voyager9 3,433 Posted December 10, 2017 29 minutes ago, Darrenf said: If you want to be pedantic you should probably learn to spell it first. Sorry, I couldn’t let that irony slide. Not on the Internet I dint Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobA 1,235 Posted December 10, 2017 9 minutes ago, JohnnyB said: Unfortunately, as things stand, there are not enough votes (60) to pass in the Senate! Some Republicans will vote no and there are not enough Democrats who will vote yes to counter that and reach 60 Maybe. We don’t really know what the balance of power will be when it gets there. 10 minutes ago, JohnnyB said: SCOTUS IS OUR ONLY HOPE IN THIS GODFORSAKEN STATE! Unfortunately true. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GRIZ 3,369 Posted December 10, 2017 23 minutes ago, JohnnyB said: Unfortunately, as things stand, there are not enough votes (60) to pass in the Senate! Some Republicans will vote no and there are not enough Democrats who will vote yes to counter that and reach 60. They will not use the "nuclear option" as it would set a precedence for future Senates. The bill will die in the Senate unfortunately and we will have to wait for another Trump SCOTUS appointment for SCOTUS to finally rule on CCW once and for all. SCOTUS IS OUR ONLY HOPE IN THIS GODFORSAKEN STATE! We'll see. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted December 10, 2017 Unfortunately, as things stand, there are not enough votes (60) to pass in the Senate! Some Republicans will vote no and there are not enough Democrats who will vote yes to counter that and reach 60. They will not use the "nuclear option" as it would set a precedence for future Senates. The bill will die in the Senate unfortunately and we will have to wait for another Trump SCOTUS appointment for SCOTUS to finally rule on CCW once and for all. SCOTUS IS OUR ONLY HOPE IN THIS GODFORSAKEN STATE!Why does everyone think nuclear option or cloture are the only two options?Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,321 Posted December 10, 2017 What options do you see as possible here for this to pass the Senate? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darrenf 422 Posted December 10, 2017 What options do you see as possible here for this to pass the Senate?They could just let the Democrats filibuster and ride it out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,321 Posted December 10, 2017 Just now, Darrenf said: They could just let the Democrats filibuster and ride it out. And devote 30 straight days of filibuster time for just this bill? I don't see it. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darrenf 422 Posted December 10, 2017 And devote 30 straight days of filibuster time for just this bill? I don't see it.You asked about other options. Whether you see it or not, it is an option. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted December 10, 2017 And devote 30 straight days of filibuster time for just this bill? I don't see it.They don't need to go for 30 straight days. They can continue to conduct other business by gaveling in and out. That is how it is supposed to work.Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
revenger 473 Posted December 10, 2017 I was thinking about another scenario if this is to pass and is signed into law, Free states would no longer need to issue non-resident permits would they? What would happen to our non-resident permits. any thoughts on this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,321 Posted December 10, 2017 Just now, revenger said: I was thinking about another scenario if this is to pass and is signed into law, Free states would no longer need to issue non-resident permits would they? What would happen to our non-resident permits. any thoughts on this It's a money maker for states that issue non resident permits. They won't shut that profit center down. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
revenger 473 Posted December 10, 2017 very true, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NJGF 375 Posted December 10, 2017 5 hours ago, GRIZ said: ...If there's a posted sign at the entrance and you ignore it there is currently no penalty for doing that in NJ AFAIK.... Isn't ignoring a posted sign at the entrance to a property considered defiant trespass? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NJGF 375 Posted December 10, 2017 6 hours ago, GRIZ said: Article VI of the COTUS establishes the COTUS and all laws made by Congress to be the law if the land and enforceable in every state. A state does not have an option to follow Federal law. It must. The only reason states are getting away being sanctuary states and marijuana laws is because there were 8 years of Obamanocchio. Don't the feds have to enforce federal laws not the states. The INS can go into any state and detain and deport any undocumented/illegal people. The states can help if they chose but they are not violating any laws by not. Didn't AZ get slapped down a few years by trying to enforce the immigration laws and were told by the feds to stop (I know I am probably missing some details on this). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
