ryan_j

So if I shoot heroin at home and a police officer is not present I guess I haven't broken any laws either. I agree that it is a stupid law, but I disagree that it is never enforced. I will say that it hasn't been enforced yet, like the hollow point ban was and now airport firearms transport by nonresidents.

That is a GREAT example of just how utterly stupid NJ's laws are. You aren't actually training someone with that firearm, yet you can show him/her the firearm just because you're an instructor. Meanwhile if I ask my wife or a friend to hold my firearm for me while I change my clothes or do something else, I've just done an illegal transfer. NJ never ceases to amaze. Nappen had posted a link to an article where it shows where in daily life we can unknowingly commit felonies without even realizing it. I'll see if I can dig it up.

You can also read the other articles there, that are from antis. Some of them shovel some real bulls***.

http://harvardlawreview.org/2014/04/the-second-amendment-as-a-normal-right/ Commentary by Alan Gura in the Harvard Law Review

You are traveling with a firearm in a locked case in the trunk, and you go from your home to the diner, then to the grocery store, then to the laundromat, all with that unloaded firearm in a locked case in your trunk. You are then stopped by the police for a traffic violation, and they search your car. They find this unloaded firearm in a locked case. Are you illegally in possession? You have no access to the firearm how can there be possession

Of course there is no exemption... as I said. No. But unless you tell the skycap, "here is my luggage, it has guns in it, and I am leaving you in possession of these guns" the skycap really isn't "in possession" of your firearms. There is a legal term for this, I forgot what it was. Technically, yes. Is it ever prosecuted? Probably not. But there is no exemption in the law, and Nappen has said that it could constitute an illegal transfer. Yes. No exemption for that. Is it likely to be prosecuted? Probably not. But there is no exemption for this. The exemptions list specific places where you can temporarily transfer firearms to other people for specific purposes. To show someone at your home is not one of them. You can't use the argument that "it's common sense" either, as the hollow point exemption was common sense too, but as Brian Aitken found out, a judge can very easily interpret the law exactly as written and the end result is a big fat screwing. That is definitely an illegal transfer. This is why services such as Firearms Support and Storage exist. But again, will law enforcement even know you did this? Will they care? Probably not. It would take a LEO who is savvy and knows the ins and outs of the law. Most of them do not, and I bet most don't know this is an illegal transfer.

FID, carry permit or permit to purchase a handgun. I've used two of the above to buy pistol ammo already.

Somehow they do just fine in the vast majority of other states where you don't need a FID for anything.

For some reason I thought you were only allowed to carry the firearm(s) you qualified with. In any case it is still an illegal transfer. If you do not think it is, please point out the law which allows this type of transfer to take place. It does not fall under the exemptions.

Nah, that is a South Jersey old wives tale. The last shop I went to, RTSP in North Jersey doesn't require FID to see/handle a gun prior to purchase.

Illegal transfer. Plus, he can't check in your luggage for you. Also, for a retired cop, his permit only covers the firearm listed on it. LEOSA covers everything though.

He's not on the board. http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/board.asp?privcapId=160210

Michael Bloomberg no longer runs Bloomberg, LP.

Well, it's not like handguns are uncommon in Newark...

http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/05/scotus-for-law-students-what-does-the-solicitor-general-do-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/ I doubt the SG would be involved as this is a challenge to a state law.

The attorney who goes before SCOTUS to represent the Government. On a side note, Paul Clement, the attorney who won Peruta was a former solicitor general who has appeared 70+ times before the Supreme Court.

Yes, I know. But it's encouraging, rather than just an outright prediction of denial.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/04/supreme-court-challenge-student-predictions/ 47.4% polled predict a grant.

The law only says that you must be going to or from a range, or place of target practice. It doesn't say where you have to be coming from. So if you go from one range to another you're good. I did exactly that last weekend. Went from an indoor range to an outdoor one. People do that all the time. No laws broken.

It could go either way. Open carry could be seen as a way to discourage people from carrying. Of course, if they restrict us to open carry, I want us all to march on Trenton every month carrying openly, and just carry openly everywhere. Let them realize that their plan is not working. Of course they probably realize this and they will just let it fall to concealed carry... that's if they even pass a law. They might just leave it as-is which means you can choose openly or concealed. But again, they have to take the case first... let's get there first before we start planning how to carry.

Total sham. FEW if any of these pistols were imported into the US.

That is probably what they will do. IF they even take the case.

ABE, AVP and PHL are good.

I live in Sussex County and every commercial airport is at least an hour away.

There a few of them. Same trainers who do RPO quals.