EdF

Of course, this is necessary as the SCOTUS ruling allows for these sensitive areas. They need to be clearly defined.

This is clearly a positive as no one can now CHARGE a felony in order to take away guns.

Well . . . It's pretty easy to say, go to another shop. But, again, having been behind the counter, I can see the reasons. Thefts are high and people aren't stealing $5000 Stacatto 2011 . . . They are stealing Glocks and others that are easy to move on the street. You're complaining a shop here. Go talk to THEM and see why the rules are in place. Or, go somewhere else.

When I was selling guns in NJ in 1977-9, we asked for FIDs before unlocking the rack or opening the case. When back then, a friend of mine was regularly using his brother's FID to go out and look at guns. Asking for the matching DL isn't a big deal in the current environment..

By the way . . . This was the DC Appeals Court, and I just barely give a shit how they rule. Almost every one of these cases is going to have to go to SCOTUS for the time being. That MAY change in the future but, for now, it just one more reason to work toward turning the votes of your friends and families.

That's not what I said . . . I specifically said, "I abhor any new restrictions . . . ' My point with the bump stocks is that they are so ineffective that it's hard to give a crap.

I have to admit that I'm torn a little on this one . . . I abhor any new restrictions but I find it difficult to support something as crappy as a bump stock . . . You could do the same thing with a padded jacket or sweater.

As I said, they are the ones who are ISSUING the permits. That's just great, right? Well, it is until you are forced to use your gun. Then the lawyers get involved. If you trust the lawyers, then that SP issued permit will be perfect.

The instructor that I know says that he hasn't seen anything from the AG to indicate that this is the case so he still includes the make, model and serial number from the weapon that you use to qualify. He also points out that he has talked to several lawyers who have suggested that you should qualify with each gun that you expect to carry. This way, if involved in a shooting you won't have to listen to some local prosecutor argue that you were not qualified with the gun that you used. Remember, the PD are the ones approving the permits but the attorneys are the ones who will be looking at the shootings. Just throwin' it out there . . .

I just asked the same open v concealed question in the "Concealed Carry" forum!

Last week, I was at a gun club talking to an experienced NRA instructor. We were discussing carry guns and he pointed out that NJ doesn't actually have "concealed" carry licenses. We just have "carry" licenses. In terms of the discussion we were talking about imprinting or having a holster show when you bend over to tie your shoes. Did I miss something in the discussion? Because he was talking like you can, with the license, carry open on your hip.

There were so many things in there that I have said for years that I had to check to see if I was a source!

Nobody can really tell . . . It's riddled with bullet holes . . .

Thanks everyone . . . I called Cherry Hill Police this afternoon. The detective called me back and we updated the email address without an issue. He was very friendly and happy to help!

Did you already have his email address? I'm going to call this afternoon . . . On top of everything else, I started a new job this week and my time has been pretty tight!

Damn it! Over the 4th weekend, I lost my wallet. Long story, don't want to go into it but my FID was in there. Yesterday, I filled out the stinking application to replace my card and included a few P2P requests. One of my references hasn't gotten his email and the other has. I may have made a mistake with his email address. Is there a way that I can correct the mistake or shorten the extra time that this is now going to take? I hate making simple mistakes . . .

The ruling CLEARLY states that they can't just make everywhere a prohibited location. But, it's going to take more law suits to get THAT enforced. This is far, far, from over . . .

Remember . . . Whatever he proposes will still have to pass a Democrat led assembly, a Democrat led senate and be signed by a Democrat Governor. Just how much do you think that he can get away with in one shot. Work to elect more Republicans around the state and see how much more you can get.

The truth is that the legislature doesn't HAVE to do anything. The AG already said that they will no longer require the justifiable need letter as part of applications. For now, the rest of the requirements remain. Anything that the legislature does is likely to screw things up further.

They aren't going to get injunctive relief and I wouldn't buy 17's for my Glock under an injunctive program. The problem is that they would be creating repeat and unnecessary injury if they decide to support the ban again.

No other specific info but all of the remaining 2A issues (including the magazine limit) have been remanded back to lower courts for reconsideration under Bruen.

These decisions should actually be announced in the next few minutes.

Feel free . . . This is a public forum. Take everything said here, every little opinion, as worth exactly what you paid to be here.

BTW: Remember, NH will not enforce federal gun laws. That doesn't exempt NH citizens from those laws. The FBI and other agencies will still enforce them. Don't expect this to be like federal marijuana laws.

I would be starting a class action suit for civil rights violations. The list shouldn't have been anywhere NEAR a "dashboard" . . . This is exactly why governments shouldn't be keeping lists, or partial lists, of gun owners. The bad guys now have a way to see both who is armed and who is NOT armed. This is just the point of concealed carry: Keeping the criminals unsure of who is safe to attack.,