Jump to content
kc17

Permit case going to NJ Supreme Court

Recommended Posts

I didn't see this mentioned previously, admins my apologies and lock/merge if it is.

Nappen has a client that was approved a Carry permit by local PD but the Sheriff County Superior Court shot it down with no hearing. The realist/pessimist in me says this will turn out like the kidnap victim case, permit will be issued to make it go away. I think that was the case anyway...

 

http://www.evannappen.com/supreme-court-to-hear-nappen-law-firmrsquos-legal-challenge-to-new-jersey-carry-permit-law.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kc17 said:

I didn't see this mentioned previously, admins my apologies and lock/merge if it is.

Nappen has a client that was approved a Carry permit by local PD but the Sheriff shot it down with no hearing. The realist/pessimist in me says this will turn out like the kidnap victim case, permit will be issued to make it go away. I think that was the case anyway...

 

http://www.evannappen.com/supreme-court-to-hear-nappen-law-firmrsquos-legal-challenge-to-new-jersey-carry-permit-law.html

It wasn’t the sheriff but the court that denied his application.  

On the merits as defined in the article:  I don’t see #1 being upheld by NJSC too much jersey. #2 is interesting. Maybe. #3 may be upheld but then N.J. will just hold a kangaroo hearing (and charge a fee for it). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree they will probably just issue the permit to make it go away. 

On another note I did not know nappen has his own websight. Quite a bit of fear mongering going on over there. I'm not surprised. Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

It wasn’t the sheriff but the court that denied his application.  

On the merits as defined in the article:  I don’t see #1 being upheld by NJSC too much jersey. #2 is interesting. Maybe. #3 may be upheld but then N.J. will just hold a kangaroo hearing (and charge a fee for it). 

I stand corrected. My speed reading/comprehension failed me on that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I of course hope Nappen wins this for his client but the Supreme Court describes the issue on appeal as one of due process and the right to a hearing, not whether "justifiable need" is valid anymore: "Among other issues, was petitioner entitled to a hearing on his application for a permit to carry a handgun?"

Also, others may correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that a few years ago, when SCOTUS was considering whether to grant cert. in Drake, the NJ Supreme Court granted cert. in a carry case only to revoke it once SCOTUS denied cert. in Drake.  I wonder if the NJ Supreme Court is trying to send a message to SCOTUS to deny cert. in Rogers so as to allow the NJ Supreme Court to weigh in on "justifiable need" first?  I may be cynical, but perhaps this strategy is at play again and the State's delay in briefing Rogers is/was designed to allow the NJ Supreme Court time to grant cert, in Nappen's case before SCOTUS could in Rogers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2019 at 8:10 PM, fishnut said:

On another note I did not know nappen has his own websight. Quite a bit of fear mongering going on over there. I'm not surprised. Lol

Fudd be damned.  I disagree with you.   The lawful citizen should be secure in his or her person and property and NOT subject to the whims of an unjust and tyrannical government no matter how slight the perceived risk.  There should be a healthy fear of an out-of-control government seeking more power. That is NOT fear mongering or exaggerating.  One should NOT underestimate its foe.  A non-violent individual not otherwise committing a crime should NOT be subjected to thousands of dollars in fines and lawyers fees, and NOT be subjugated and put in jail, and of course live in fear.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2019 at 4:59 PM, Underdog said:

Fudd be damned.  I disagree with you.   The lawful citizen should be secure in his or her person and property and NOT subject to the whims of an unjust and tyrannical government no matter how slight the perceived risk.  There should be a healthy fear of an out-of-control government seeking more power. That is NOT fear mongering or exaggerating.  One should NOT underestimate its foe.  A non-violent individual not otherwise committing a crime should NOT be subjected to thousands of dollars in fines and lawyers fees, and NOT be subjugated and put in jail.  

So do you transport loaded mags to the range? According to the state police it is totally legal but this is what happen has to say on the topic

"Here is the third in the series of tips by Evan Nappen. 3. The ‘ammo in the glovebox myth’. There are certain myths that New Jersey gun owners may have heard out there, and one of these myths is “you transport your guns in the trunk and your ammunition in the glovebox.” Nothing could be further from the truth. The exemptions in 2C:39-6g require that your gun be unloaded. The ammunition can be right next to your gun, even in the same box case. But don’t have it loaded in any magazines because if the magazine is loaded, they will claim the gun is loaded."

Now that was from us law shield not nappen websight but I'm guessing that is also somewhere in his websight. That is fear mongering in my opinion. I'm not the only one who feels this way either 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Tunaman said:

Sure it might be legal to have them loaded,  but it may cost you 10000 bucks to find out in court.  Why would you put yourself in that position?

Can you provide an example of someone in NJ who was arrested for transporting loaded mags and was charged with transportation of a loaded firearm? 

10000 bucks? Even if a person was wrongfully arrested by a cop who did not know the law a drunk public defender would be able to get the case thrown out. 

However my point was that nappen tends to be a fear monger and that was the first example that came to mind. 

