Jump to content
JMich3

How can NJ basically eliminate CCW??

Recommended Posts

Forgive me for such a newbie question but i am just that a newbie. How is it NJ can make CCW basically impossible when the Second amendment, federal law, says its our right? I’m not trying to argue with anyone, I’m just trying to understand the basis of how it all works 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JMich3 said:

Forgive me for such a newbie question but i am just that a newbie. How is it NJ can make CCW basically impossible when the Second amendment, federal law, says its our right? I’m not trying to argue with anyone, I’m just trying to understand the basis of how it all works 

Technically N.J. is “shall issue” in that they grant CCW’s. The reality is they’re “may issue” in all but name since their “Justifiable Need” requirement is impossible to clear.  

There is no Federal law currently that would make NJ’s policy illegal.  Reciprocity would help significantly but that’s dead in committee. 

So far the courts have not decided if that policy is a violation of 2A. They have refused to pick up any 2A case. Hopefully that changes once there is a more favorable SCOTUS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THAT is the travesty of America - TWO sets of laws and rules, where states can override the American Constitution.  It should be the other way around - states need to ENFORCE the American Constitution, not violate it. 

Our nation is deep into an ideological civil war that's slowly heating up.  Patriots, be prepared for what's coming.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2018 at 8:01 PM, JMich3 said:

How is it NJ can make CCW basically impossible when the Second amendment, federal law, says its our right?

Easy question to answer. Because the residents bend over and allow it to happen. Period.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The vast majority of Americans have lost, or better yet have not been taught how this nation came to be and why, and the reason that our American constitution emphasizes the right to bear arms.  It is our birthright.  It is how we came to be.  It took firearms, bloodshed, tremendous suffering, untold hardship and massive death to form America.  It was a rebellion against a tyrannical government.  Be prepared, patriot brothers.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2018 at 8:07 PM, voyager9 said:

Technically N.J. is “shall issue” in that they grant CCW’s. The reality is they’re “may issue” in all but name since their “Justifiable Need” requirement is impossible to clear.  

There is no Federal law currently that would make NJ’s policy illegal.  Reciprocity would help significantly but that’s dead in committee. 

So far the courts have not decided if that policy is a violation of 2A. They have refused to pick up any 2A case. Hopefully that changes once there is a more favorable SCOTUS. 

I don't think so....  According to "handgunlaw.us,"  NJ is "may issue" both technically and in reality.    Still, the law probably wouldn't be challenged, and that's the problem here.  No one single individual or group of people have the resources to take NJ all the way through the court system to challenge it.   And NJ plays on that.  it has unlimited resources for fighting such challenges. 

Anyway, to answer the OP's question,  the basic problem is that NJ feels they can take the position they do because no one will challenge them or has the resources to do it.   And they count on that to make it work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2018 at 8:01 PM, JMich3 said:

Forgive me for such a newbie question but i am just that a newbie. How is it NJ can make CCW basically impossible when the Second amendment, federal law, says its our right? I’m not trying to argue with anyone, I’m just trying to understand the basis of how it all works 

How does it work? 

Politicians in NJ don't believe it's your right...

No one has told them otherwise....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

How does it work? 

Politicians in NJ don't believe it's your right...

No one has told them otherwise....

Oh, I'm sure many have told them... I'm even sure many actually know that for themselves... they just don't care... They ignore it in favor of their own agenda.

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HBecwithFn7 said:

Oh, I'm sure many have told them... I'm even sure many actually know that for themselves... they just don't care... They ignore it in favor of their own agenda.

 

Legally speaking, no one that matters...

Not a single Judge in the Supreme court of NJ, no opinions from the 3rd appellate court, and certainly nothing from SCOTUS.

Share this post


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

Legally speaking, no one that matters...

Not a single Judge in the Supreme court of NJ, no opinions from the 3rd appellate court, and certainly nothing from SCOTUS.

