Mr Sut

Did you do your fingerprints prior to dropping off your application. Reason I ask is the State Police web says that they will let you know about fingerprints when you submit your application 

1 minute ago, Kdin1 said:

Mr Sut

Did you do your fingerprints prior to dropping off your application. Reason I ask is the State Police web says that they will let you know about fingerprints when you submit your application 

I got instructions from NJSP Washington on what to use to book an Identogo appointment. I actually did my prints in the morning before I dropped off my packet to the NJSP Washington Station.

 

Permit to Carry Instructions Washington Station 2022.pdf

22 minutes ago, Mr.Stu said:

I spoke with the trooper at NJSP Washington today. As of this afternoon, my application is the only one on her desk but she hasn't done anything with it yet - I dropped it off 6/30 so it has sat for almost a week (but over a holiday)

She seems very nice and not an anti, so hopefully things will go OK. We joked about me being her guinea pig, but she has done permits before for armored car, etc.

I guess they are waiting to see if your application lays baby carry apps and grows wings. Lol.

29 minutes ago, CJack said:

I guess they are waiting to see if your application lays baby carry apps and grows wings. Lol.

They are wary, for sure, waiting to see if it has anchor baby apps.  They were thinking about shredding the app before it can reproduce on the Xerox, but do not know what to do in light of the recent overturning of R v W.

***DELETED***

Went to rtsp in union yesterday. 3,5,7,10, and 15 yards. Timed but nothing crazy. Holstered, fire 5, mag change, reholster, fire five more, clear and holster. Same at each distance. Were super friendly. FBI q target. 
 

Hoping that since they’re listed on state police website for qualifications I won’t run into any issues. They even list the state code that this qual satisfies on the paperwork. 
 

Handed completed app in at lunch today in Mt. Laurel. They were super friendly as always. They said once fingerprints are back the chief will approve asap. After that it’s out of their hands. Going for fingerprinting tomorrow. Have to go to Philly as their were no appointments available in a 50 mile radius to me in nj for a month. Sucks but whatever. Trying to get this done asap before they move the goal post on us. Fingers crossed. 

15 minutes ago, samiam said:

Can you please post a link to the NJSP web page where it says that? That could be the answer as to why I can't get a Contributing Case Number to give to Identogo in my effort to get fingerprinted before completing and submitting my application form. Identogo requires that number (which is apparently supposed to come from local PD, or nearest NJSP location if there is no local PD), along with the correct Service Code and ORI, in order to schedule a fingerprinting appointment.  

Was in Mount Laurel paperwork too. Once I submitted app they gave me the info needed for prints. 
 

Here is a link to SP doc that states this is how they’re handling. 
 

https://www.nj.gov/oag/njsp/firearms/pdf/Permit_To_Carry_Instructions.pdf

2 hours ago, ToddD said:

 

Went to rtsp in union yesterday. 3,5,7,10, and 15 yards. Timed but nothing crazy. Holstered, fire 5, mag change, reholster, fire five more, clear and holster. Same at each distance. Were super friendly. FBI q target. 
 

Hoping that since they’re listed on state police website for qualifications I won’t run into any issues. They even list the state code that this qual satisfies on the paperwork. 
 

Handed completed app in at lunch today in Mt. Laurel. They were super friendly as always. They said once fingerprints are back the chief will approve asap. After that it’s out of their hands. Going for fingerprinting tomorrow. Have to go to Philly as their were no appointments available in a 50 mile radius to me in nj for a month. Sucks but whatever. Trying to get this done asap before they move the goal post on us. Fingers crossed. 

So how do you qualify with this when CJack took the entire HQC1 .....................wrap your head around this and tell us......waiting for the standard to be set by the state.

No need to come in hot at me, guy. Sharing my experience. Relax. If it’s not accepted I’m out the money, not you. If you don’t feel a place approved by the state can determine an acceptable qualification don’t go there. 
 

Again, no one knows what will be accepted. Anyone applying this early is running a risk. Just sharing what I did. Take it or leave it, I don’t need to wrap my head around anything and tell you, but feel free to piss off with your confrontational attitude.  

6 hours ago, xXxplosive said:

So how do you qualify with this when CJack took the entire HQC1 .....................wrap your head around this and tell us......waiting for the standard to be set by the state.

Because the statute doesn't say you have to take exactly the HQC1...