carl_g 568 Posted December 10, 2017 2 hours ago, revenger said: I was thinking about another scenario if this is to pass and is signed into law, Free states would no longer need to issue non-resident permits would they? What would happen to our non-resident permits. any thoughts on this That's a great question. I agree why would a state process non resident permits anymore. If this law passes they are basically obsolete and meaningless. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnGalt 9 Posted December 10, 2017 That's a great question. I agree why would a state process non resident permits anymore. If this law passes they are basically obsolete and meaningless.As mentioned above. It doesn’t take much for a state to process them, and the financial gain they will get from individuals like us living in the PRNJ or the PRCA will gladly shell out any number they ask for just to get that right. Hell those states could up he prices to a couple grand for out of state permits and I know I’d pay just to be able to carry. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,321 Posted December 10, 2017 24 minutes ago, JohnGalt said: Hell those states could up he prices to a couple grand for out of state permits and I know I’d pay just to be able to carry. So would I.............But let's not give them any ideas! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GRIZ 3,369 Posted December 10, 2017 2 hours ago, NJGF said: Isn't ignoring a posted sign at the entrance to a property considered defiant trespass? Depends on the state. Never heard of "defiant tresspass" in NJ. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GRIZ 3,369 Posted December 10, 2017 2 hours ago, NJGF said: Don't the feds have to enforce federal laws not the states. The INS can go into any state and detain and deport any undocumented/illegal people. The states can help if they chose but they are not violating any laws by not. Didn't AZ get slapped down a few years by trying to enforce the immigration laws and were told by the feds to stop (I know I am probably missing some details on this). AFAIK most police officers in a state are not obligated to enforce Federal law. There is a obligation for Federal officers to "take appropriate action" for a state crime committed in their presence. Federal officers often prosecute crimes under state systems when prosecution is declined by the US Attorney. If they discover a state crime they notify state or local police. Federal officers can "deputize" anyone to assist them in an arrest or seizure. It used to be if a state or local police officer he or she would notify HSI . This is just cooperation. This is what this "sanctuary" bs is about. Now there are many reasons a state or local can be cross designated by a Federal agency . This involves training and the state or local guy or girl gets a Federal ID. If they are cross designated they have all powers of a Federal officer. What happened in Arizona a few years ago was Sheriff Joe in Maricopa County had most of his deputies cross designated by HSI when Bush 43 was POTUS. This gave them authority in immigration and customs laws. Sheriff Joe would have his deputies arrest illegals and turn them over to HSI. The Obama administration told them to stop. They even told Border Patrol to just issue a summons to apprehended illegals (like they were going to show up). That's what happened in AZ. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MichaelDiggs 29 Posted December 10, 2017 I'm actually getting a CC permit from Utah even though I live in NJ. Just doing it to be ready if this really happens. We have a %54 chance of this bill being a law. Since I'll have a CC permit from Utah I'll be able to be in NJ, live here and carry with no ramifications because of the permit from Utah. I'll be sure to have the law on paper in my car in case I ever get stopped. It will supersede state laws since this one is federal. I really do hope it goes through, I'm just preparing and getting ready ahead of time. Don't even try to apply for a NJ permit. Never happen unless you have that justifiable need which is very hard to define. Have to spend about $200 for everything, but hey, at least I'll have a carry permit for Utah even if it all falls through. H.R. 38 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GRIZ 3,369 Posted December 10, 2017 This law goes into effect 90 days after passage. That is sufficient time for police everywhere, including NJ, to get educated on it. There were no issues in NJ that I am aware of when the Law Enforcement Officer's Safety Act went into effect. Reciprocity will affect a lot more people. I can't see police locking up people carrying under this law. More so because if they do and they're wrong the court will have to pay their attorney fees and leave the agency open for a civil rights lawsuit. Carrying a copy of the law with you doesn't make much sense for a couple of reasons. First, this is not a way to endear yourself to a LEO who's looking to arrest you. You're really calling the cop a dummy by doing this. Would you believe someone you're about to arrest who's waving a couple of sheets of paper in your face? I've had more than one person tell me I couldn't do something. If I'd listened to them it would have been a tough time for me. I knew I was acting in a legal manner. Secondly, police will be educated in this law no doubt. If you are following the law and get arrested by your attorney fees will be paid and the following lawsuit will reward you handsomely for your ordeal. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NJGF 375 Posted December 10, 2017 5 hours ago, GRIZ said: Depends on the state. Never heard of "defiant tresspass" in NJ. https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2016/title-2c/section-2c-18-3/ 2016 New Jersey Revised Statutes Section 2C:18-3 - Unlicensed Entry Of Structures; Defiant Trespasser; Peering Into Dwelling Places; Defenses. 