Maybe an attorney who actually lives in NJ would like to weigh in on the topic @JasonSeidman

Also there is this right from his websight. 

 http://www.evannappen.com/possible-defense-for-possessing-a-shockwave.html

And how many members here have a shockwave? Has anyone been arrested for owning a shockwave? 

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2019 at 6:34 PM, fishnut said:

Can you provide an example of someone in NJ who was arrested for transporting loaded mags and was charged with transportation of a loaded firearm? 

10000 bucks? Even if a person was wrongfully arrested by a cop who did not know the law a drunk public defender would be able to get the case thrown out. 

However my point was that nappen tends to be a fear monger and that was the first example that came to mind. 

Maybe an attorney who actually lives in NJ would like to weigh in on the topic @JasonSeidman

Also there is this right from his websight. 

 http://www.evannappen.com/possible-defense-for-possessing-a-shockwave.html

And how many members here have a shockwave? Has anyone been arrested for owning a shockwave? 

YOU JUST WON THE INTERNET FOR TODAY!

WELL SAID!

Rosey

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass carry  permit case similar to NJ permit case now also  pending  cert  in U.S. Supreme court

 

In the
Supreme Court of the United States ________________
MICHAEL GOULD, et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
MARK MORGAN, in his Official Capacity as Acting
Chief of the Brookline Police Department, et al.,
Respondents.
________________
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United
States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
________________
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
________________
 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, Fishy.   Nappen exaggerates to make a point.   He warns people of the pitfalls in NJ.    Maybe he is making money off his presentations and his book, etc.but HIS NJ -based law firm is not lacking business in the Republik due to largely unjust laws and enthusiastic statists.  There are numerous examples in which NJ citizens have found themselves on the wrong side of the law and for mere technicalities and mala prohibitus. There have been many Jersians peacefully minding their own business and who have been targets of enthusiastic LEOs and over-zealous and agenda-driven  DAs and judges.   Many people are unaware of the laws and as they say ignorance is bliss.  No wait, the age -old proverb "Ignorance is no excuse of the law" still applies.   So maybe no Shockwave but what about an elderly gentleman who no longer needs firearms and advertises the M1 Carbine that he has had in his closet for many years for sale?   Or what about playing with a sling shot purchased legally at a Wal-Mart about 30 miles from your home and a cruiser drives by?  Or perhaps an older, professional black gentleman and friend who is a gun owner because I introduced him to firearms, but not an enthusiast, and on his yearly visit to the range he stops at Dunkin Donuts and has his range bag unsecured/unfastened/unlocked in his locked SUV on the rear passenger seat as he goes inside to get coffee and drop the kids off at the pool.  And a peace officer pulls into an adjacent spot and the observant officer notices the Midway bag on the back seat.  Will the MAN in the uniform having a slow and bad day just go about his day and get his donut?  Will my dear dumbass friend with his latte and his  encased 15-round magazine loaded with hollow points and his separated, but not securely fastened Beretta, or possibly Glock 19, and the illegal stop to find relief and caffeine escape the colorblind officer and enjoy a peaceful and Constitutional day at the range or is he going to shit his pants?   Fish I assume you are a LEO.  What would the outcome be in these scenarios?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2019 at 5:24 PM, fishnut said:

So do you transport loaded mags to the range? According to the state police it is totally legal but this is what happen has to say on the topic

"Here is the third in the series of tips by Evan Nappen. 3. The ‘ammo in the glovebox myth’. There are certain myths that New Jersey gun owners may have heard out there, and one of these myths is “you transport your guns in the trunk and your ammunition in the glovebox.” Nothing could be further from the truth. The exemptions in 2C:39-6g require that your gun be unloaded. The ammunition can be right next to your gun, even in the same box case. But don’t have it loaded in any magazines because if the magazine is loaded, they will claim the gun is loaded."

Now that was from us law shield not nappen websight but I'm guessing that is also somewhere in his websight. That is fear mongering in my opinion. I'm not the only one who feels this way either 

Nappen isn't the only one.  Scott Bach said as much in his intro speech to Cherry Ridge.  My buddy and I looked at each other pretty incredulously.  Then he said it again to make his point.  

I emailed him about it.  He promised to be more cautious in his explanation.  I've not sat in to check.  

  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In what I read from Nappen  the ammo needs to be in a separate  compartment from the firearm. The firearm needs to be locked, or securely fastened and away from passengers in vehicle. I don't know what Law Shield is saying.  Again it is a technicality what case, lock, securly, mag/gun all means and it is Left up to subjective interpretation with potential severe outcomes.  

 

Living in the armpit stinks.   Again, what are you guys trying to say?  Common sense and justice will win the day?   Live in a state of ignorant bliss?  You will be ok if you don't buy that Shockwave?  Bump stocks are ok just don't accidentally or purposefu!ly call attention to yourself?  The sky is not falling?  Your freedoms aren't too or unreasonably being infringed?