The state won't be setting standards anytime soon, either. 

10 hours ago, ToddD said:

 

Went to rtsp in union yesterday. 3,5,7,10, and 15 yards. Timed but nothing crazy. Holstered, fire 5, mag change, reholster, fire five more, clear and holster. Same at each distance. Were super friendly. FBI q target. 
 

Hoping that since they’re listed on state police website for qualifications I won’t run into any issues. They even list the state code that this qual satisfies on the paperwork. 
 

Handed completed app in at lunch today in Mt. Laurel. They were super friendly as always. They said once fingerprints are back the chief will approve asap. After that it’s out of their hands. Going for fingerprinting tomorrow. Have to go to Philly as their were no appointments available in a 50 mile radius to me in nj for a month. Sucks but whatever. Trying to get this done asap before they move the goal post on us. Fingers crossed. 

Mt. Laurel to Union in its self is a good hike.. Good luck and keep us posted

So, I understand this chompin' at the bit to get a permit here, but somewhere down the line we're going to have to address this qualification BS ......what no one is talking about is,...what about folks in their later years who for one reason or another can't drop to one knee and shoot..... or shoot weak hand because of some injury or maybe arthritis....is the state going to deprive NJ citizens their 2A right  because they may be physically handicapped in one way or another.... the elderly are so often targets of crime.....these tests IMO are ALL Infringements placed upon us....Fla, Ga, VT....they all have it right.....here, we're nowhere near being right... CCW and self-defense isn't just for young cowboys, it's for everyone.....and that's how I feel .

1 hour ago, xXxplosive said:

So, I understand this chompin' at the bit to get a permit here, but somewhere down the line we're going to have to address this qualification BS ......what no one is talking about is,...what about folks in their later years who for one reason or another can't drop to one knee and shoot..... or shoot weak hand because of some injury or maybe arthritis....is the state going to deprive NJ citizens their 2A right  because they may be physically handicapped in one way or another.... the elderly are so often targets of crime.....these tests IMO are ALL Infringements placed upon us....Fla, Ga, VT....they all have it right.....here, we're nowhere near being right... CCW and self-defense isn't just for young cowboys, it's for everyone.....and that's how I feel .

I think many agree that the quals are the most undefined part.

The only standard available says that qualification is required, but there's nothing indicating that it HAS to be HQC1.

There are retired LEO's who are practically insisting that HQC1 will be needed, but places like GFH and RTSP who have been providing quals for many years believe the standard they use is sufficient.  They are both listed by NJSP as authorized places for qualification, so some people who are anxious are rolling the dice and going with the programs those places offer.

I think we'll know once people start getting their permits (or rejections).  I doubt NJ is eager to go out and add clarity, so don't expect much more to come out right away.

heard this AM  the NJSP are waiting for a directive from the AG regarding Quals.....and said they are holding all apps...., and not to expect anything too soon........but that has no bearing on a large segment of our citizens who maybe cannot meet the specs. set forth... and in violation of their rights ....... I still see what Judge Thomas declared as Constitutional Carry for all 50 states based on the 2nd and 14th...I believe these tests are designed to limit our Constitutional Rights under the 2A and those supporting them are doing the same...but that's only My Opinion.

On the subject of what CoF should be used for quals, the statute and Admin Code are silent on what the CoF should be, or even any guidance as to what skills it is supposed to test.

I am planning to start running quals - I have 2 volunteers to be guinea pigs to verify that my NRA Basic Pistol Instructor cert is sufficient to sign off on quals.

From my liability perspective, I am going to use HQC1 and HNQC. If someone I have signed off on is involved in an incident I wouldn't be surprised if they come looking for me to see whether the person really was properly qualified. If I can point to the CoF and say that is is the same that LEO and RPO use, I think I have a better chance of avoiding liability than if I used some other CoF that I just made up on my own.

I also already have firearms instructor liability insurance.

23 minutes ago, xXxplosive said:

heard this AM  the NJSP are waiting for a directive from the AG regarding Quals.....and said they are holding all apps...., and not to expect anything too soon........but that has no bearing on a large segment of our citizens who maybe cannot meet the specs. set forth... and in violation of their rights ....... I still see what Judge Thomas declared as Constitutional Carry for all 50 states based on the 2nd and 14th...I believe these tests are designed to limit our Constitutional Rights under the 2A and those supporting them are doing the same...but that's only My Opinion.

