Jump to content
reloaderguy

New Step Added To Pistol Permits

Recommended Posts

Just talking to my neighbor who just got back from the permit office and he told me that once all the paperwork is back including the mental health check they now have to send the mental health check back to the State Police to be signed off on. Has anyone heard of this? Where we usually got our permits in 4 weeks she told him it will now take 6-8weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BH is reporting 3-6 months for newbies.  No idea on the lag for renewals.  I was told traffic is up 3x over normal, and I bet it gets worse.

Oasshole wishes he could have created a firearms bump in this state like muffdiver is doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That does not sound right.  The State Police runs the SP-066 report and provides the results to the local PD.  See below:

I, __________________________________________________ am aware of my rights under N.J.S.A. 30:4-24.3, and the

Health Insurance Portability and Insurance Accountability Act (HIPAA), 45 C.F.R. 164.50, and consent to the disclosure of

my mental health records to the Chief of Police and the Su per in ten dent of State Police, or their designees, for the purpose of

verifying my fi rearms permit application and my fi t ness to own a fi re arm under N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3. I understand that copies

of this authorization shall be considered suffi cient authorization for the release of records.

 

Sending the report back to the State Police after the State Police send it to the local PD makes no sense. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, 1LtCAP said:

ALMOST sounds like the local pd trying to add something extra, like cherry hill was adding extra forms.......

Last time I obtained a permit (a few years ago), Cherry Hill was still adding the next-of-kin form - and refused to process without it being return and notarized.  Does anyone have information on whether this is still taking place in C.H.?  I could try to swing by next week when I'm off and request new paperwork, even though I'm not submitting for anything, and see if they still insist on that form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, reloaderguy said:

Not really. He was there yesterday

Does not mean that his local PD is adding something that is not even a legal requirement at this time...so I stand by my comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kwadz said:

Last time I obtained a permit (a few years ago), Cherry Hill was still adding the next-of-kin form - and refused to process without it being return and notarized.  Does anyone have information on whether this is still taking place in C.H.?  I could try to swing by next week when I'm off and request new paperwork, even though I'm not submitting for anything, and see if they still insist on that form.

Illegal.  I wouldn't have done and asked them to process it.  If they didn't I'd have called on of the two 2a groups in NJ and a lawyer.  It's illegal to add to the already effing, shitty, stupid, meaningless process with even more stupid stuff

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob0115 said:

Illegal.  I wouldn't have done and asked them to process it.  If they didn't I'd have called on of the two 2a groups in NJ and a lawyer.  It's illegal to add to the already effing, shitty, stupid, meaningless process with even more stupid stuff

I agree that it's illegal and I informed them of this.  They told me that without filling it out, they would not process further.  My wife and I (ironically, each other's next of kin) both had stuff on hold at different FFLs and couldn't pick them up without permits.  While it sounds heroic and awesome to refuse, go to court, pay thousands of dollars out of pocket to sue them, and then finally get the permits 2 or 3 years later, we decided that this time we would want to take ownership of our already-purchased goods.

That being said, it's been on my to-do list to go back there, apply for more permits (that I may not necessarily need for any specific purchase in the near future), and then try this step.  But I was promised by ANJRPC 3 years ago that they would add Cherry Hill to their project strikeforce or whatever they named it to force the township into compliance.  I figured if they were willing to do it, I would see how that played out.  Crickets since then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it really incumbent on the individual to obtain and pay for legal representation when a municipal entity is in violation of state law? Shouldn't you be able to file a complaint against the PD with the county prosecutor for that jurisdiction?

Just curious.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"All Police departments should be aware that N.J.S. 2C: 58-3.f states, in part, “There shall be
no
conditions or requirements added to the form or content of the application, or required by the
licensing authority for the issuance of a permit or identification card, other than those that are
specifically set forth in this chapter.”

 

verbatim

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pizza Bob said:

Is it really incumbent on the individual to obtain and pay for legal representation when a municipal entity is in violation of state law? Shouldn't you be able to file a complaint against the PD with the county prosecutor for that jurisdiction?

Just curious.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

Yes and the prosecutor then has to do an investigation. That in itself can convince the pd to change their ways.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, revenger said:

"All Police departments should be aware that N.J.S. 2C: 58-3.f states, in part, “There shall be
no conditions or requirements added to the form or content of the application, or required by the
licensing authority for the issuance of a permit or identification card, other than those that are
specifically set forth in this chapter.”

