Cereza

Has anyone ever left the "employer" field blank?

You would think so, but this is New Jersey. Thank you for posting the links to the bills. Did anyone else notice... H.R. 986: "To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a means by which nonresidents of a State whose residents may carry concealed firearms may also do so in the State." H.R. 402: "To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State." If I'm reading correctly, neither S.498, H.R. 986 nor H.R. 402 is not going to help us here in NJ. Parsing H.R. 923 is giving me a headache, but the NRA site says, "this legislation is the House companion bill to S. 498. The legislation would also respect the rights of individuals who possess concealed carry permits from their home state." So, 0 for 4 for NJ residents?

Can you link the two latter bills? I'd like to read them. (I've only seen the text of Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015 | S.498 so far.)

I don't have the legal background to judge whether that's a viable workaround or not, but remember, power given to the Federal Government is never relinquished willingly. Be very careful what you give up in perpetuity for short term gain.

I agree, and that's what the court did in Heller. When D.C. passed laws that effectively banned handgun ownership, the Court said not so fast, that violates the Constitution and struck it down. What I'm pointing out is that in that same decision Justice Scalia said that gun rights are not unlimited, i.e. states could forbid guns in schools and government buildings and states could impose restrictions on the right to carry. Filling one Supreme Court vacancy does not necessarily tip the Court in favor of constitutional carry. Just this past summer Roberts, Kennedy and Alito supported a majority decision (Voisine v. United States) in which misdemeanor violations led to the confiscation of individuals' guns in Maine. I'm not convinced Roberts, Kennedy, Alito or even Thomas are going to lend support to a decision that completely scraps state controls.

SCOTUS (Scalia included) previously ruled that the states have the right to place limitations on the Second Amendment. Even if Trump could appoint Wayne LaPierre to the court, I'm not sure the majority would rule that a state's permit process was a violation of the Second Amendment.

I'm not a lawyer but my theory is that they're written that way to preserve states' rights (aka power) over their residents. States' rights is one of the excuses that the PA AG's have been using to re-examine reciprocity agreements. It came to their attention that some PA residents have been granted the right to concealed carry by other states, in effect superseding PA's sovereignty over its citizens, and no government on earth likes seeing its power usurped.

$3K is a bargain next to the Fusion MSRP: $10,999.99

That is the collection of my dreams. All that's missing is the Fusion… Inox versions are absolutely produced by the American branch of the company though I have no idea when production first started. In theory they're still being made though finding a 92FS Inox brand new in-stock is an epic quest at this time. I spotted one at GSSC back in April or May of this year and I haven't seen one since.

Be very, very careful. Read about what happened to Mia Higginbotham: Higginbotham and her husband carefully researched the necessary legal requirements for transporting firearms on an airplane. The TSA states on its website that a gun must be unloaded and locked in a hard sided container, and transported as checked baggage only. When Higginbotham took the gun to the airport it was in the originally manufactured box, in a hard non-crushable suitcase that had double locks on it. She declared it at the desk, and it passed the TSA x-ray screening. A counter agent stopped them and said that the firearm must be in a metal box, even though the TSA never noted that on their website. Higginbotham decided to surrender the gun, but during the time that she was looking for an alternative, the sergeant called a New Jersey prosecutor and told them to arrest Higginbotham. Police officers arrested her in front of her daughter and husband for illegally possessing a gun that she legally owned. Even though she broke no federal laws and only a second-degree state felony, her bail was set at $50,000 because of “the severity of the crime.” Full story at: http://redalertpolitics.com/2015/09/29/nj-woman-arrested-illegally-possessing-gun-legally-owns/ NRA video here:

Thanks for the heads up. Price went up $3 a card, but still a bargain.

https://www.attorneygeneral.gov/Media_and_Resources/Firearm_Reciprocity_Agreements/ The key is resident vs. non-resident. Non-resident FL reciprocity was done away with in Feb. 2013, and non-resident Utah in Jun. 2014.

