Jump to content
fslater

Possession IN NJ Of Self Made Firearm

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, SmittyMHS said:

A lotta peps interpret what the law says differently then what a DA might.

That’s always been the case. It starts with the arresting officer. This is why we have a court system, although sometimes imperfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Zeke said:

That’s always been the case. It starts with the arresting officer. This is why we have a court system, although sometimes imperfect.

Unless you're an urban minority youth, in possession of a gun illegally, then the gun charges get dropped.

You will read about the charges in paper, but 95% dropped.

They know how to game the system.

Share this post


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

A lotta peps interpret what the law says differently then what a DA might.

Well, a lot of people don't read the laws.. at least in there entirety. And some DA openly ignore parts of the law.. 

Besides, its not entirely legally to pass laws the general public can't understand..you shouldn't need a lawyer to figure out how to follow a law.

 

The NJSP right on their website says bullets with a polymer filled tip are not hollow point.. didn't stop a cop from arresting that security guard. 

Share this post


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

Well, a lot of people don't read the laws.. at least in there entirety. And some DA openly ignore parts of the law.. 

Besides, its not entirely legally to pass laws the general public can't understand..you shouldn't need a lawyer to figure out how to follow a law.

 

The NJSP right on their website says bullets with a polymer filled tip are not hollow point.. didn't stop a cop from arresting that security guard. 

I couldn't agree with you more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Grapeshot said:

So, a lot of people in the black powder community build their own rifles and pistols. Is this now illegal? 

First Rule of Fight Club:  NOBODY TALKS ABOUT FIGHT CLUB!

~R

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2020 at 12:36 PM, PK90 said:

I see nothing wrong with assembling out of NJ, then possessing the completed firearm in NJ.

My $0.02 and worth about that on a good day. 

The statute seems to indicate the illegal act is obtaining parts used to create an untraceable firearm (and oddly, I think if it ever comes to it, the fact that isn't defined anywhere will come into play as to what that means).  If you have a fully built and functional non-serialized firearm, you have clearly obtained the part to create it. More importantly, that firearm could be taken apart and used to assemble a whole other firearm. 

It'll get hard into the semantics of constructive intent and what is is. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, raz-0 said:

The statute seems to indicate the illegal act is obtaining parts used to create an untraceable firearm (and oddly, I think if it ever comes to it, the fact that isn't defined anywhere will come into play as to what that means).  If you have a fully built and functional non-serialized firearm, you have clearly obtained the part to create it

Thanks, I was starting to question my sanity and my understanding of the word "obtain."

I think "untraceable" is, unfortunately, well defined in the statute - the firearm doesn't have a serial number that traces back to a federally licensed manufacturer.

Believe me, I wanted an 80% handgun lower manufactured in another state and then brought into NJ to be an effective legal loophole in case I ever had a friend or loved one in a "Carol Bowne" type situation, where they were threatened and didn't have enough time to get a handgun via the NJ permitting process.  I even paid for a consultation with Joshua Prince in PA to ensure that there were no legal snags on the PA side of the border with a NJ resident finishing an 80% frame in PA, but that was before the most recent ghost law was passed.

I don't agree with every opinion from Evan Nappen (especially his belief that carrying of tasers/stun guns is still illegal), but I do think he's got the right interpretation here.

NJ's AG obviously does...not...like firearms that come into NJ outside of the FID/FFL/purchase permit process - in addition to the "ghost gun" laws, they've also outlawed the possession/transmission of files for 3D printing of firearms; how that ban, which is an obvious 1st amendment infringement, is still in effect boggles me. 

If you want to go ahead and do it anyway because "Molon Labe" or "Free men don't ask permission", by all means, but I wouldn't take it out in public in NJ and you'll always have the risk that it will come to NJ's attention if you get involved in a bad relationship split, house fire, red flagged, etc.  I'm very skeptical that the "but I didn't manufacture it in NJ" fact is going to make a prosecutor tuck tail and run if a "ghost gun" charge comes up.


 

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, DirtyDigz said:

Thanks, I was starting to question my sanity and my understanding of the word "obtain."

I think "untraceable" is, unfortunately, well defined in the statute - the firearm doesn't have a serial number that traces back to a federally licensed manufacturer.

Believe me, I wanted an 80% handgun lower manufactured in another state and then brought into NJ to be an effective legal loophole in case I ever had a friend or loved one in a "Carol Bowne" type situation, where they were threatened and didn't have enough time to get a handgun via the NJ permitting process.  I even paid for a consultation with Joshua Prince in PA to ensure that there were no legal snags on the PA side of the border with a NJ resident finishing an 80% frame in PA, but that was before the most recent ghost law was passed.

I don't agree with every opinion from Evan Nappen (especially his belief that carrying of tasers/stun guns is still illegal), but I do think he's got the right interpretation here.

NJ's AG obviously does...not...like firearms that come into NJ outside of the FID/FFL/purchase permit process - in addition to the "ghost gun" laws, they've also outlawed the possession/transmission of files for 3D printing of firearms; how that ban, which is an obvious 1st amendment infringement, is still in effect boggles me. 

If you want to go ahead and do it anyway because "Molon Labe" or "Free men don't ask permission", by all means, but I wouldn't take it out in public in NJ and you'll always have the risk that it will come to NJ's attention if you get involved in a bad relationship split, house fire, red flagged, etc.  I'm very skeptical that the "but I didn't manufacture it in NJ" fact is going to make a prosecutor tuck tail and run if a "ghost gun" charge comes up.


 

Well I can see why you came to that conclusion because you left out the most important parts of the new law which apply here: 

There is ABSOLUTELY no way Nappen is even close to having this "right". SO let's apply the law, because it specifically state that it does not apply to anything that has the capacity to function as a firearm. So If the law specifically, and by that i mean literally says actually firearms are not to be regulated under this law... how can anything of what you OR Nappen say be true?

 Purchasing firearm parts to manufacture 1[untraceable] a1 firearm 1without a serial number1.  In addition to any other 1[penalty imposed] criminal penalties provided1 under 1[current]1 law, a person who 1, with the purpose to manufacture 2or otherwise assemble2 a firearm and without being registered or licensed do so as provided in chapter 58 of Title 2C of the New Jersey Statutes,1 purchases 1or otherwise obtains1 separately or as 1part of1 a kit 1a firearm frame or firearm receiver which is not imprinted with a serial number registered with a federally licensed manufacturer or1 any combination of parts from which a firearm 1without a serial number1 may be readily 1[assembled with the purpose to manufacture an untraceable firearm] manufactured 2or otherwise assembled2 , but which does not have the capacity to function as a firearm unless manufactured1 2or otherwise assembled2 is guilty of a crime of the third degree. Notwithstanding the provisions of N.J.S.2C:1-8 or any other law, a conviction under this subsection shall not merge with a conviction for any other criminal offense and the court shall impose separate sentences upon a violation of this subsection and any other criminal offense. 

     As used in this subsection, 1[“untraceable firearm” means an unlawfully manufactured firearm for which the sale or distribution chain from a licensed retailer to the point of its first retail sale cannot be traced by law enforcement officials] “firearm frame or firearm receiver” means the part of a firearm that provides housing for the firearm’s internal components, such as the hammer, bolt or breechblock, action, and firing mechanism1 2, and includes without limitation any object or part which is not a firearm frame or receiver in finished form but is designed or intended to be used for that purpose and which may readily be made into a firearm frame or receiver through milling or other means2.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2020 at 5:03 PM, raz-0 said:

My $0.02 and worth about that on a good day. 

The statute seems to indicate the illegal act is obtaining parts used to create an untraceable firearm (and oddly, I think if it ever comes to it, the fact that isn't defined anywhere will come into play as to what that means).  If you have a fully built and functional non-serialized firearm, you have clearly obtained the part to create it. More importantly, that firearm could be taken apart and used to assemble a whole other firearm. 

It'll get hard into the semantics of constructive intent and what is is. 

 As used in this subsection, 1[“untraceable firearm” means an unlawfully manufactured firearm for which the sale or distribution chain from a licensed retailer to the point of its first retail sale cannot be traced by law enforcement officials] “firearm frame or firearm receiver” means the part of a firearm that provides housing for the firearm’s internal components, such as the hammer, bolt or breechblock, action, and firing mechanism1 2, and includes without limitation any object or part which is not a firearm frame or receiver in finished form but is designed or intended to be used for that purpose and which may readily be made into a firearm frame or receiver through milling or other means2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind the participation in this discussion, however, It would be beneficial to everyone if we leave our opinions out of it... This law is actually written with a lot of specifics.. and one of those is that the item you are being charged with cannot in its form be classified as a firearm. 