 

verbatim

Yup.  I quoted this directly to them and they simply said, "No.  This is OUR form.  If you don't fill it out, we don't process your application."  Period.  They truly don't care that it's against the law.  Like I said, we had stuff on hold at two different FFLs and didn't have 12-24 months for this to play out.  Plus, this is Camden County.  If you know anything about politics here, the county prosecutor would consider it a joke.  Like I said, though, now that I have no plans to purchase anything, I may try pursuing that route some day when I have time.  Of course, that means taking off work to arrive during their limited business hours to get a form, spending the $20+$2 of my own money for the background check/investigation, and starting the process from there.  I don't object to doing any of that, but it is something on the back burner right now compared to other things in my life.  Personally, a form that my wife signs and her form that I sign is not an issue for us since both of us shoot.  But from a legal standpoint, and in other households where it may be a problem, I agree totally that this form needs to go.  Keep in mind that there are hundreds, probably thousands, of Cherry Hill residents who have also filled out that form and not refused for the same reasons - they already had purchases lined up and didn't want to lose them. 

If I have some time next week (with time off from work), I may try to make it over there.  I don't want to hijack this thread more than I already have (sorry OP!!!), so please follow me over to an old thread specifically about Cherry Hill where I can solicit some advice and a game plan from you guys:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kwadz said:

Yup.  I quoted this directly to them and they simply said, "No.  This is OUR form.  If you don't fill it out, we don't process your application."  Period.  They truly don't care that it's against the law

 

Sadly, this mindset is what I fear you'll have to look forward to if/when "national reciprocity" ever happens.  States like the PRNJ will totally ignore it... taking a "So sue us..." position... knowing they'll probably have the legal/financial resources to outlast any such plaintiff.  Again, the only way to ensure compliance with national reciprocity that I think would be effective is to tie it to federal funding to that given state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another reason to say goodbye to NJ - they run amok of personal liberty of its law abiding citizens and could care less if *they* the powers that be, break the law....and willingly flaunt it in the face of its citizens.

 

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kwadz,   If you are not buying anything you should at least set them straight,   call the NJSP firearms unit and tell them what they told you.   one thing the Troopers DO NOT LIKE  is when a local interferes with their process.    I corrected the quote in my original reply to add the bold as that is how it is written for the locals.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2017 at 7:18 AM, HBecwithFn7 said:

Sadly, this mindset is what I fear you'll have to look forward to if/when "national reciprocity" ever happens.  States like the PRNJ will totally ignore it... taking a "So sue us..." position... knowing they'll probably have the legal/financial resources to outlast any such plaintiff.  Again, the only way to ensure compliance with national reciprocity that I think would be effective is to tie it to federal funding to that given state.

The best way to insure compliance is to make the state pays the plaintiffs legals bills should the plaintiff prevail. That will shut down the "we don't care" shit right away.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, brucin said:

The best way to insure compliance is to make the state pays the plaintiffs legals bills should the plaintiff prevail. That will shut down the "we don't care" shit right away.

But how long will that take (until summary adjudication)? The state can delay...delay....delay until the plaintiff runs out of money and can't proceed any further.  But the one thing they do understand is receipt of Federal aid.  They understand that real good.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I not sure but I think  they did that with Federal Highway Funds when the drinking age was raised to 21. States that didn't comply would no longer receive the $. All states complied. Not a constitutional issue for sure but similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently heard a radio commercial that was from the NJ AG's office explaining some new program to report rouge cops,  although they were in no linking it to these cops who make up their own laws on guns as they really dont give a shit but maybe we can use it for that as well as other firearm related things.     If I hear it again I'll write down what this program is called,  I checked their website but couldn't find anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2017 at 5:15 PM, Pizza Bob said:

Is it really incumbent on the individual to obtain and pay for legal representation when a municipal entity is in violation of state law? Shouldn't you be able to file a complaint against the PD with the county prosecutor for that jurisdiction?

Just curious.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

Bob,

I think the NJ Attorney General has an Office of Civil Rights. That would probably be the office that should investigate and fight the town on your behalf. However, since the State of NJ doesn't believe in civil rights when it comes to firearms ownership, you would probably be out of luck! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2017 at 5:15 PM, Pizza Bob said:

Is it really incumbent on the individual to obtain and pay for legal representation when a municipal entity is in violation of state law? Shouldn't you be able to file a complaint against the PD with the county prosecutor for that jurisdiction?

Just curious.

 

I think the county prosecutor would probably be reluctant to bring such charges against  the PD.  Remember, they are co-dependent on each other in re: their regular work. It's just like good LEOs tolerating bad ones and not ratting them out. You might just have to depend on that bad LEO for backup in a deep dark alley one night.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, brucin said:

I not sure but I think  they did that with Federal Highway Funds when the drinking age was raised to 21. States that didn't comply would no longer receive the $. All states complied. Not a constitutional issue for sure but similar.

Yes, they did. And there was resistance to do it again in other cases. Which is why it may not happen with this one.

But if ever there was a case for braking that policy,  national reciprocity is it!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, brucin said:

The best way to insure compliance is to make the state pays the plaintiffs legals bills should the plaintiff prevail. That will shut down the "we don't care" shit right away.

No it wouldn't.  It's not the offenders money, it's tax payers money.  Now if the offenders were held personally liable,  that would stop this crap in a second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...