MiNH Link: http://www.njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/81880-meanwhile-in-new-hampshire/ Maybe we can change this one to the "Save NH CCW in PA!" thread?

Make sure you check again in January 2017. If Josh Shapiro, the Democrat running for AG, pulls out a win he's already said that he's targeting reciprocity agreements. Quoting from his website: Review concealed carry permit reciprocity agreements Pennsylvania sets and enforces its own gun laws to keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have them due to criminal activities or mental health issues. But some get approval to carry from other states and skirt our laws. As Attorney General, Shapiro will carefully review Pennsylvania’s reciprocity agreements and modify or close those that would allow guns into the hands of dangerous people who should not have them under Pennsylvania law. Source: www. joshshapiro. org / agenda / getting-tough-on-gun-violence / (take out the spaces)

Has anyone considered writing to Assemblyman Carroll to ask?

The full text is available at ballotpedia: https://ballotpedia.org/New_Jersey_Dedication_of_All_Gas_Tax_Revenue_to_Transportation,_Public_Question_2_(2016) Here's a tl;dr version courtesy of the Lt. Gov. ETA 11/2/2016: Kim G put up a fact sheet on why everyone should vote no on 2: http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/nj1015.com/files/2016/11/Vote-No-On-Two-Fact-Sheet-Rev.jpg

I'm not against taxation. I'm against the NJ government raising the taxes on everything so that they can add a few stops to a light rail that the majority of NJ residents don't want and don't use, and screw our future in the process because they'll have to borrow $12 billion in hope that they'll be able to complete the project. If you think the money they raise is going towards repairing our shitty roads, bridges and overpasses, you must also believe in the Easter Bunny. Per everyone's favorite Senate Majority Leader: "No one here is voting for a gas tax unless we know, and we know for certain, that Hudson-Bergen Light Rail comes to fruition," Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg said. "It has taken too long." "The group of senators encouraged voters to vote yes on ballot question 2, which would guarantee all the TTF money raised would be mandated for use on transportation projects." Source: http://www.nj.com/bergen/index.ssf/2016/10/extension_of_light_rail_to_bergen_county_seen_as_priority.html

Your home range is GFH—have you asked them if they would assist in the transfer?

Voting yes on Question 2 gives the NJ government the authority to borrow up to $12 billion ($1.5 billion a year in borrowing for eight years) for any transportation project they want, i.e. the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail expansion. Assuming that you think the light rail project is a great way to spend a couple of billion dollars (I don't) the problem is that their math doesn't work. The income from the gas / diesel / petroleum tax—while driving up the price of EVERYTHING in NJ—is predicted to fall short of the yearly $1.2 billion funding goal since fuel consumption is in a years-long downward trend and they know there will be a drop-off in out of state drivers coming specifically to NJ to fill their tanks. So what's NJ to do if they miss their fundraising goals and they're borrowing money? Well, the legislature didn't approve a 23¢ increase, they passed a formula that allows the state treasurer to adjust the gas tax rate every August. Think that rate is going to drop if we're in the hole? Voting no on Question 2 will prevent them from borrowing $12 billion, and without that loan they get to go back to the drafting table and come up with a real lockbox amendment.

Did they remove it? I see Howard's comment, but not yours. I think it would be better if 2A supporters bought tickets and got to voice their opinions during the Talkback. Part of the problems with these things is that while they're touted as discussions they're simply bias-confirming echo chambers. Your comment survived at least the five-minute mark... spoke too soon—it's gone.

I like Assemblyman Carroll but that was painful to watch. There was a lot of misinformation going back and forth. eta: sorry, my brain checked out for a moment. I see you said it was the legislature…

They made us wait two commercial breaks for that BS slow reveal…

D'oh. I see now you put the link above the video...{need more coffee}... awesome find.

This link might work: http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/10/is_joe_piscopo_thinking_of_running_for_nj_governor.html#incart_river_index tl;dr version:

Does the proposed bill invalidate all of the directive or just the "justifiable need" portion?