There has been a lot of incorrect descriptions of what the law says in this thread, and i cannot for the love of god find in any instance why people would think an assembled firearm is regulated here when the law says verbatim they are not. 

Share this post


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

Jack - "includes" does not mean "only".

Its referenced twice, once in the law and again in the definition.

The regulatory part of the law specifically carves out an exemption. For the law to apply the firearm frame or receiver still needs to be manufactured or assembled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2020 at 2:57 PM, JackDaWack said:

I'm not sure what you mean. 

People in NJ are not challenging the law unless they have unfinished receivers not capable of being defined as a firearm... the law specifically states that what your being charged with possessing is not actually classified as a firearm... 

Plenty of people in NJ have complete firearms built outside NJ from 80% parts. Are you asking them to walk into a police station with them or something?

Call NJSP and ask if you can bring a non serialized firearm into NJ..

The very last thing you want to do is ask the NJSP for permission or an opinion. Years back someone started making an M1 Carbine that was not etched with "M1" anywhere. By name it was not an M1, it only looked like one. Since some firearms are banned by name in the statutes, this one was exempt. Or so we all thought. A well meaning chap asked the NJSP and another well meaning NJSP chap went so far as to say in writing on NJSP letterhead that the non labeled M1 was OK to possess in NJ. Dealers had already been selling these and people were in legal possession (a big joke in the moving target that is NJ firearm law). The letter was out in the wild and someone, believe it was the attorney general, said no and ordered all rifles back to the dealers. That's how it goes here. If you don't ask and go on the assumption you're good, you become a potential test case. Don't have PD raid your house and don't breakdown or crash on the way to the range. You take the risk.

Share this post


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

The very last thing you want to do is ask the NJSP for permission or an opinion. Years back someone started making an M1 Carbine that was not etched with "M1" anywhere. By name it was not an M1, it only looked like one. Since some firearms are banned by name in the statutes, this one was exempt. Or so we all thought. A well meaning chap asked the NJSP and another well meaning NJSP chap went so far as to say in writing on NJSP letterhead that the non labeled M1 was OK to possess in NJ. Dealers had already been selling these and people were in legal possession (a big joke in the moving target that is NJ firearm law). The letter was out in the wild and someone, believe it was the attorney general, said no and ordered all rifles back to the dealers. That's how it goes here. If you don't ask and go on the assumption you're good, you become a potential test case. Don't have PD raid your house and don't breakdown or crash on the way to the range. You take the risk.

I don't disagree. The Auto Ordinance M1 is banned by "type".. and that was unfortunate. 

As mentioned before... I made suggestions about the law as it is written, and not how some antigun dickwad would apply it.. The gun laws in this state are incorrectly applied all the time. Im sure one day someone will be arrested and charged with and "other", too. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Came away from this discussion wanting to clarify some points, so called up Law Shield again, and got a lawyer from Nappen's office again.  Below are my notes:

- Paraphrasing the lawyer: "When they passed the new ghost gun law they did not use the established terms "possession" or "acquisition" but instead used the term "obtains".  We believe this novel "obtains" term was used to attempt to avoid running into constitutional takings issue, because ghost guns become worthless once illegal (have to dispose of them without compensation).  What "obtains" means in a legal sense has to be established via case law.

- There is no case law on this yet, however their office has 4 active cases where 80% frames were completed outside of NJ and brought back into NJ.  Cases include both manufactured firearm frames alone (not assembled into functioning firearms) and assembled firearms.  In each case the prosecution is prosecuting as though "obtains" means "possesses" in NJ (the crime occurred as soon as the frame/firearm was brought into NJ).

One of these 4 cases may become the case law standard, assuming they're not all settled out of court.

- In every case where a "ghost gun" has come up, the prosecutor has never been "neutral" regarding it, it has always been an aggravating factor.

- He believes that this new law has opened the door for every firearm now possessed in NJ that does not have a serial #, or serial # that traces back to a federally licensed manufacturer to be prosecuted as illegally possessed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in Marylandistan, where we also have crazy gun "laws". I used "laws" in quotes because the MDSP like to interpret the laws outside the letter of the law. State Police are the enforcement branch; not the legislative branch. Legally, they can't interpret the law in a way that isn't consistent  with the letter of the law- but they do anyway.

If I ever hit Powerball, I will be willing to be the test case on one of these issues. Until then, I will continue bowing to the crown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2020 at 10:47 AM, DirtyDigz said:

Came away from this discussion wanting to clarify some points, so called up Law Shield again, and got a lawyer from Nappen's office again.  Below are my notes:

- Paraphrasing the lawyer: "When they passed the new ghost gun law they did not use the established terms "possession" or "acquisition" but instead used the term "obtains".  We believe this novel "obtains" term was used to attempt to avoid running into constitutional takings issue, because ghost guns become worthless once illegal (have to dispose of them without compensation).  What "obtains" means in a legal sense has to be established via case law.

- There is no case law on this yet, however their office has 4 active cases where 80% frames were completed outside of NJ and brought back into NJ.  Cases include both manufactured firearm frames alone (not assembled into functioning firearms) and assembled firearms.  In each case the prosecution is prosecuting as though "obtains" means "possesses" in NJ (the crime occurred as soon as the frame/firearm was brought into NJ).

One of these 4 cases may become the case law standard, assuming they're not all settled out of court.

- In every case where a "ghost gun" has come up, the prosecutor has never been "neutral" regarding it, it has always been an aggravating factor.

- He believes that this new law has opened the door for every firearm now possessed in NJ that does not have a serial #, or serial # that traces back to a federally licensed manufacturer to be prosecuted as illegally possessed.

 

And he didn't say anything about the fact the law states you have to obtain an nonfunctioning firearm Part in NJ?  That's a pretty clear part of the law... what you have "obtained" by statutory definition can't be considered an actual firearm by NJ definition, the law even defines it.

In any event, if you obtain a nonfuctioning firearm out of state, and manufacture it there.. If you bring it into NJ.. by jurisdictional limits.. you never obtained or possessed a nonfunctioning firearm part in NJ. If they treated it as a possession, you don't posses something that even falls under the law IN NJ. Fortunately, the state didnt use the term possession. They used "obtain" which without further defining is an action of coming into possession of something. 

Other points to consider. If I obtained these parts prior to passage of the law, since laws aren't retroactive in this respect would they be legal? The law doesn't say possession of them is legal, you just cant obtain them in NJ. I cant be held legally responsible for an action that was legal at the time. 

I'm also curious, are bb guns now illegal in NJ?

If the state can't prove you obtained a non-function receiver to make a firearm IN NJ, I bet the cases get dropped.  

It also begs the question, if they wanted to outright ban guns without serial numbers, why didn't they just say so? H

My only gripe here is the law specifically creates a disqualifier, what you "obtain" within the jurisdiction of NJ cant be a firearm by definition. The law goes as far to say what you obtained cant be in finished form. 

I think what NJ prosecutors think they can use this law for is something entirely different than what it says. 

To the average person, this law reads that it's illegal to obtain unfinished receivers in NJ... thats all. They shut down the ability for companies to send the parts here, that I believe is the heart of the law.

If there are 4 cases I would be interested to know the outcome. It was widely reported this law banned ghost guns, and maybe that was the directive send out to police and prosecutors... but the law is a far cry from that.

 

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to point out a difference. NAPPEN, most often advises people about the law in regards to what NJ is more likely to charge you with, and not necessarily what the law says. Thats why I really don't like his approach to NJ gun law advice.

 

Share this post


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

And he didn't say anything about the fact the law states you have to obtain an nonfunctioning firearm Part in NJ?  That's a pretty clear part of the law... what you have "obtained" by statutory definition can't be considered an actual firearm by NJ definition, the law even defines it.

In any event, if you obtain a nonfuctioning firearm out of state, and manufacture it there.. If you bring it into NJ.. by jurisdictional limits.. you never obtained or possessed a nonfunctioning firearm part in NJ. If they treated it as a possession, you don't posses something that even falls under the law IN NJ. Fortunately, the state didnt use the term possession. They used "obtain" which without further defining is an action of coming into possession of something. 

Other points to consider. If I obtained these parts prior to passage of the law, since laws aren't retroactive in this respect would they be legal? The law doesn't say possession of them is legal, you just cant obtain them in NJ. I cant be held legally responsible for an action that was legal at the time. 

