Dan

IMHO, we shouldn't allow for any additional steps, paperwork, processes, requirements beyond what the statutes call for. Adding on "optional" processes in exchange for preferential or expedited processing is going down the wrong path. They could use this as blackmail to get what they want... I can see it now "No paystub, it will take an additional 3 months for us to verify xyz". Next they will ask for your last W-2, at risk of further delays if you do not comply. As with so many what they call "reasonable" actions regarding gun laws...the 'give an inch take a mile' saying comes to mind. Many municipalities are already ignoring the strict time-frames as stated in the statutes. Without a form of punishment, they will continue to do this, along with continuing attempts to add on to the process. I continue to find it hypocritical that when citizens break our gun law statutes, they are facing serious criminal charges. When the govt breaks the rules, nothing happens.

Wow , I know where that is, I live not too far away. That whole area they are building on was highly contaminated from National Lead, chemical companies, and a "waste disposal company". The disposal company started burrying chemical waste because they were taking in too much for their incinerators to handle, I think this was the 70's. Remember reading about it a long time ago. Something tells me the wind/solar farm on the 14 acres is land that was too expensive to clean up completely.... Just a hunch On the OP's experience. Could you blame them for this policy. Federal law dictates that they follow the purchaser's state of residency gun laws regarding the purchase and transfer of weapons. With NJ being one of the top 3 worst states regarding archaic gun laws... the math is simple for them... avoidance is the easiest solution for them. Plus with a history of NYC suing out of state gun shops (even if they were following the law), they are "gun-shy" with selling to anti-2A states/cities.

Watch those delivery charges

Maybe its a soft opening. I know its difficult to stock every gun out there, but they should eventually at least have many of the popular makes and models. I'm not far from them, I'll check the store out in a month or so.

We talked about this before, the NJ AG is little by little scaring the shiznit out of NJ dealers "compelling" them to not deal with anything that remotely looks , smells, or feels AK-ish. Regardless of the statutes and NJAC, these folks don't have the financial or intestinal fortitude to put up a legal fight when the stakes are bankruptcy and prison time versus making a few bucks in sales. I don't blame them. Once the NJ guberment sees they can bully dealers into submission regarding the sales of guns that have an AK style, who's to stop them from going beyond that. Looks like a run at revoking the NJAC AWB evil feature list guidelines, and going back to the "unconstitutionally vague" statutes list being the legal test giving NJ prosecutors a free for all in going after pretty much any EBR type gun out there. Afterall, the original NJ AWB is still the law of the land. The NJAC are just guidelines and can be stricken out at any time.

According to that code, I suppose not. I remember finding it when looking around all of NJ's wonderful gun related laws. I have no idea how to actually use it. I suppose the merchant is responsible, as sales tax is applied at the time of purchase. Trying to get a merchant to follow this law... not sure how to do thatx Maybe there is a way to get it refunded as part of income tax. Any accountants out there!?

Most every crime has a victim. If someone is guilty of committing tax fraud (victim is the US Govt/citizens), should they loose 2A rights for the rest of their life? A line has to be drawn. The broad brush of "prior convicted felon" is well...., too broad for me. There should be more guidelines around this. In my mind 2A rights are as just important as 1A and 4A, and its restriction and circumstances to be taken away for life needs to be weighed very carefully with specific set rules. Trespassing could be a 4th degree crime in NJ, does that warrant a lifelong revocation of 2A rights?

Is this applicable? 54:32B-8.50. Short title; receipts from sales of firearm trigger locks, tax exempt 1. a. This act shall be known and may be cited as "The Firearm Accident Prevention Act". b.Receipts from sales of firearm trigger locks and other devices that enable the firearm to be made inoperable by anyone other than an authorized person are exempt from the tax imposed under the "Sales and Use Tax Act", P.L.1966, c.30 (C.54:32B-1 et seq.). L.1999,c.253. 54:32B-8.51. Short title; receipts from sales of firearm vaults, tax exempt 1. a. This act shall be known and may be cited as "The Secure Firearm Storage Act". b.Receipts from sales of firearm vaults providing secure storage for firearms are exempt from the tax imposed under the "Sales and Use Tax Act", P.L.1966, c.30 (C.54:32B-1 et seq.). L.1999,c.254.