I can only hope that SCOTUS will be the ones to break that log jam.   But I think we need one more justice to make it happen. Because Roberts is just way too flaky.  We need to replace 'Notrious RBG" ASAP.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rfd said:

THAT is the travesty of America - TWO sets of laws and rules, where states can override the American Constitution.  It should be the other way around - states need to ENFORCE the American Constitution, not violate it. 

Our nation is deep into an ideological civil war that's slowly heating up.  Patriots, be prepared for what's coming.

 

States cannot override the Constitution or Federal law.  They can make state law more restrictive but not contrary to Federal law.  The 10th Amendment let's NJ writ their own carry permit law.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, GRIZ said:

States cannot override the Constitution or Federal law.  They can make state law more restrictive but not contrary to Federal law.  The 10th Amendment let's NJ writ their own carry permit law.

... and therein lies the problem that the apathetic American doesn't understand, hasn't been taught, could care less about, and why our country has, over the last three decades, gone progressive left wing socialist.  the patriot pot is slowly but surely heating up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Jersey has been a model of success for people who hate the Second Amendment.  As they have made it more difficult to obtain firearms, they have decreased the number of gun owners, thereby making it harder for 2A defenders to have any voice in state government so that they can continue to push through ever more restrictive laws with the ultimate objective of eliminating the private ownership of firearms 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The emigration of older NJ residents and the immigration of new residents from across the Hudson have taken its toll on Jersey politics and this once red state is now a sick blue.  the right to CCW and defend is but one of many issues chipping away at our Constitution as state after state gives way under the heat of the progressive left wing socialist media, educators, politicians, and stupid Americans who'd sell their souls for free bread and circuses.  There is a lot afoot here in the USA, and all of it is stoking the fire under the pot of Patriots.

Share this post


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

... and therein lies the problem that the apathetic American doesn't understand, hasn't been taught, could care less about, and why our country has, over the last three decades, gone progressive left wing socialist.  the patriot pot is slowly but surely heating up. 

In this case u are mistaken.

 

Are you for states rights or not?

While.i wholly agree of the travesty of the legal system and laws as they relate to firearms in nj and the way it is applied to the citizenry.

 

@GRIZis spot on..  also the NJ constitution is one that does not affirm the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

 

It is worthy to look at the majority of the states constitutions...and how they read as to firearms and self defense in self of atate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HBecwithFn7 said:

I don't think so....  According to "handgunlaw.us,"  NJ is "may issue" both technically and in reality.    Still, the law probably wouldn't be challenged, and that's the problem here.  No one single individual or group of people have the resources to take NJ all the way through the court system to challenge it.   And NJ plays on that.  it has unlimited resources for fighting such challenges. 

Anyway, to answer the OP's question,  the basic problem is that NJ feels they can take the position they do because no one will challenge them or has the resources to do it.   And they count on that to make it work. 

There are several cases challenging this, in fact one is awaiting conference for certiorari now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, USRifle30Cal said:

In this case u are mistaken.

 

Are you for states rights or not?

While.i wholly agree of the travesty of the legal system and laws as they relate to firearms in nj and the way it is applied to the citizenry.

 

@GRIZis spot on..  also the NJ constitution is one that does not affirm the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

 

It is worthy to look at the majority of the states constitutions...and how they read as to firearms and self defense in self of atate

Why would the NJ state constitution need to affirm R2KBA? It's in the Bill of Rights, for all Americans. While some states affirm that right in their constitutions, it is not necessary. States DO elaborate on castle doctrines(expanding those rights), more or less when you are allowed use of deadly force.

Even if it were in the NJ states constitution, it would be quickly ignored.... FFS its ignored as #2 right in the bill of rights. 

States rights do not triumph individuals rights as outlined in the 10A, that is not a valid argument unless you are arguing the subject isn't a right at all. 

 

A states rights issue on this subject is when and how you can use a firearm, not the possession or carry of it... NJ may say you need to try and retreat, while Texas and FL have stand your ground laws.. THIS IS STATES RIGHTS..

