more power then he actually has. With that said - Most of you here are much more politcal savy than myself...I would love to be wrong.

First, the president has veto power.

2nd the house and the senate have the majority.

That majority being of the same party as the president elect. Things should happen.

[HBecwithFn7 296]

First, the president has veto power.

2nd the house and the senate have the majority.

That majority being of the same party as the president elect. Things should happen.

 

Precisely.  I  think there is, now, a plausible chance that the legislation can pass and be signed into law, federally.  What the states do with it, and how the federal govt. can enforce the new law upon the states, is a different matter.  First, we will have to ensure we have a majority in SCOTUS before the cases start winding through the system. Next, as stated earlier, there will have to be some kind of "incentive" to elicit compliance from the states.  E.G., tie some of this new "infrastructure" funding being contemplated to compliance with the law... just like before, when federal highway funding was tied to rasing the drinking age to 21 for all states.

[Zeke 5,504]

Precisely. I think there is, now, a plausible chance that the legislation can pass and be signed into law, federally. What the states do with it, and how the federal govt. can enforce the new law upon the states, is a different matter. First, we will have to ensure we have a majority in SCOTUS before the cases start winding through the system. Next, as stated earlier, there will have to be some kind of "incentive" to elicit compliance from the states. E.G., tie some of this new "infrastructure" funding being contemplated to compliance with the law... just like before, when federal highway funding was tied to rasing the drinking age to 21 for all states.

This is the chess I reference.

 

To my friends here, stay the course. That is the only way we best this storm.

[fslater 62]

I am not contending on the training, testing, bcs. What I am contending is pitfalls of letting Feds setup a "Permit System" with "highest standards" to satisfy NJ.  THAT would be heavy infringing of other 49 states. Leave the permitting (or constitutional) aspects to States, which is where it belongs.  Feds deal with interstate issues, which is where the Reciprocity Issue belongs. 

If the other49 states were subject to NJ standards cases thats hearings are rejected WOULD be heard by the SCOTUS and those standards would be found unconstitutional. Up to this point the court just rejects hearing NJ cases to ovoid offending one side or the other and the country outside NJ was oblivious. Put it in every states back yard and see what happens to NJ laws and standards in reguard to 2A

[Zeke 5,504]

If the other49 states were subject to NJ standards cases thats hearings are rejected WOULD be heard by the SCOTUS and those standards would be found unconstitutional. Up to this point the court just rejects hearing NJ cases to ovoid offending one side or the other and the country outside NJ was oblivious. Put it in every states back yard and see what happens to NJ laws and standards in reguard to 2A

This^^^

Keep in mind Missouri jus went constitutional carry( Ferguson effect). The winds are in our favor.

[capt14k 2,052]

This is the chess I reference.

 

To my friends here, stay the course. That is the only way we best this storm.

Too bad your chess game has been check mated. Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare prevents federal government from blackmailing states with federal highway funds. However a national carry law or supreme Court decision that all concealed carry licensing is valid in all states like a driver's license would suffice. Doesn't have to meet NJ standards. We already have the ruling on gay marriage so it just needs to be applied to conceal carry. Supreme Court ruling is the best route to national concealed carry.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Zeke 5,504]

My friend, obamacare is done, the Supreme Court will be new.