I'm also curious, are bb guns now illegal in NJ?

If the state can't prove you obtained a non-function receiver to make a firearm IN NJ, I bet the cases get dropped.  

It also begs the question, if they wanted to outright ban guns without serial numbers, why didn't they just say so? H

My only gripe here is the law specifically creates a disqualifier, what you "obtain" within the jurisdiction of NJ cant be a firearm by definition. The law goes as far to say what you obtained cant be in finished form. 

I think what NJ prosecutors think they can use this law for is something entirely different than what it says. 

To the average person, this law reads that it's illegal to obtain unfinished receivers in NJ... thats all. They shut down the ability for companies to send the parts here, that I believe is the heart of the law.

If there are 4 cases I would be interested to know the outcome. It was widely reported this law banned ghost guns, and maybe that was the directive send out to police and prosecutors... but the law is a far cry from that.

 

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to point out a difference. NAPPEN, most often advises people about the law in regards to what NJ is more likely to charge you with, and not necessarily what the law says. Thats why I really don't like his approach to NJ gun law advice.

 

As posted last evening, we're dealing with the EXACT issue in Marylandistan... The MSP interprets a law and prosecutors base their case on the state police's interpretation rather than the actual law itself. Our issue, which I'm sure is similar in Jersey, is the prosecution has bottomless pockets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I worked for a County Prosecutor's Office and saw firsthand that the law plainly written means nothing to a lawyer. They are taught as much in law school. Definitions and meanings are elastic in nature to them. To you and I it is black and white but I'm telling you it isn't to them. It is what it is and if you get pushed into the legal system you learn it fast. Without good lawyers and loads of cash you will just be more roadkill under the bus of law. I had a prosecutor tell me that the law meant one thing in section a. and b. but not the same for c. under the same firearm statute. He said it with a straight face and meant it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2020 at 5:08 PM, Downtownv said:

Unless you're an urban minority youth, in possession of a gun illegally, then the gun charges get dropped.

You will read about the charges in paper, but 95% dropped.

They know how to game the system.

In NJ when a piece of scum is arrested for a crime and have a firearm in their possession, the firearm charge is dropped for a  plea bargain guilty plea on the other charge

If your a law abiding citizen caught in the NJ gun laws trap and they can't charge you with anything else they will fight tooth and nail to imprison you for that.

Case in point: A while back, (I'm thinking 15ish yrs ago) a guy was arrested, convicted and sentenced in NJ. His crime? He had a Hollow Point bullet in a drilled out case (OBVIOUSLY no powder) with a spent primer on his key ring.

Sad (discussing) thing is, its gotten worse since then.

In light of what's going on  today apparently its OK to riot, loot, burn, physically assault,  murder (assassinate LEO"s). But its not OK to holster a tool to defend yourself from it! 

I live in a semi-urban town where I'm not in proximity to what the afore mentioned pieces of shit are doing. The peaceful protesters(?) are calling for the dispansion PD"s and the looters are loving it. I hope they do in places like NYC, Chicago, LA, Detroit. I would LOVE to see how that works out for them (fuking MORONS). :lol: :lol: :lol:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2020 at 11:38 AM, SmittyMHS said:

Another great cliche. And maybe should be used faster on threads like this.

I ask a question as to their legality because verbally Murphy said possession is illegal and I didn't see anything in the statute making them illegal. I did not condone, state I had or wanted one or that anyone else in NJ should  violate NJ law! I was seeking guidance to the statute wording that made them illegal.

The Name of the sub-forum I posted it in is "Current New Jersey Gun Laws Discussion" not, "Lets quote fantasy movies to decide what to talk about".

Apparently either you or myself require remedial reading comprehension tutoring

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

18 U.S. Code § 922 (a) It shall be unlawful—

(3) for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or 
licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that this paragraph (A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State, (B) shall not apply to the transportation or receipt of a firearm obtained in conformity with subsection (b)(3) of this section, and (C) shall not apply to the transportation of any firearm acquired in any State prior to the effective date of this chapter;

 

I'm new to this forum, hence the late post/reply. From reading some of the posts it appears not all folks may be aware of the above-quoted law.  One should be very conservative in their interpretation of the law. Because as "[W]reckelss" correctly points out, the authorities will give the most favorable interpretation of the law as it applies to their case.