Totally agree on infringement and we have gazillion lawsuits to file (unfortunately) to get NJ anywhere near to the freedoms other states offer in this space.

NJSP "waiting for directive" is yet another BS delaying tactics. They have been doing RPO apps for years. The admin code and requirements are pretty clear in that aspect. The least they could do is to move their a** on the apps that include RPO or higher Quals at the least.  But ofcourse they are going to "wait" and sit on this as long as they can. Not only we have to deal with the NJ Politicians, we also have to deal with Bureaucracy that is rampantly anti-2A.  

48 minutes ago, xXxplosive said:

heard this AM  the NJSP are waiting for a directive from the AG regarding Quals.....and said they are holding all apps...., and not to expect anything too soon........but that has no bearing on a large segment of our citizens who maybe cannot meet the specs. set forth... and in violation of their rights ....... I still see what Judge Thomas declared as Constitutional Carry for all 50 states based on the 2nd and 14th...I believe these tests are designed to limit our Constitutional Rights under the 2A and those supporting them are doing the same...but that's only My Opinion.

Tell them they have 90 days to figure it out before you start carrying, legally. 

48 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

Tell them they have 90 days to figure it out before you start carrying, legally. 

And then when you do - you will most likely get arrested - the government will not adhere to timeframes of automatic 'approval'

 

If he does and he is stopped, how to he establish proof?

 

This is NJ - let's not lose sight of that fact.

 

Carry here will NEVER be like it is in free states that pay attention to their citizens rights.

Well, until folks here realize all these control measures enacted by the state are infringements  of 2nd and 14th then wait for the test results and see if they let ya....senior citizens or handicapped are to be excluded because of physical development / aging.......these tests are an infringement and it's Only My Opinion.

It's a pity no qualified lawyer has shared their thoughts with us here. Speaking from a non-lawyer perspective, the only direct effect of Bruen on NJ so far is the removal of the justifiable need requirement to obtain permit to carry. The NJ permitting process has been in place for many decades. Any sudden changes to the process, particularly to make it harder, would be legally highly suspect at the moment. The qualification requirement is not well-defined in the current instructions:

https://nj.gov/njsp/firearms/pdf/NJSP_WEBSITE_REVISION_FOR_PTC_v2.pdf

The current official state document that lists the qualification courses of fire is at:

https://nj.gov/lps/dcj/pdfs/dcj-firearms.pdf

Many people find the first qualification course of fire - HQC1 - on page 35 of that document and make a rushed judgment that this is what should be expected from civilians as well. In my opinion, this is a wrong judgment for many reasons. First of all, the test is clearly designed for service sized handguns carried by most law enforcement officers. I would venture a guess that a good number of these officers might not be able to pass HQC1 using a snubnosed revolver. Note also that law enforcement officers must repeat qualifications every six months. According to the current rules, the qualifications for permit to carry are only repeated every two years.

It seems that the currently existing guidance which is most closely related to permit to carry qualifications is the qualification course of fire for RETIRED law enforcement officers that can be found on page 79 of the above document. This point of view is also supported by the fact that the only NJ state guidance about authorized qualification instructors is the list of ranges that are authorized to provide RPO qualifications:

https://nj.gov/njsp/firearms/shooting-ranges.shtml

I think that the current RTSP qualification course of fire most closely resembles the RPO qualification course of fire on page 79 in the document linked above.

57 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

Tell them they have 90 days to figure it out before you start carrying, legally. 

The US Supreme Court said we can do so.....out side of our home for self-defense purposes....OMO.

15 minutes ago, xXxplosive said:

The US Supreme Court said we can do so.....out side of our home for self-defense purposes....OMO.

You are sadly being naive.....  

Only My Opinion..........

***DELETED***

***DELETED***

was just told, under the current system your permit is maxed out at 75yo.......so basically you have no right to self-defense upon reaching that age......what's right here.

7 minutes ago, xXxplosive said:

was just told, under the current system your permit is maxed out at 75yo.......so basically you have no right to self-defense upon reaching that age......what's right here.

At an age you might need it the most - goofy people

 

Goofy............!!!!!

20 minutes ago, xXxplosive said:

was just told, under the current system your permit is maxed out at 75yo.......so basically you have no right to self-defense upon reaching that age......what's right here.

IIRC, that only applies to retired LEO, or has that changed?

***DELETED***