One important note is that your friend must have an FID if you were to go the COE route.

Don't submit anything that is not legally required, like a paystub or anything like that. I'd do as axeman says and call the State PD, from past issues like this where people called in, the State PD straightened out the local PD.

Everything I find on the CZ-85b says the magazine stock is 16 rounds. So that would make it a 16+1 gun. There are alternative 15 round mags for sale for this gun, so perhaps NJ dealers are replacing the 16's with 15's ... adding to the cost. Or CZ sells a "NJ compliant" kit with 15 rounders as a special order. Two possibilities.

NJ based company puts it out, limited release. I just ordered a 5lb bag of espresso coffee beans from them, I stumbled on this while looking around their site. My link

Because NJ doesn't have a clear and concise definition of "loaded" (none that I could find, correct me if I'm wrong), this has caused people to start making assumptions like this. The guys over in California have put together some good resources around this topic as they too have encountered the "loaded mag = loaded gun" controversial assumption. Well worth a read: My link Needless to say, California has beat this to death, and the article I linked above has some case law examples around it. I agree with the quote below from the article.

Here's my suggestion: Stroll in Central Park near the Met, then onto the Met Museum (don't miss the arms and armor), then downtown by the South Street Seaport at Mark Joseph's Steakhouse for dinner (one of my favorite restaurants). If you have time you can stop by Rockefeller Center on the way to dinner from the Met.

And this is the beauty of NJ law.... Once you left NJ, NJ law does not apply any longer. The "directly to... with reasonable deviations under the circumstances" protects you leaving NJ provided you are taking the gun to an exempted place (target shooting range in FL). Once past the border, NJ law is suspended. You can be gone for a month, whatever. Now when time to go home, you get back on your plane. Once you fly over the border, the "directly home" clause is in effect. Now that you are back in NJ, you can't dawdle around unless it is another reasonable deviation. You land, get your bags, and go home.

Wouldn't going to a location for target shooting in which you purchased a plane ticket for to get to make taking your gun to the airport a "deviation(s) as are reasonably necessary under the circumstances". Why do you need FOPA for that? "g.All weapons being transported under paragraph (2) of subsection b., subsection e., or paragraph (1) or (3) of subsection f. of this section shall be carried unloaded and contained in a closed and fastened case, gunbox, securely tied package, or locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is being transported, and in the course of travel shall include only such deviations as are reasonably necessary under the circumstances."

OK now i'm really finished just had those last questions. Thanks for the argument fellas, all in good sport, and I respect everyone's own interpretations and opinions.

If you placed your gun on the table, and your wife picks it up while in your home... would you say that she "received" (define : take delivery of) or "acquired" (define: to gain for oneself through one's actions or efforts) the gun? So that's covered in 2C:58-3... below for your reading. 2C:39-6 e. allows for the "keeping and carrying" in your home and place of business. define keeping: to hold or retain in one's possession define carrying: to be the means of conveying or transporting How does one keep or carry something without acquiring or receiving it first? 2C:58-3 must be satisfied before 2C:39-6 e. exemptions can take place. 2C-58-3: Firearms purchaser identification card. No person shall sell, give, transfer, assign or otherwise dispose of nor receive, purchase or otherwise acquire an antique cannon or a rifle or shotgun, other than an antique rifle or shotgun, unless the purchaser, assignee, donee, receiver or holder is licensed as a dealer under this chapter or possesses a valid firearms purchaser identification card, and first exhibits said card to the seller, donor, transferor or assignor, and unless the purchaser, assignee, donee, receiver or holder signs a written certification, on a form prescribed by the superintendent, which shall indicate that he presently complies with the requirements of subsection c. of this section and shall contain his name, address and firearms purchaser identification card number or dealer's registration number. The said certification shall be retained by the seller, as provided in paragraph (4) of subsection a. of N.J.S.2C:58-2, or, in the case of a person who is not a dealer, it may be filed with the chief of police of the municipality in which he resides or with the superintendent.