As we know, the general rule is that Federal law preempts State law.  So, even if the NJ law is interpreted in a way favorable to a defendant under NJ law, based on what, if any, statements/admissions were made to prove a firearm was not manufactored, assembled, or otherwise created in NJ, the mere fact that it was transported into the state may lead to unintended consequences.

Moreover, the term "obtained" may likely be looked upon as simply "receiving" without the explicit use of the term "possession". Therefore either side of the coin can be used here to charge an individual.  Either as the transporter or the receiver of the firearm.

Remember that the terms are not included in the law for purpose of aiding the public in reaching a meaning of the law.  For that, one needs to consult the legislative record to attempt to properly understand the intent of a law. Here, it is very likely that case that the term "obtained" is chosen for its broad context.  That is why it is chosen by the law-makers.  It is for the courts to narrow. But I believe that term would likely cover assembly or any other acquisition of a firearm. Indeed, the law need not include the term "purchase" and the law would still serve its apparent intended purpose by the Federal legislators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, NJ2ARights said:

I'm new to this forum, hence the late post/reply. From reading some of the posts it appears not all folks may be aware of the above-quoted law.  One should be very conservative in their interpretation of the law. Because as "[W]reckelss" correctly points out, the authorities will give the most favorable interpretation of the law as it applies to their case.

As we know, the general rule is that Federal law preempts State law.  So, even if the NJ law is interpreted in a way favorable to a defendant under NJ law, based on what, if any, statements/admissions were made to prove a firearm was not manufactored, assembled, or otherwise created in NJ, the mere fact that it was transported into the state may lead to unintended consequences.

Moreover, the term "obtained" may likely be looked upon as simply "receiving" without the explicit use of the term "possession". Therefore either side of the coin can be used here to charge an individual.  Either as the transporter or the receiver of the firearm.

Remember that the terms are not included in the law for purpose of aiding the public in reaching a meaning of the law.  For that, one needs to consult the legislative record to attempt to properly understand the intent of a law. Here, it is very likely that case that the term "obtained" is chosen for its broad context.  That is why it is chosen by the law-makers.  It is for the courts to narrow. But I believe that term would likely cover assembly or any other acquisition of a firearm. Indeed, the law need not include the term "purchase" and the law would still serve its apparent intended purpose by the Federal legislators.

I disagree. Will a prosecutor try and fuck you over using those modified definitions? probably if they want to nail ur ass to the wall. 

Unfortunately for them... there are plenty of firearm definitions that use the terms "obtain" "manufacture" "possess". Unless they provided the definition in statute, it maintains a standard meaning found in common dictionaries available to the public. They may attempt to stretch what a term means, but they cannot reference other terms that hold entirely different meanings. 

They may say, "since you are in possession of the item, it would make sense to consider you obtained it at some point". "or that you manufactured it", however the burden of proof still falls on the state to meet the language of the statute. 

A good lawyer would request the evidence from the state to show when the item in question was obtained, where it was obtained and from who, and what makes the item in question fall under the statutory limits.  

 

The above law is interstate purchasing of firearms. We are not talking about purchasing firearms out of state. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you to the extent that the burden is on the state. But I believe my caution is with merit.  Further, the above law is not limited to interstate firearms purchasing as the statute states (indicated by the bolded portions).  I am a champion of differing points of view and I appreciate your comments.  My intent was to provide some insight so that it perhaps saves some individual from a very bad experience.  That insight is based upon personal experience practicing law, as well as experience as a former law enforcement officer. After having worked closely with prosecutors, I have a different view of how things typically work. Personally, I would err on the side of caution in New Jersey. But in NJ we still have the right to choose how to proceed. Well, at least today - who knows what will happen over the next 3 years in Trenton.

Share this post


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

Bottom line: It sounds like if I "possess" a 1980's scratch built flintlock rifle with no serial number, I can be charged with a felony under the ghost gun statute, correct?

That's how the attorney from Nappen's office that I talked to sees it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, 10X said:

The site works fine with the TOR browser.   Tor Browser   It's free and reliable.  NJ has no right to regulate your internet access.

Just because you can use that browser, doesn't mean they can't track you... just saying...

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...