Share this post


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

OK, Fishy.   Nappen exaggerates to make a point.   He warns people of the pitfalls in NJ.    Maybe he is making money off his presentations and his book, etc.but HIS NJ -based law firm is not lacking business in the Republik due to largely unjust laws and enthusiastic statists.  There are numerous examples in which NJ citizens have found themselves on the wrong side of the law and for mere technicalities and mala prohibitus. There have been many Jersians peacefully minding their own business and who have been targets of enthusiastic LEOs and over-zealous and agenda-driven  DAs and judges.   Many people are unaware of the laws and as they say ignorance is bliss.  No wait, the age -old proverb "Ignorance is no excuse of the law" still applies.   So maybe no Shockwave but what about an elderly gentleman who no longer needs firearms and advertises the M1 Carbine that he has had in his closet for many years for sale?   Or what about playing with a sling shot purchased legally at a Wal-Mart about 30 miles from your home and a cruiser drives by?  Or perhaps an older, professional black gentleman and friend who is a gun owner because I introduced him to firearms, but not an enthusiast, and on his yearly visit to the range he stops at Dunkin Donuts and has his range bag unsecured/unfastened/unlocked in his locked SUV on the rear passenger seat as he goes inside to get coffee and drop the kids off at the pool.  And a peace officer pulls into an adjacent spot and the observant officer notices the Midway bag on the back seat.  Will the MAN in the uniform having a slow and bad day just go about his day and get his donut?  Will my dear dumbass friend with his latte and his  encased 15-round magazine loaded with hollow points and his separated, but not securely fastened Beretta, or possibly Glock 19, and the illegal stop to find relief and caffeine escape the colorblind officer and enjoy a peaceful and Constitutional day at the range or is he going to shit his pants?   Fish I assume you are a LEO.  What would the outcome be in these scenarios?  

Nope, not LEO at all. You know what they say about assuming things.......

Can you provide any actual arrests and outcomes similar to any of the hypothetical situations you outlined?

If someone tries to sell an M1 carbine and gets jammed up it sucks but as you said ignorance of the law is not an excuse. 

There is nothing illegal about your second hypothetical situation that is illegal besides posession of 15 round mags. Also there would be no probable cause for a cop to search his car without consent 

As far as slingshots go, to my knowledge no one has ever been jammed up for posession of one, hell harbor freight in greenbrook sells them in their store  

Share this post


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

In what I read from Nappen  the ammo needs to be in a separate  compartment from the firearm. The firearm needs to be locked, or securely fastened and away from passengers in vehicle. 

Not true for all guns 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has turned into the "Do YOU transport loaded mags" thread of 2019!  

IANAL.  That being said...remember that Lawyers are paid to keep you out of jail, NOT tell you what the law says.  There's a HUGE difference.  Staying out of jail, in the extreme sense, means we each tuck our tail between our legs and walk around with a guilty look on our collective kissers.  Downtrodden, BEAT, on the DEFENSE at all times.  Transporting according to FOPA Rules while still inside NJ.  Do most of you know the difference?  Can you type it w/o looking it up?  I Doubt it.  Doing it lawfully and doing it "Candy-Ass style" are completely different.  Lawyers always give advice on the extreme side of surrendering your 2A rights.  That way no one can point fingers and say "He told me xyz about transportation" under cross examination.  They always take the safe play.  And you lose rights that way!

I choose to push the envelope.  A "secure package" is brown craft paper & bakery string.  On your front seat.  Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrr locked in the trunk of an automobile, completely naked, no case, holster or box or other impediment of access of any type or kind, and then merely tossed into the trunk to get scratched by the other 199 naked, UNLOADED firearms contained therein :)  My 12th grade edumacation taught my punctuation and its' MEANING.

If the next wiz-bang lawyer tells you to remove your firing pins or field strip prior to transporting, are you Richard Craniums going to comply & say "YES SIR, MORE PLEASE!" Just askin' for a friend...

~R

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Smokin .50 said:

If the next wiz-bang lawyer tells you to remove your firing pins or field strip prior to transporting, are you Richard Craniums going to comply & say "YES SIR, MORE PLEASE!"

Sadly, yes they will.

tenor.gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2019 at 6:34 PM, fishnut said:

Can you provide an example of someone in NJ who was arrested for transporting loaded mags and was charged with transportation of a loaded firearm? 

10000 bucks? Even if a person was wrongfully arrested by a cop who did not know the law a drunk public defender would be able to get the case thrown out. 

However my point was that nappen tends to be a fear monger and that was the first example that came to mind. 

Maybe an attorney who actually lives in NJ would like to weigh in on the topic @JasonSeidman

Also there is this right from his websight. 

 http://www.evannappen.com/possible-defense-for-possessing-a-shockwave.html

And how many members here have a shockwave? Has anyone been arrested for owning a shockwave? 

Right after the part he has underlined to support his argument that a shockwave is a destructive device it says, "any weapon capable of firing a projectile of a caliber greater than 60 caliber, except a shotgun or shotgun ammunition generally recognized as suitable for sporting purposes" 

It exempts firearms that shoot shotgun ammo right after he stops underlining.

The guy will get his permit & go away, Nappen gets paid from the Go Fund Me, and also gets free advertising material for his next client. 

I assure you he wants no changes in the law. He's just here to make a living. 

Screenshot_20190404-110737_Chrome.jpg

  • Agree 1

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...