HBecwithFn7

I think the state would have some difficulty going from "May Issue" to "No Issue," especially from the LE community. There would probably have to be some "grandfathering" of people who currently have NJ CCW permits, or exceptions for retired LEOs, politicians, judges, etc... people who already have them. And if they did that, there would be all kinds of legal challenges for "discrimination" reasons. I think the NJ legislature are experts at twisting laws and regulations to meet their needs and circumvent all kinds of federal intervention. They don't need to go to "no issue." Actually, I think it benefits them not to go "no issue" (better control of the process and less risk of legal challenges). But, failing that, they can tie things up in the courts for decades. I can just see people like Sen. Weinberg saying "Bring it on...." thinking that no one would dare challenge them in court. We have to be ready to do that, and take it all the way to the end with them.

I'd say two. Roberts and/or Kennedy can be kinda "iffy" on stuff like this.

Last week, I volunteered at my Chamber of Commerce's annual "Sporting Clay" Tournament in Tampa. It's held at a private outdoor sporting clay range about 10 miles from my house. Basically, there were 10 trap stations that were in place "for score." But there was one station (the one I operated) called "Crazy Clays." It didn't count towards anyone's individual score, but it was just a fun station. The field had a total of 5 traps placed in random locations, all around the field. The controller I was given allowed you to program the number of traps (5), the number of clays for each round (24 in this case), the number of shooters in each round (3 or 4), and the time interval between each volley (6 seconds in this case). Once I pressed the button to start the sequence, it was automatic and unstoppable. The first volley was 1 clay from each of the operating traps, all at once, and in all different directions. After that volley, every 6 seconds, either one or two clays would be thrown from any of the 5 different trap stations, every 6 seconds until 24 clays had been thrown. Shooters would be limited to 2 shells max capacity in their weapons at a time, and a total of 24 shells divided by the number of shooters. So, if a team of 4, they'd each have six shells, two at a time. A team of 3 would have eight.They would use those 6 second intervals to reload. What most of the teams would end up doing is alternating between volleys. After the first volley from all 5 trap stations, one half of the team would shoot while the other loaded, and they'd take turns back and forth. It was a team score, as opposed to the individual scores at the other stations, so it didn't matter. The highest score was 18 of 24, by a team of 4. You guys would have loved it.

In NJ, a "crime" would, for the most part, be the equivalent of a "Felony" elsewhere. That is any offense that is "indictable," and would carry a term of greater than one year in a state prison or equivalent facility. There are 4 degrees of crimes. A "Crime of the 4th degree" is usually 1 year to 18 months in the State Prison. 3rd degree is 3-5yrs. 2nd Degree is 5-10 years, and 1st degree is 10-20 years, all per each offense. Some offenses have their own sentencing guidelines, of course (Murder is 1st degree, but carries 30yrs to life without parole). A "misdemeanor" elsewhere is called a "Disorderly Person's Offense" in NJ, usually carrying up to 6 mos. and, usually served in a county jail or equivalent facility. A "Petty Disorderly Person's Offense" is, usually, the classic "30 days in Jail." I'd consult a lawyer if you're uncertain, but it would seem to me that if what you pled to (or was reduced to) did not carry a sentence greater than 6 months and was not a "crime" but a "Disorderly person's offense" (which it should be if was less than 1 year), you should be able to answer "No" to that question. It sounds like they're only asking if one has been convicted of a crime/felony.

Nothing against Aretha... obviously an extremely talented lady who deserves R-E-S-P-E-C-T. But the National Anthem is one of those songs that deserves the same, and deserves to be sung the way it was written... straight forward and almost "hymn like." Maybe that's just me, but I really don't like singers "interpreting" the National Anthem to that extent. That said, I think Lady Gaga at the Super Bowl nailed it, even though she flunked the "Banner yet wave" test..

I concur. The traffic is better on Sundays because most of the stores are closed. Paramus has all kinds of "blue laws" that make it illegal to sell certain things on Sundays. Taxes are lower due to all the tax revenue from the shopping malls. That's the same as with Englewood Cliffs and the business located there.

Recon - You are scheduled to travel this Friday. Best of luck, and hope you were able to get your "inventory" shipped appropriately. Let us know how things went. Regards, Hbec

Let us all hope that the state doesn't adopt this as their battle cry when the federal laws/regs come a floodin' in....

The Hope Barracks did have a bit of a reputation, as I recall. The Netcong & Washington Barracks were not as bad. I'm not sure it's the "military" cultural factor that's involved. I think it more an NJSP cultural factor... things taught in the "academy..." things taught by "management" and senior troopers. In essence, the epitome of "Us vs. them." One learns to "prevail at all costs..." One learns quickly how "the system works" and how to exploit it to prevail over the average citizen that doesn't know it as well as they do. The only people that seem to know the system better than troopers (and whom they treat differently) are lawyers, once they determine they are lawyers. I guess in Ms. Masarra's case, they didn't inquire as to her status soon enough. That said, I think local LEAs are much more "customer service" oriented. I worked very closely with the LEA in the towns where I served as an EMT, and they are nothing like NJSP. Much more "user friendly." Of course, there are exceptions everywhere, and at both extremes, but I think what's happening here is more a matter of NJSP culture than anything else.

Precisely.

See this week's GFH Radio Podcast... #286...

Maybe... maybe not. I'd actually like to see one additional conservative appointment after Scalia is replaced. Remember that Kennedy and even Roberts can be a little flaky when it comes to real conservative choices. Very risky. We need that 6-3 majority, just to be sure.

"Used" I believe. I can't imagine any police academy admitting any potential recruit that is "currently using..." Do they not do durg/urine tests before a final decision?

I know several FFLs that have been enforcing that for some time. I came into my FL FFL with a 4473 that was filled out electronically (via Adobe) and he rejected it... said I had to fill his form out in his presence.

Agreed. I don't want the federal govt. interfering either. But, just like NJ legislators, they are very smart people who know the law and the "system" and how to exploit it to get what they want. I guess we'll see how it shakes out in the courts.

That can be overturned, just as Obamacare itself is about to be. I already hear talk about the federal govt. withholding funds from "sanctuary cities" that won't comply with the govt's ICE efforts. NJ legislators are experts at obfuscation. They haven't stayed in power this long by being stupid. They *will* find ways around federal law. It sounds like it's going to be up to "The People" to not comply, then. Good Luck with that.

Biggest change is to remind all that using medical (or recreational) Marijuana disqualifies you from purchasing new guns... You can download it here.

And do you really think that NJ will just "give up" and say, "Oh well?" They will fight this to the death. They will blatantly ignore the federal law and keep imposing their restrictions. Who would dare challenge them in court? The only way for this (national reciprocity) to work is if federal funding for various projects is tied to compliance with the law (as federal Highway funding was tied to raising the drinking age to 21).

Precisely. Always remember to keep their end game in mind.... "Confiscate...Confiscate....Confiscate"

Update: AP just tweeted the following: Something tells me this engineer has definitely taken his last ride.

I'll be honest. I would not want to store any weapon where it's "open to public viewing." If it can be seen by someone standing outside the driver or front passenger window, that's not a good mounting place. I can see having a mounting place inside the center console or glove box. I also like the enclosed boxes mounted on the sides of the pickup truck.

That makes sense, considering the vehicle update cycle and having digital equipment installed, therein. When I was an EMT in NJ I did scanning as things were pretty much still analog. Although some areas in Mass. had gone digital by then. One question, though. Would digital scanners be effective, as much of the transmission being textual data transfers to the computer screens in the vehicles? Is there that much voice transception done in the digital world these days?

In fact, the US Atty. for the Newark Federal district.

It might not be about "compensatory" damages to her, the victim. It may also be about "punitive" damages against the defendant. In the one civil tort case on which I did serve as a juror (in fact the foreman of the jury), we rendered a verdict that had both elements (well, actually 3). 1) A compensatory damage amount for damages the victim suffered. 2) A %age subtraction from that compensatory amount, if it was found that there was any "contributory negligence" by the plaintiff/victim (there was none in this case), and 3) a "punitive damage" amount to punish the defendant. I'm thinking, in this case, the emphasis would probably be on the "punitive" side... First, I would do whatever I could to "avoid" being stopped in the first place (driving the speed limit, not standing out in traffic, etc.). Failing that, I would comply with any physical orders (turn off the car, produce documents, etc. put your hands where I can see them, etc.). If asked, "Do you know why I stopped you?" I would reply, "No I don't, sir." And then we'd take it from there. I would never consent to a search of the vehicle and insist on a warrant. If asked a question that I feel might be a trap, I would not answer. I would assert my rights. If they arrest me for that, I'd have my lawyer deal with it accordingly and take the appropriate legal actions.

I think any resistance at all against what a LEO wants could be considered "obstruction." The problem is that most of the citizenry fail to understand their rights and fail to exercise them. I think LE exploits that as part of the "intimidation" game... to get what they want. You have to be able to play that game as well as they do. This means having the same or better day-to-day knowledge of "the system" as they do (which they'll believe you won't (unless you're a lawyer), and which it seems Ms. Masarra did, being a lawyer). It also means being prepared to be "arrested" and spending some time behind bars (like Ms. Masarra did), even if you know you're right. Just do what they say (i.e. don't give them a reason to shoot you). That's what "false arrest" and "civil rights violation" lawsuits are for, as the troopers involved in the Masarra incident are finding out. I hope the court disallows the motion to dismiss and the trial proceeds. I guess it will come down to "who knows who" in the federal justice system.