2C:18-3. a. Unlicensed entry of structures. A person commits an offense if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or surreptitiously remains in any research facility, structure, or separately secured or occupied portion thereof, or in or upon utility company property, or in the sterile area or operational area of an airport. An offense under this subsection is a crime of the fourth degree if it is committed in a school or on school property. The offense is a crime of the fourth degree if it is committed in a dwelling. .... ..... b.Defiant trespasser. A person commits a petty disorderly persons offense if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or remains in any place as to which notice against trespass is given by: (1)Actual communication to the actor; or (2)Posting in a manner prescribed by law or reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders; or 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NJGF 375 Posted December 10, 2017 In theory one still needs a state permit to carry within 1000 feet of a school to be legal under the GFSZA and yes I know very few people care about this as it is not enforced. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MichaelDiggs 29 Posted December 10, 2017 7 hours ago, GRIZ said: This law goes into effect 90 days after passage. That is sufficient time for police everywhere, including NJ, to get educated on it. There were no issues in NJ that I am aware of when the Law Enforcement Officer's Safety Act went into effect. Reciprocity will affect a lot more people. I can't see police locking up people carrying under this law. More so because if they do and they're wrong the court will have to pay their attorney fees and leave the agency open for a civil rights lawsuit. Carrying a copy of the law with you doesn't make much sense for a couple of reasons. First, this is not a way to endear yourself to a LEO who's looking to arrest you. You're really calling the cop a dummy by doing this. Would you believe someone you're about to arrest who's waving a couple of sheets of paper in your face? I've had more than one person tell me I couldn't do something. If I'd listened to them it would have been a tough time for me. I knew I was acting in a legal manner. Secondly, police will be educated in this law no doubt. If you are following the law and get arrested by your attorney fees will be paid and the following lawsuit will reward you handsomely for your ordeal. Yea, I think providing an officer who really would perform an illegal arrest deserves the court to hear that the citizen was literally giving him the legal law on what he was doing is wrong. That would be the little twist of the knife at the end. I don't want to endear or call the officer a dummy. Just try to provide him the facts of the law and maybe he actually would take a peek. But like you said, there shouldn't be any problems and the police would be educated. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GRIZ 3,369 Posted December 10, 2017 7 hours ago, NJGF said: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2016/title-2c/section-2c-18-3/ 2016 New Jersey Revised Statutes Section 2C:18-3 - Unlicensed Entry Of Structures; Defiant Trespasser; Peering Into Dwelling Places; Defenses. 2C:18-3. a. Unlicensed entry of structures. A person commits an offense if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or surreptitiously remains in any research facility, structure, or separately secured or occupied portion thereof, or in or upon utility company property, or in the sterile area or operational area of an airport. An offense under this subsection is a crime of the fourth degree if it is committed in a school or on school property. The offense is a crime of the fourth degree if it is committed in a dwelling. .... ..... b.Defiant trespasser. A person commits a petty disorderly persons offense if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or remains in any place as to which notice against trespass is given by: (1)Actual communication to the actor; or (2)Posting in a manner prescribed by law or reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders; or Thanx for the cite. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GRIZ 3,369 Posted December 10, 2017 2 hours ago, MichaelDiggs said: Yea, I think providing an officer who really would perform an illegal arrest deserves the court to hear that the citizen was literally giving him the legal law on what he was doing is wrong. That would be the little twist of the knife at the end. I don't want to endear or call the officer a dummy. Just try to provide him the facts of the law and maybe he actually would take a peek. But like you said, there shouldn't be any problems and the police would be educated. Being responsible for payment of the defendant's legal fees and losing lawsuits will ensure police are well educated by their agencies. Be more concerned that you are carrying within the law than twisting knives. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GRIZ 3,369 Posted December 10, 2017 @MichaelDiggs having the right attitude when dealing with police is to your benefit. Many people have been let off for minor infractions because they knew how to act 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray Ray 3,566 Posted December 10, 2017 What are we discussing in these last few pages? Between the cut-N-past from government, state and local websites and the "what if" comments this has gotten out of control. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jackandjill 683 Posted December 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, Ray Ray said: What are we discussing in these last few pages? Between the cut-N-past from government, state and local websites and the "what if" comments this has gotten out of control. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mrs. Peel 7,156 Posted December 10, 2017 2 minutes ago, Ray Ray said: What are we discussing in these last few pages? Between the cut-N-past from government, state and local websites and the "what if" comments this has gotten out of control. Seriously... the topics are like little kittens scampering to and fro throughout the thread. I can no longer follow it all! My brain hurts. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites