Rob0115 1,105 Posted March 25, 2019 https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2019/03/john-boch/illinois-circuit-judge-rules-foid-card-unconstitutional-attorney-general-reportedly-appealing-to-il-supreme-court/ NJ’s requirements don’t appear as strict as Illinois in that you can own a firearm with the FPID it seems you cannot in Illinois but if this keeps going up the court system it may be a break for NJ 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sota 1,191 Posted March 25, 2019 still not following a TTAG link... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartiati 63 Posted March 26, 2019 Interesting, but the judge isn’t saying FOID in general is unconstitutional, but rather it is an impossible burden to require a person to have in there possession at all times an FOID card in the home in order to possess a weapon according to state statute in the home. He makes the argument that the way the law is written everyone in the home would need to have an FOID in order for there to be a firearm in the home because according to the definition of possession all in the house are technically in possession. Stange case will be interesting to see where this lands. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SJG 253 Posted March 26, 2019 No relevance to N.J. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray Ray 3,566 Posted March 27, 2019 22 hours ago, SJG said: No relevance to N.J. Not true, IF they appeal to the supreme court. All fees are ruled Unconstitutional. 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartiati 63 Posted March 27, 2019 That’s not the argument. Has nothing to do with fees. The judge is only saying it is unconstitutional to require the ID to possess in the home. This will not help us. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SJG 253 Posted March 27, 2019 1 hour ago, Ray Ray said: Not true, IF they appeal to the supreme court. All fees are ruled Unconstitutional. Any decision of the IL. Supreme Court has no binding or precedential impact in N.J. This case is just not U. S. Supreme Court material. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray Ray 3,566 Posted March 27, 2019 38 minutes ago, Spartiati said: That’s not the argument. Has nothing to do with fees. The judge is only saying it is unconstitutional to require the ID to possess in the home. This will not help us. 9 minutes ago, SJG said: Any decision of the IL. Supreme Court has no binding or precedential impact in N.J. This case is just not U. S. Supreme Court material. If Illinios appeals it goes to the Supreme Court! Fuck, pay attention. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartiati 63 Posted March 27, 2019 10 minutes ago, Ray Ray said: If Illinios appeals it goes to the Supreme Court! Fuck, pay attention. Read the opinion regardless of whether or not it goes to SCOTUS it doesn’t challenge NJ regime except you can’t require in FID in the home which we already have. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray Ray 3,566 Posted March 27, 2019 1 hour ago, Spartiati said: Read the opinion regardless of whether or not it goes to SCOTUS it doesn’t challenge NJ regime except you can’t require in FID in the home which we already have. Did you not just watch the video? If it goes to the SCOTUS and loses YOU CAN NO LONGER REQUIRE A PERMIT OR CHARGE FOR ONE! Fuck! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kawi7 52 Posted March 27, 2019 Here is why it was ruled unconstitutional.. Due to the language of 430 ILCS 65/2(a)(l) and the Court’s interpretation of the statute, it is clear that compliance is impossible when one is in ·their own home. No person could have their FOID card on their person 24 hours each and every day when firearms or ammunition are in the house. In addition, every person in the home (family member, friend, spouse, etc.) who has knowledge of the firearms or ammunition and has immediate and exclusive control of the area where the firearms or ammunition is located, who does not have a FOID card, would be in violation of the statute Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,417 Posted March 27, 2019 24 minutes ago, Ray Ray said: YOU CAN NO LONGER REQUIRE A PERMIT OR CHARGE FOR ONE Fuck! It would instantaneously redefine the F in FOID Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartiati 63 Posted March 28, 2019 2 hours ago, Ray Ray said: Did you not just watch the video? If it goes to the SCOTUS and loses YOU CAN NO LONGER REQUIRE A PERMIT OR CHARGE FOR ONE! Fuck! What video? I don’t need to watch a video I read the opinion. The opinion is that the law is not constitutional because it is an impossible burden in the home. It doesn’t say a thing about the fee. Read the opinion. This will do nothing in NJ. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PeteF 1,044 Posted March 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Spartiati said: What video? I don’t need to watch a video I read the opinion. The opinion is that the law is not constitutional because it is an impossible burden in the home. It doesn’t say a thing about the fee. Read the opinion. This will do nothing in NJ. You must have missed a part. Read 10. 10. In this case the facts show the defendant possessed a gun, in her house, for the purpose of self-defense without a FOID card. To require the defendant to fill out a form, provide a picture ID and pay a $10 fee to obtain a FOID card before she can exercise her constitutional right to self-defense with a firearm is a violation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the States and a violation of...... The video says that the Illinois SC, is leaning to uphold the lower court decision. So as @Ray Ray says if this does go to SCOTUS, it is a very big deal as all fees could be ruled unconstitutional. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray Ray 3,566 Posted March 28, 2019 Thank you @PeteF IF this goes to the SC and IF it is ruled unconstitutional then our whole permit system will be taken down, and the current fees along with these new "fees" they want to implement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted March 28, 2019 @Ray Ray. Good job widdle buddy! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray Ray 3,566 Posted March 28, 2019 9 hours ago, PeteF said: You must have missed a part. Read 10. 10. In this case the facts show the defendant possessed a gun, in her house, for the purpose of self-defense without a FOID card. To require the defendant to fill out a form, provide a picture ID and pay a $10 fee to obtain a FOID card before she can exercise her constitutional right to self-defense with a firearm is a violation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the States and a violation of...... The video says that the Illinois SC, is leaning to uphold the lower court decision. So as @Ray Ray says if this does go to SCOTUS, it is a very big deal as all fees could be ruled unconstitutional. The only way for us to lose is: 1. They don't appeal and allow the FOID cards to be null and void. They did this with concealed carry. Instead of appealing to the SC and possibly losing it nationally, they backed off to save other states to keep their anti 2A laws. 2. They appeal and the SC rules in their favor. Then we're fucked. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
raz-0 1,256 Posted March 28, 2019 22 hours ago, Spartiati said: Read the opinion regardless of whether or not it goes to SCOTUS it doesn’t challenge NJ regime except you can’t require in FID in the home which we already have. Yes and no. Initially I agreed with you. However on further consideration I believe there is a small and potentially pertinent area of overlap. The argument is that given that possession in the home is clearly protected by heller, and that constructive possession is a crime, it is impossible to comply with the law short of firearms being excluded from the home. NJ permits are required not for possession, but transfer. However, constructive possession is still a thing in NJ. given the laws we passed about person to person transfers, and what constitutes a transfer in NJ, one can reach the same conclusion. Without exclusion of firearms form the home, everyone in the home is potentially guilty of constructive possession, and being in possession without a legal transfer is forbidden. There's some i dotting and t crossing to be done, but I suspect you can reasonably reach the same conclusion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kawi7 52 Posted March 28, 2019 There’s a big difference in what Illinois has and what NJ has... Illinois has a FOID (Firearms Owners Identification Card) needed for mere possession of a firearm.. NJ has a Firearms Purchaser Identification Card, which in not required for possession.. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites