HBecwithFn7

Depends on the FFL, I'd guess. If they "trust" you, they might let you do that work. But I'm thinking that they'd want to do the work themselves to ensure it leaves their custody as "NJ Legal." What happens to the original tube.....

One can have the original mag tube replaced with a smaller one. The basic 930 (with no tube, just a cap) can handle 4+1. When I purchased my 930 I bought a Nordic +2 Extension kit to make it 6+1. Likewise, you can by a Nordic +2 Kit, remove the original JM Pro tube, and put on the +2 extension to reduce it to 6+1.

Except that FL *does* disclose CCW info to other "law enforcement" authorities, per their statutes... Specifically, the MCAC for one. Just ask Mr. Filippidis.

On my way home from FL, I stopped in the Cabela's in Christina. I couldn't believe all the ammo just sitting on shelves awaiting their owners... If this store is half the size of the Hamburg store, that place must be a fortress! Can't wait to go back.

Perhaps if, not so much for himself, but for others in the GOP. Remember the NJ Primary is in a week or two. I wonder if he might be waiting until after that before taking action....

Not in NJ he doesn't. The threat was neutralized when the dog was "euthanized." No more justifiable need! </sarcasm>

My understanding is that, ultimately, it's up to the CLEO to "investigate" the app. How that's done Is up to them, I assume within guidelines established by the NJSP. I guess it depends on how strict the CLEO thinks the investigation needs to be. I believe that for my initial FID & 2P2Ps, the two references I listed were contacted. Since I'm my own employer (and I told my chief that when I submitted the initial paperwork), I was not contacted to "verify employment." When I filed for 2 additional P2Ps, some 3-4 months later, I don't believe even my two references (same ones) were contacted a 2nd time.

Sorry.... Ketchup for me...

I get that bro. I've been to NOLA, once in 1995 for Tech-Ed. One of my best times. I loved to go to "Mulates" restaurant near the Waterfront. And walk in all the waterfront mall stores. Of course, this was pre-Katrina so I have no idea what it's like now. I hope it's recovered OK....

That, and I'd prefer having a bag that doesn't blatantly advertise what might be in it. (i.e., BARETTA, SIG-SAUER, GLOCK, etc. etc.) all over it....

And few if any reports that he also had a knife, and that he actually stabbed three of his victims. They made it seem like he shot them all.

I wish I could... But I'll probably have a ton of stuff to do from having returned from FL. We'll see.

Where and when, etc? Any URL for info?

Some women prefer "women only" classes/instructors for a number of reasons. I took my mom to Heritage Guild a few months ago for the 1st time. As it happens, it was on a Tues., where they had the "Handgun 101 for women only" class. The instructor was a woman, although some of the HG RSOs helped out with the live fire portion of the class. No men were allowed to listen to the lecture or stand in the port area during the live fire portion. I had to wait in the lounge area for her. Mom loved it. She insists that when I bring my 14 y/o nephew there to take his training, I use the same female instructor. I get the sense that she was just more comfortable with a female instructor, and accepting "instructional feedback" from a female instructor. Not that she needed much. I understand from the RSO's that assisted that Mom "aced" the course. Anyway, as stated earlier in the thread, I will be taking my niece training soon as well. We'll see how she does with me as her mentor (she'll be 18 in about a month). I may not do HG because of the "consent" issue I mentioned earlier. We'll see.

Much appreciated. She'd be in Church on Sunday mornings. Or at work, otherwise (gotta make fuel money et al.). And it will probably be at EFGA. I have a guild membership also. But what I learned recently is people between 18-21 at HG must have parental (or guardian) consent even to shoot handguns under adult supervision! If 18 or over, they can sign their own consent/waiver for "long guns," but they must be 21 or have parental/guardian consent to shoot hand guns, even under "older" adult supervision... I dont' believe EFGA or the other ranges have this requirement.

Just curious... Have we identified all who post here "visually" (i.e. at a meetup, or "Shotgun Shootout" or when hanging out at your favorite FFL)? I'm wondering if, perhaps, some on here may be posting "androdgenously." I have my suspicions... I'll keep them to myself... :D And, FTR, I'm all male. I'll be trying to introduce my niece to the sport, as I introduced my nephew to it. She will turn 18 in July, and can shoot long guns on her own. Problem is, I believe her interest is in pistol shooting, so I'll be trying to work with her. I may need help as I need people willing to lend .22s for her to shoot (I only have 9mm and .45acp).

As expected, after the 10 day quarantine. The reports I read indicated that he attempted to attack the workers at the shelter as well. It's a shame, but probably necessary. Probably no way to rehabilitate the dog. I still want to know how the dog was raised/treated by their owners and whether or not they could face any penalties as a result. At least, they should face a penalty for violating leash laws, if there were any.

The should not do that unless they're actually selling you the firearm. Then they have every right to charge you tax on the value of the firearm.

Yes, it's worth it, if you can find what you're looking for at a much better price. Yes, you owe NJ Use tax on things you purchased from out of State. If the merchant doesn't collect it, you have to pay it on your NJ 1040 at end of year (or by Est. tax payments if large enough). Be wary... I've heard reports of some Tax depts. stopping UPS trucks and auditing the packages (i.e. the "taxman" delivering the package his/herself and demanding payment of Use tax up front before delivery)! gunbroker.com is just that - a "broker." You're actually dealing with the merchant that offers the item. You make your payment directly to that merchant, and they ship the item directly to the NJ FFL that you specify to them. You then pay the FFL transfer fee and NICS fee to that FFL.

Actually, I did say something that had to do with it... But, yes, let's end the discussion here. There are two issues, correct. 1) What happens when voluntarily transporting a weapon to an airport for a flight, and 2) what happens when one is forced into that scenario due to an airline mishap that results in a layover requiring the pax to leave air side. I think 2) is the more critical issue. If I'm living somewhere where I know there are these legal issues (like NJ or NYC), then I have to factor that into the risk/benefit calculation. If I live somewhere (and am traveling to somewhere) where I don't expect these issues, but are forced into it by the airline's mishaps, then that's a huge problem.

Agreed, but none of that should apply if the pax. stays "air side" and never possesses the weapon while "in transit." If they have to take custody of the weapon and leave the secure area, then all bets are off and they are subject to whatever state/local laws are in effect. But they'd have to be "caught" with it in possession. It would seem the primary way that happens is when they re-enter the airport and check in for their flight (and re-delcaring the weapon - and if the airline or TSA notifies state/local/transit police). I don't know of any cases where a pax. was under surveillance by LE and busted entering or leaving the airport building. I thought the whole point of this issue (and the concern) was pax. who *thought* they were only "transiting" through an airport (and not leaving air side or taking possession of their weapons while in transit) but being forced into that scenario (and being subject to state/local laws) due to an airline mishap. If a pax. is doing this "willfully," then it's their responsibility for what happens... Is it "right?" No, but it is the law... and it's why (until the law settles down) I won't transport on an airline. It's why I cancelled my Autotrain reservation to Florida and drove down (because they wouldn't allow my firearms on board the Autotrain).

But it wouldn't be in the owner's "possession" while in the custody of the airline, right? As I said earlier, as long as the pax. flies in, stays air side, never touches their checked baggage, and then leaves on an outbound plane (with gun in checked baggage aboard), they were never "in possession" of it. Did they violate the law, then? Or, does "ownership = possession" within the context of that law? And my point being, they really wouldn't... but it wouldn't matter, because the pax. would still have to travel some distance through the city limits to get to LGA or JFK from wherever they were staying... and thus, violate the law by being within city limits for that brief period of time. The assumption being that, if you arrive at the check in counter and declare your weapon, that you had to be somewhere in NYC to get to that counter and, thus, violated the law. If you flew into JFK/LGA, stayed air side, never touched your checked baggage and left again, you'd have never "possessed" it while in NYC and, thus, not violated the law. Unless, again, "ownership = possession." Can you cite what 3rd circuit rulings make it illegal to "fly into / out of" an airport with a gun in checked baggage and remaining in the airline's custody? Just curious... I wasn't aware of any other jurisdiction having "NYC like" laws... or any other cases where a pax. was confronted "air side" for flying in with a weapon still in the airline's custody. Or, for that matter, a case where a pax. was forced to stay overnight and then busted the next morning for checking in with a weapon (other than NYC airports). Did this happen in NJ based on NJ State law (or Philly based on Philly law)?

Perhaps not, if you "flew into JFK" on a layover, stayed on the secure side at all times, never had access to your checked luggage, and flew out again. I think the point is not ever needing to "check in" at the main counter with your gun in your luggage (i.e. where you have to declare it). Now, maybe the airline could screw you even more by forcing you to take custody of it while on air side layover, but.... No, you didn't. You questioned what constituted a violation of the law (i.e. "How could anyone know where they stayed"), implying that staying outside of NYC would not be a violation. My point is, because LGA/JFK are both within the corporate limits of NYC, just "arriving at the airport" from the outside (regardless of where you stayed) and "checking in at the main counter" seems to place you sufficiently within NYC to constitute a violation of the NYC law (if you check in with a gun).

Would not the very fact that you arrived at JFK/LGA from "somewhere" and checked in (regardless of your local origin) be considered "being in NYC with your gun" and a violation of the law? I mean, it's not like you stayed on the secure side of the airport all the time. You landed, collected your luggage (with your gun), left the airport and returned to the airport (with your gun). I would think they'd consider that a violation of the NYC law.

Would it matter, though? If they're going to take the gun involved in the HD scenario, would they also not take your *entire* home inventory as well? Or are they not allowed to do that constitutionally while "under indictment," but not yet "convicted...." ?