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Why would the NJ state constitution need to affirm R2KBA? It's in the Bill of Rights, for all Americans. While some states affirm that right in their constitutions, it is not necessary. States DO elaborate on castle doctrines(expanding those rights), more or less when you are allowed use of deadly force.

Even if it were in the NJ states constitution, it would be quickly ignored.... FFS its ignored as #2 right in the bill of rights. 

States rights do not triumph individuals rights as outlined in the 10A, that is not a valid argument unless you are arguing the subject isn't a right at all. 

 

A states rights issue on this subject is when and how you can use a firearm, not the possession or carry of it... NJ may say you need to try and retreat, while Texas and FL have stand your ground laws.. THIS IS STATES RIGHTS..

 

Well stated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, rfd said:

... and therein lies the problem that the apathetic American doesn't understand, hasn't been taught, could care less about, and why our country has, over the last three decades, gone progressive left wing socialist.  the patriot pot is slowly but surely heating up. 

Progressivism in this country started over 100 years ago not 30.  Woodrow Wilson was probably the first "progressive" POTUS.  The ideas hung around  and we're revived by FDR, our first Progressive Socialist POTUS.  FDR wanted to make Americans so dependent on the government the Democratic Party would control the country for the next 50 years.  The zenith of FDR's Socialist tendencies was after being warned by Churchill to "watch out for Stalin" he catered to Stalin.  This resulted in the division of Europe and 50 years of Cold War.  Truman and JFK were more like your traditional, old time Conservative Democrats.  If they were to run for POTUS today they'd have to run as Republicans.  The Democrats wouldn't have them.  FDR didn't save the country from the Depression and really wasn't a,great wartime leader IMO.  That's a discussion for another time.

Progressive Socialism grew under Johnson and was continued by Clinton and Obama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, GRIZ said:

Progressivism in this country started over 100 years ago not 30.  Woodrow Wilson was probably the first "progressive" POTUS.  The ideas hung around  and we're revived by FDR, our first Progressive Socialist POTUS.  FDR wanted to make Americans so dependent on the government the Democratic Party would control the country for the next 50 years.  The zenith of FDR's Socialist tendencies was after being warned by Churchill to "watch out for Stalin" he catered to Stalin.  This resulted in the division of Europe and 50 years of Cold War.  Truman and JFK were more like your traditional, old time Conservative Democrats.  If they were to run for POTUS today they'd have to run as Republicans.  The Democrats wouldn't have them.  FDR didn't save the country from the Depression and really wasn't a,great wartime leader IMO.  That's a discussion for another time.

Progressive Socialism grew under Johnson and was continued by Clinton and Obama.

 

yes, all true.  the seeds of socialism are near 200 years old here in north America.  however, it has accelerated in the last 3 decades in terms of politics, education and media to the point where it is easily recognizable by anyone with half a brain.  this was not true in the past, and the covert reasons why stupid -not ignorant- Americans will be our ruination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/7/2019 at 9:05 AM, rfd said:

 

yes, all true.  the seeds of socialism are near 200 years old here in north America.  however, it has accelerated in the last 3 decades in terms of politics, education and media to the point where it is easily recognizable by anyone with half a brain.  this was not true in the past, and the covert reasons why stupid -not ignorant- Americans will be our ruination.

I think you are making a mistake.  

Do not dismiss socialists as stupid and having half a brain. They are definitely cunning and crafty. Otherwise they never would have made the "progress" they have in the past 30 years.

Most of America is conservative. The problem is you have to prove to people that conservatism works. The last POTUS to do this was Reagan.  That's why he took 49 states in 1984.

Do not dismiss politics. Realistically politics is not getting everything you want. Politics is comprimise.  Many will shout "no comprimise" and wind up with nothing.  The idea is to.make the other side think they've won but they really got nothing.

