H.M. Murdock

I bought a safe at Dicks in Freehold less than a year ago and it was automatically exempted. I think their Point-of-sale software does it automatically -- I did not mention anything to the salesperson and they didn't mention anything to me. I believe the sales tax exemption applies to any safe, cabinet or lock box that is capable of storing firearms, even if it is not marketed as such. *Edit* I checked my receipt and the TAX line is simply missing between SUBTOTAL and TOTAL where it normally resides (see attached photo for comparison between receipts for the safe and for ammo). Your path of least resistance may be to ask your store to call Freehold to figure it out.

Not exactly a throw away gun if you get to look at it again and again at your murder trial Regarding a throw down gun, you've been watching too much TV.. but its a good way to destroy your credibility and subsequently your self defense assertion, turning a 0-10 year jail sentence into 30 to life. Get a Glock, they're cheap, good looking and reliable. And stop watching so many procedural crime dramas and mob movies

Thanks for the explanation. Good examples My biggest fear in most states is having to defend myself but being unable to prove that I first attempted to retreat. In the heat of the moment will I risk turning my back to an assailant so that I can flee? It seems like I can take some solace in that an escape route must be considered safe, presumably by a reasonable person. The prosecution may argue that there was a safe escape route that I did not take and I may legitimately not have even considered that route once the adrenaline started pumping. I guess all I can do it revert to my instincts and training if the time comes and hope I will have the opportunity to explain myself to an unbiased judge and jury.

Thank you Grandad for your service in the 8th Army and Nanny for your service in the London WVS during the Blitz. Bless you for your courage and bravery and for being able keep private the atrocities you've seen and return home and raise such a beautiful family. We must never let this happen again. Uncle Phil, thank you for your service in the Alps and hello to the good people at Boscombe Down airfield. I miss you Mum and Dad, it's only a matter of time until we're reunited. I write this with tears in my eyes. Hello my friend at Mountain Home AFB and a remembrance to those pilots who perished in the air tragedies this year and a prayer those young children and wives they left behind. Thank you to all veterans and active duty personnel for your service to our great country. Thank you for all the sacrifices you have made so that we may continue to enjoy our freedoms. "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

That makes sense Anselmo -- and the laws governing possessing a weapon and self defense are not always congruent. Important to recognize that being able to legally possess something that can be used as a deadly weapon does not mean protection from prosecution when using it as a deadly force in self defense. And vice versa, illegally possessing something that can be used as a deadly weapon is not the end of the world if you are protected from prosecution when using it as a deadly force in self defense. From what I understand the defendant will usually get charged with homicide unless they can demonstrate the cirumstances in which they used deadly force in self defense as indisputable. Otherwise they are arrested, retain a lawyer, stay in jail or raise bail and will then need to present an affirmative defense at trial. An innocent person might even plea down to a sure thing if they don't want to gamble on being outlawyered, jury emotion, etc. In states that have SYG a person who uses deadly force in self defense is immune to prosecution if they believe it was necessary to prevent death or great harm to themselves. That burden of proof is on the state. This is what I would call lawful self defense in that you are not wrung thru court until you are hopefully "exonerated" by a jury of your peers. In NJ I do not have this protection so if I use something as a deadly weapon in self defense out on the street, like the knife I legally carry or a large rock I find at the scene, I will likely be arrested, spend a lot of money retaining a lawyer and raising bail (if even an option) and have to assert and prove self defense at trial where any numbers of things can go wrong. If something like this happens I can only hope there is a witness to the incident and that they are honest and thick skinned. I would go thru the same if I was legally carrying a firearm and used it in self defense. Now if I was in Virginia carrying a firearm legally with my VA permit and I was attacked out on the street I could immediately use deadly force in self defense. But if I was attacked and I couldn't immediately reach my firearm and needed to block a strike first before I draw my firearm I would then have the duty to retreat before I could use lethal force. If I did not attempt to retreat I would probably find myself presenting an affirmative defense at trial after gaining an arrest record and spending a lot of money. If I was in Florida under the same circumstances with my FL permit I do not believe I have any obligation to retreat. I can simply defend myself with deadly force if I believe it is necessary for self preservation. So when someone says they have the right to defend themselves with deadly force (as a general statement or qualified with "in all 50 states" or "with a carry firearm") the statement doesn't make sense to me. A "right" is something you should be able to exercise with the presumption of innocence. Not something you defend at trial successfully provided you have enough money and all the stars are aligned.

Everything I have been saying is clarification to that statement I made in a hastily added postscript to my explanation of legally carrying a knife in NJ. It was one thing that was "wildy incorrect", not a bunch of stuff. My position relates to the lack of congruency between possessing a weapon and being able to use it in self defense. I did not say "you can't carry a firearm for self-defense unless you have stand your ground or castle doctrine." I was talking about lawful self defense -- not being liable to prosecution -- and I still am And here I thought SYG puts the burden of proof on LE to find evidence to the contrary and on the court -- SYG providing immunity from prosecution unless they can prove otherwise. Whereas in a self defense claim would normally would be an affirmative defense at a homicide trial -- along with arrest record, bail, lawyers paid and your entire future on the line. I think you are grouping 2 very different things together as self defense whereas I am not. I don't think you're right about the burden of proof. You have avoided confirming the PA law. Notice I have not wavered on the only thing I mentioned about it. You say, "You have that right in 50 states, but somehow, Yes, you are still wrong." .. doesn't make sense. You also welched on your offer for suggestions. Then again, my expectations were minimal. I believe you're being intentionally obtuse. I will also sign off but I promise to return if you lure me back. It was nice jerking off with you too

No, I think that even if you are lawfully carrying a firearm you can only lawfully use your gun for self defense if the state has those protections. Otherwise, you must fulfill your duties to retreat, etc. and produce evidence that you took all those steps before you used deadly force as a last resort. My point was that those 2 things go together nicely -- they provide someone carrying a gun with the legal protection of using it for self defense. Out of 48 states that issue permits you are only protected from prosecution in 20 or so states that have stand your ground laws. Of the 30 or so states that have castle laws, most only limit you protection to your own home where you wouldn't need a permit to carry anyway. So when someone says they can carry for self defense, in many states they are can be liable to prosecution when they defend themselves with deadly force unless they are very careful in fulfilling their duty to retreat, etc. But you cannot -- you usually have to meet a narrow criteria, else you are liable to prosecution. And even if you meet the criteria you can still get wrung through court. I also didn't say anything about PA law other than "castle doctrine and/or stand your ground". Is PA not a state that has those laws on the books? From what I understand in PA you have the right to use deadly force in self defense wherever you are legally allowed to be. Am I wrong? My point above was that if PA changed their law and removed those protections outside the home, your carry permit would still be valid but you would not have the protection against prosecution if using deadly force to defend yourself outside the home. I'm posting on an internet forums as a matter of discussion. I am not publishing a book to be distributed to uneducated citizens as the word of law. As for the suggestions, go ahead driver. I put "for all lawful purposes", we'll see

? The beginning of that post How about CT or is that considered may issue?

Alright, I condede I was wrong on NH. I was thinking of CT. Now that you've focused on that one point, can find issue with the majority of my arguments?

I totally agree, there are always specific circumstances in which deadly force is permissible or will go unchallenged if you can produce evidence that you meet certain conditions The distinction here between those narrow exceptions and lawful self defense. In the latter you are protected from prosecution by the castle doctrine or stand your ground law. No arrest, no lawyer, etc. Once you get into the possibility of prosecution, and affirmative defenses, arguing whether you could have escaped thru a window, etc. it's a gamble It's getting late but I think we're on the same page

Thanks Sigman and Mosin. I will do some research over the next week or so and report back before I buy

I'll let Mipafox answer that because he alluded to the fact that his permit application had several options to choose from. I don't think the answers to this have to make sense, the answer you use should merely not be "self-defense" (or that concept similarly worded) in a state that you are not legally protected from prosecution for the use of deadly force outside your home (or wherever you would need a permit to carry concealed)

You are skipping over the part where I explained how I am in legal possession of a knife for lawful purposes. It seems like you skipped over a lot of what I wrote. Off the top of my head, New Hampshire (which I stated earlier) Now I thought I just read the argument from Midwest that you don't need a reason to get a concealed permit. Of course every state's permit is different. I have all the possible non-resident permits I can apply for so I can't apply for any more unfortunately. If you go back and read my original statement it was a comparison between lawful self defense and defending yourself in court (after being arrested and arraigned) by proving you acted under the strict and narrow confines of being not being able to escape, no non-lethal options, etc. I believe you live in a state that has castle doctrine and/or stand your ground integrated into the law and practically speaking your permit to carry fits together cleanly with self defense. If you are in Pennsylvania you have the protections of the castle doctrine which allow deadly force without prosecution. But let's say they change the PA law as to not allow justifiable homicide ala self defense. Your concealed carry permit will still be valid but you will not be able to defend yourself with deadly force without facing prosecution. The law? I didn't and the people I vote for usually don't get elected so I can't take any credit unfortunately. I took a cursory look to satisfy your question. In Virginia I don't even think I can lawfully use deadly force in my own home. In Maine I am limited to within my own home under certain conditions. The other 4 states have caste doctrine laws and some have stand your ground, all with deviations in exclusions.

I should not have used the word "most" there Even though your permit application doesn't ask for a reason, it doesn't make self defense a recognized legal purpose. Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground provide those protections for lawful self defense with the firearm. New Hampshire is one example of a shall issue state that requires a purpose that is not self-defense. Connecticut is another although their status as shall issue can be disputed theoretically (but not practically). I put "for all lawful purposes" when I applied for concealed carry in both these states. Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Florida, Virginia and Maine did not ask me for a reason on my concealed carry application. But again, that does not make it lawful to carry for self-defense

I was talking about the charges that Dan mentioned, "You get to go to court on aggravated assault charges, possession of a weapon for unlawful purposes, and I'm sure others. You will have to prove that you were using a deadly weapon for self defense because you had no clear route of escaping imminent death or serious bodily injury from the person attacking you" Those charges would still apply with whatever you chose to use as a weapon, be it a knife or a large rock or your martial arts training. Since I carry the folding knife for both work and day-to-day utility (i.e. peeling apples) I have a legitimate reason to possess the folder. And now I am on a level playing field if I am forced to use my knife in self-defense, jury emotion aside, as with someone using any random object as a deadly weapon in self-defense. In my opinion that nullifies that the "anti- knife carry" argument in my case. It should also be mentioned that in most states carrying a firearm for the purposes of self-defense, with a concealed carry permit or under the protections of constitutional carry, is not a recognized legal purpose. If you write "self-defense" as the reason you're in applying for a concealed permit in most states, the application will be denied.

Correct, but this is about what the OP can possess, not use. If you defend yourself with a large rock you can face similar charges if you can not prove the same.

And don't even THINK about bringing in a slingshot! Notice how you haven't heard from Dennis the Menace since 1963? He's been rotting in a NJ jail for felony possession. Serious business! Unfortunately your best bet for personal protection is a folding knife. Slightly better than nothing..

Today I sighted in the rifle at Westchester after getting it close with a laser boresighter at home I had a 6 inch spread with 5 shots at 100 yards. Having to load one round at a time thru the ejection port was not ideal for consistency. The downsized front post was helpful, I may even drop down to the smallest post (.034"). I reckon that a better marksman with younger eyes could probably shoot a 1-2 inch group with this rifle I'm thinking about a scope for shooting 200 yards but there don't seem to be any good options for the AK. I hear good things about the Ultimak rail, from the picture it looks like the scope mounts up front like a scout rifle. Any ideas or recommendations? This rifle will only be used for target practice and plinking but I wouldn't mind a red dot -- never used one before and I'm curious

Yes it seems to be enabled based on post count, somwhere between 318 and 1000+

Ah, thank you sir

Yeah it should show on any background check that you sign off on (i.e. lexisnexis)

How do you change the title that appears above your username and avatar/picture when you post? Mine currently says "NJGF Member" but of course I want to change it to something clever and witty

Made me chuckle

OP, as a sidenote you should submit a personal records request thru the state police.. It's suprisingly easy nowadays: Go to https://www.bioappli...nj/Default.aspx, fill out your info and pay the $41, schedule an appointment to get your prints done at Halsey St in Newark, fill out NJ form NJAPS2 with the same info you filled out online (http://www.nj.gov/nj...niversforma.pdf) and bring it with you to the appointment. You should have a latter back in a week or two either saying you have no criminal record in NJ or you have one and the details will be attached. Don't bother doing a federal request unless you lived out of of state or otherwise have a federal paperwork trail. Who knows, maybe someone used your name at booking or otherwise stole your identity. Or maybe there is something you did a long time ago that you forgot about. Of course you probably got denied for the reasons being discussed in the thread but it's important to do your own homework before someone checks you out And another vote for fighting the system *after* you take delivery of your FID and a few pistol permits first