For some reason I can't get across that receiving, acquiring, transferring are all governed by separate laws than possession. The act of giving , receiving, acquiring is completely different than possessing, keeping, carrying. The later has to occur first. There are two legal tests at play here and two statutes that governs each. Everyone is entitled to their own interpretation of the laws. And please refrain from calling my ideas nonsense and rhetoric on how my interpretations could cause loss of life. That's just being silly on both fronts. I'll agree to disagree here as well. I'm closing my argument...

Nothing in subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent a person keeping or carrying about his place of business, residence, premises or other land owned or possessed by him, any firearm, Again, I am not arguing possession, AKA "keeping or carrying", I'm proposing that under NJ laws, there is no legal way to (transfer, purchase, receive, or otherwise acquire) a firearm from owner to a non-owner even if they both live in the same home without going through the entire paperwork process. Guys, possession and the act of receiving, acquiring, transferring firearms are two separate statutes. Please read 2C:58-3, which covers these things. It explains all the rules that need to be follow before a person comes into possession. Once a person legally acquires a gun according to 2C:58-3, now 2C:39-6 e. exemptions provides a way of "keeping and carrying" that gun on their own property, home, place of business. Otherwise, if what you are saying is correct, we don't have to follow 2C:58-3 when dealing with two people that live in the same home. The only way under NJ law that the wife could come into possession (receive, purchase, or otherwise acquire) a gun even in her own home would be via inheritance or if she moved into NJ with it in the first place. This would indicate the wife is the owner, even though she doesn't have an FID or filled out NJ paperwork. She would have to live within the exemptions just like everyone else. If your friend came over your house, and you handed him your gun, technically that is illegal as your home is not a condition of the Temporary Transfer rules and exemptions in 2C:58-3.1. I'm also not arguing the fact that it is highly unlikely that LE or anyone for that matter will bust down your door and arrest you. I'm strictly sticking to technicalities and interpretations within NJ laws.

They heard there were guns inside.

I'll play.. What is the allowable exemption for a gun to be transferred between a husband (owner of said gun) and wife in their own home? N.J.S.2C:39-6 e. allows the "keeping or carrying" of "any" firearm in the home. Nothing is said about transferring a firearm to another person, which is distinctly different as they go so far as to define transfers. I'll tell you... if it does not meet the Temporary Transfer exemptions in 2C:58-3.1, it is then covered in 2C:58-3 a.-l. which governs dispositions of firearms. Pay special attention to "otherwise acquire", as in if the wife picking up the gun on her own accord from the kitchen table. Again, I'm not arguing possession in the home, I'm arguing that disposition, acquisition, and transfer rules do still apply. Its about how the wife came to posess the gun, not the act of posessing that is in question.

The point again... there are two ways for you to transfer possession of a gun from yourself to someone else... temporary or permanent. For temporary xfers, there are specific rules and conditions to be met, like being at a range or training class, in the woods hunting, etc. That leaves all other forms of transfer options to be permanent, which requires a COE, and or pistol permit , and checking FID/ID. By allowing someone to handle your gun outside the rules and conditions of a temporary xfer, that is technically breaking the law in my interpretation of the law unless you go through the motions of a permanent xfer. Your argument does have potential around the "any" comment in the home exemption. Clever. The temporary xfer statute does state: "Notwithstanding the provisions of N.J.S.2C:39-9, N.J.S.2C:58-2, N.J.S.2C:58-3 or any other statute to the contrary concerning the transfer or disposition of firearms, or from carrying the same" With the "any other statute" being the home exemption one: "Nothing in subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent a person keeping or carrying about his place of business, residence, premises or other land owned or possessed by him, any firearm" It could be argued that 2C:39-6 e. is a "statute to the contrary" of 2C:58-3.1 a.

I share your logic and personally subscribe to your method.

The home is just another exempted place for the condition of possession, just like having an FID makes you possessing a long gun in the parking lot legal. Under our laws, there are two kinds of transfer, permanent and temporary. If you can't meet the specifics for temporary, your only other option is permanent... requiring COE and PPP, etc. Transferring any gun in the parking lot or in your home is not specified as being valid for a temporary transfer, thus your only other option is permanent.