Bob B

One year in prison and 5 on probation.

I guarantee that most active gun owners in NJ have violated NJ's firearms possession laws on multiple occasions without realizing it.

Interesting.

Vlad, Daedalus, If you were on the jury for Brian Aitken, how would you have voted?

No problem. I think sometimes we forget that we don't have to convince the other guy. I appreciate the honest debate.

No problem at all. It's a good debate and those who read your points and mine may decide for themselves. I did not know the jury had the power to change laws at will? A juror can't change the law, but he can vote to acquit regardless of what the law says, based on his own good conscience. what if a jury of ones peers decided selling crack cocaine is not really that big of a deal? That is exactly what happened with prohibition. Juries refused to convict and eventually, prohibition was repealed. Yes, it can lead to a bad verdict, but that is the risk that goes along with putting jurors in charge of a man's fate. A much more dangerous system of justice is one in which the juror is denied the use of his sense of right and wrong, and must make a decision based solely on the letter of the law (and only that law which the judge allows him to consider) and the instructions provided by the judge on how to interpret and apply the law, regardless of whether or not he agrees with them. Why have a jury trial at all if the judge can manipulate what is presented to the jury, knowing that the jury has no choice. Plus, if there is only one juror who refuses to convict and the rest refuse to change their vote, then it is a mistrial and the case may be tried again. If there is another mistrial, the prosecutor may get the message and give up. to take your point the other way... to use a "gun possession" charge as an example.. would it not be equally wrong for someone who thinks guns are bad to side with the state against some individual because they feel it is for the greater good? That is why we have 12 jurors instead of one or two, to reduce that risk. Plus, the judge can overturn a guilty verdict (but not a not-guilty verdict) if he feels that the required elements of the crime were not proven by the prosecution. Think about it for a while. Once it clicks, your going to utter some colorful expletives. Final thought. What if one day you got pulled over for having a tail light out and the police officer saw a hollowpoint bullet that had rolled out from under your seat. You're not on your way to the range. That's a fourth class crime, up to 18 months in prison and up to a $10k fine. Oh, and no more guns for you, forever. Should the jurors use common sense and good conscience, or reluctantly send you to prison? Wouldn't you be hoping for that one juror who knew about jury nullification? Jurors can and must nullify bad law. It's essential to our system of justice.

Because the jury may decide that it is a bad law. Vlad, I gotta disagree with you on this one. The point is that possession of a firearm for the purpose of self-defense by a law-abiding citizen in a non-sensitive area, with no criminal intent, should never be a crime. This is why we have a right to a trial by a jury of our peers, not by a judge. If the jury believes that the person committed the crime, but doesn't like the law or the punishment, they can vote not-guilty and send a message to the legislature that they need to change the law. That's how the system is supposed to work, but we have been tricked into thinking that we are supposed to follow all of the judge's instructions even if we don't agree with them. Not true - we can acquit based on good conscience. Jurors have the right to judge the law as well as the facts. This is a prime example of when jury nullification should have been used. If the jury knew about the permits, that may have made the difference. The jury may have gone through a thought process like this: "Why is this a third class crime (felony)? Why isn't it an administrative charge, like a $100 fine for not having a NJ permit? He has permits from other states so obviously he has been vetted and is not a danger to anyone. What kind of dumb-a** prosecutor would even pursue a case like this when there are real criminals out there? This guy is just an easy target. He might go to prison for this. Hmmm, something stinks. I'm not going to convict this guy. The law is stupid. NOT GUILTY" After enough NOT GUILTY's the prosecutors stop trying similar cases and the legislature is prompted to change the law. That's why it was important for the jury to know about the other permits. Joe, that is what judges tell us, but it is not true. A juror has the obligation to consider the law and may acquit based on good conscience. See above. BTW, I wasn't aware of this either until about six months ago when I had jury duty. My experience prompted me to do some research. I posted about it here: http://njgunforums.c...2Bnullification

http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/dpmslr308.htm

Happy Birthday!

http://www.clarkcust...m/dpmslr308.htm

NJ2AS is in the early planning stages of a lobby day. We have not set a date yet, but we have been talking to legislators (the ones friendly to our cause) about how to best do it and have been given some solid guidance. Frank and I have made a couple trips to the State House already and are getting familiar with how things work there. After visiting the State House, it's clear to me that having an organized mass "lobby day" is a very effective tool. It's hard to explain, but the State House is a very different environment than a legislator's local office. More can be accomplished there in less time. This is the one that got me interested in the idea: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqR6d0qJOMA

Exactly. The FID allows you to possess unloaded rifles and shotguns. But, be careful, even though you can't be charged with Unlawful Possession of a Weapon (Firearm) you are still subject to the charge of Possession of a Weapon (Firearm) for an Unlawful Purpose, so you can't possess them for any reason.

Lock your unloaded firearms in the trunk and go have fun at the range.

That's the statute. Keep reading it. It takes a few times before it sinks in.

You should call the Chief of Police and respectfully point out that there has been a delay. Something like "I know you guys are busy and short handed and it's the holidays, but the delay has been more than it should be and it's interfering with my ability to make a purchase. Could you please check into it and see if I can get my permits. Thank you." I predict that you will have them within 48 hours of speaking to the Chief. I reject the notion that any delay, holidays or not, is acceptable and just the way it is. Everyone should call on day 31 and respectfully ask for your permits. If you get an excuse, the next call should be to the Chief. If you don't take your right to keep and bear arms seriously, don't expect anyone else to. You can be firm while still being respectful and courteous.

No problem. I'll PM you.

Here's the requirement (found on page 11 of the Maine's booklet, http://www.maine.gov/dps/msp/licenses/documents/Weapons/CFP%20Booklet.pdf): To me, that means that NRA first steps is fine. No big deal. Gun for Hire has classes all the time. If you're going to get your FL CCW, you can do the entire application packet (prints, photo, and notary) at the next NJ2AS meeting. There's a thread on here about it somewhere. Most got their permits in about 30 days.

They don't accept Florida CCW, but it is easy to get a Maine License as a non-resident.. http://www.maine.gov/dps/msp/licenses/documents/Weapons/non-resident%20application%20package.pdf Not sure why you are not willing. You don't need prints or notary, just a photo. Takes a few weeks. Should arrive way before summer. More info and links here: http://handgunlaw.us/states/maine.pdf

Exactly. The question is not whether or not it is legal, because it is clear that you would be protected under FOPA. Even so, you might get arrested and be in for a legal battle because LE and prosecutors don't understand the law. Revell v. Port Authority is an example. The question is whether or not you are going to give up your right to carry in a neighboring state because you fear the authorities in NJ may make that error. That is an individual decision for each person to make.

Interesting quote from Mr. Gilbert. Although it's good advice to keep your mags unloaded while transporting, just in case, I have yet to see any case law in NJ where a judge considered a gun loaded because a magazine, not inserted into the gun, was loaded. I wouldn't be surprised if there is, but he should have backed up his statement with some kind of proof. I'm concerned that he may be perpetuating a rumor. To make the statement " The gun would be considered loaded, and it would place you outside the exemptions for proper transportation of the firearm." is pretty conclusive. I would like to see the case law that backs up his statement.

It can be either. Note that it can be a "civil distrubance or other emergency." It does not have to be a declared state of emergency.

That's correct. It's in the Administrative Code. All sales of firearms and ammunition are suspended "upon notification" during a "civil distrubance or other emergency." It's not a criminal statute, but the retailer could lose his license for violating the code.

The intent is there, but poorly written, as usual.

Well, they obviously didn't fix everything. lol

Most people who live in NJ have no idea how the firearms laws are written and, therefore, have no idea how to comply with them. And, if you have taken the time to study them enough to understand them, you realize that complying with them is nearly impossible.