For example, support legislation that says every FFL has to provide a gun lock with every firearm sold.  Yes, that does put a burden on FFLS and manufacturers that cost a few dollars which will be passed to the consumer.  Many would see this as an attack on the RKBA.  It would have little impact on that.  But the left would proclaim a resounding victory.

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, GRIZ said:

I think you are making a mistake.  

Do not dismiss socialists as stupid and having half a brain. They are definitely cunning and crafty. Otherwise they never would have made the "progress" they have in the past 30 years.

Most of America is conservative. The problem is you have to prove to people that conservatism works. The last POTUS to do this was Reagan.  That's why he took 49 states in 1984.

Do not dismiss politics. Realistically politics is not getting everything you want. Politics is comprimise.  Many will shout "no comprimise" and wind up with nothing.  The idea is to.make the other side think they've won but they really got nothing.

For example, support legislation that says every FFL has to provide a gun lock with every firearm sold.  Yes, that does put a burden on FFLS and manufacturers that cost a few dollars which will be passed to the consumer.  Many would see this as an attack on the RKBA.  It would have little impact on that.  But the left would proclaim a resounding victory.

 

you are preaching to the choir and  you didn't read my post at its intended meaning and you are mistaken.  i know our enemies far better than most.  the socialists are fanatics, no more or less.  they lack common sense, therefore they, too, have a half functional brain at best.  the real half-brained ones are the many Americans that are either ignorant or stupid, and vote by media populism and/or "feelings", or just don't vote.  in the course of the millennia, the pendulum of free societies swings.  the USA is clearly on the down swing and may never recover.  we shall see ... or maybe my grand children shall see. 

 

Share this post


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

Most of America is conservative. The problem is you have to prove to people that conservatism works.
 

 

I agree with you that most of mainstream America is conservative, but I believe the problem is that the Dems have brought in 30 million needy immigrants from Third World countries to drown out our voices and keep them in power.  Many experts believe that Trump is the last Republican president we will ever see, for exactly that reason.  (Cheery thought, I know.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/6/2019 at 4:51 PM, JackDaWack said:

Why would the NJ state constitution need to affirm R2KBA? It's in the Bill of Rights, for all Americans. While some states affirm that right in their constitutions, it is not necessary. States DO elaborate on castle doctrines(expanding those rights), more or less when you are allowed use of deadly force.

Even if it were in the NJ states constitution, it would be quickly ignored.... FFS its ignored as #2 right in the bill of rights. 

States rights do not triumph individuals rights as outlined in the 10A, that is not a valid argument unless you are arguing the subject isn't a right at all. 

 

A states rights issue on this subject is when and how you can use a firearm, not the possession or carry of it... NJ may say you need to try and retreat, while Texas and FL have stand your ground laws.. THIS IS STATES RIGHTS..

 

What I am trying to show is that at some states level the right of the people to keep and bear arms is enacted in their states consitution's as well as the USCONN affirmation.  NJ seems to not have that - it is interesting reading

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, GRIZ said:

I think you are making a mistake.  

Do not dismiss socialists as stupid and having half a brain. They are definitely cunning and crafty. Otherwise they never would have made the "progress" they have in the past 30 years.

Most of America is conservative. The problem is you have to prove to people that conservatism works. The last POTUS to do this was Reagan.  That's why he took 49 states in 1984.

Do not dismiss politics. Realistically politics is not getting everything you want. Politics is comprimise.  Many will shout "no comprimise" and wind up with nothing.  The idea is to.make the other side think they've won but they really got nothing.

For example, support legislation that says every FFL has to provide a gun lock with every firearm sold.  Yes, that does put a burden on FFLS and manufacturers that cost a few dollars which will be passed to the consumer.  Many would see this as an attack on the RKBA.  It would have little impact on that.  But the left would proclaim a resounding victory.

 

Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak. If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him

 

 

“All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.”

 

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...



×
×
  • Create New...