N.J. laws on guns may be relaxed

 

There may be momentum for expanding the rights of law-abiding gun owners in New Jersey.

 

New Jersey residents and visitors have the right to use deadly force on their properties against criminal trespassers, according to the Self-Defense Law, last amended in 1987. The state's gun-control regulations are considered very tight and generally prevent people from carrying concealed weapons.

Some lawmakers hope the McDonald v. Chicago decision -- which one Supreme Court justice predicted will spark a slew of lawsuits -- will loosen New Jersey's regulations at a time when it seems most necessary.

"We hope it opens the doors,' said Louis Crescitelli, chief of staff for Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose, R-Sussex.

 

The bill would free people who are justified in using such force in New Jersey from any criminal prosecution and civil action.

"This is for situations before police can arrive and decisions have to be made," Bucco said, adding the bill wasn't originally geared toward budget cuts and people can still rely on police departments.

Assembly Law Enforcement Committee member Paul Moriarty, D-Gloucester, said he'd be interested in hearing testimony for the bill but that is up to committee Chairman Gordon M. Johnson, D-Bergen, who decides which bills reach the committee agenda. Johnson couldn't be reached Friday for comment.

State Senate President Stephen M. Sweeney, D-Gloucester, said through a spokesman any new self-defense legislation would need to be closely scrutinized to "ensure it met the dictates of common sense."

"All residents must be able to protect themselves in their own home when they feel their life is in imminent danger, as our laws currently do," Sweeney said in an e-mailed statement.

 

Nice!

N.J. laws on guns may be relaxed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nice!

 

Hopefully the media pressure will get Johnson to at least hear some pro-gun bills and get them to committee. Thanks for the link.

Link above didn't work for me. Found one that did here: link

State Senate President Stephen M. Sweeney, D-Gloucester, said through a spokesman any new self-defense legislation would need to be closely scrutinized to "ensure it met the dictates of common sense."

"All residents must be able to protect themselves in their own home when they feel their life is in imminent danger after running away as far as you can go, then telling the BG to leave and that you are armed, and then you are going to see a civil suit no matter what the result is, as our laws currently do," Sweeney said in an e-mailed statement.

 

 

Bold inserted for actual laws.

 

What a knob.

makes me proud to be from the same town as Alison.

If only things like this came to be true.....

 

With all the budget cuts and LEO layoffs, there NEEDS to be a movement towards citizens being able to protect themselves.

Link above didn't work for me. Found one that did here: link

 

Your link is to their beta site:

http://beta.courierpostonline.com/article/20101025/NEWS01/10240336/-1/FEEDBACK

 

My link is to their production page:

http://www.courierpostonline.com/article/20101024/NEWS01/10240336/N-J-laws-on-guns-may-be-relaxed

 

Also found this link:

 

http://www.courierpostonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=201010240336

 

http://www.courierpostonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=201010240336

If only things like this came to be true.....

 

With all the budget cuts and LEO layoffs, there NEEDS to be a movement towards citizens being able to protect themselves.

There is, The NJ Second Amendment Society. We are working towards this exact goal, along with quite a few other things. Come to the meeting on the 17th Nov and find out. PM me if you have any questions.

If only things like this came to be true.....

 

With all the budget cuts and LEO layoffs, there NEEDS to be a movement towards citizens being able to protect themselves.

 

The police have no duty to protect you, see the supreme court case Castle Rock v. Gonzales. The police have some deterrent effect and arrests take criminals off the street but for the most part they arrive after the deed is done and fill out the reports afterward. A 20% reduction in police via layoffs etc. will have no noticeable impact on crime. It will affect how long it takes them to respond but 99.999% of the public would be none the wiser. Crime statistics will probably go down as fewer things will get reported. If you reduce too much, it will flip the other direction and that would be bad. We're no where near the levels that these RIFs will make any difference one way or another.

What Mark said.

 

And, this could be making its way through the system as a scorched earth, last resort alternative to taking another look at the budget cuts.

 

"If we can't find some money to keep these services going, we may have to allow the sheep population to arm legally defend themselves, and you all know what will happen then. It can't be allowed... there would be chaos. The streets will run red with the blood of the innocent. We MUST find a way to keep this from happening to our children. More taxes! More, I say... MORE, not less."

The police have no duty to protect you, see the supreme court case Castle Rock v. Gonzales. The police have some deterrent effect and arrests take criminals off the street but for the most part they arrive after the deed is done and fill out the reports afterward. A 20% reduction in police via layoffs etc. will have no noticeable impact on crime. It will affect how long it takes them to respond but 99.999% of the public would be none the wiser. Crime statistics will probably go down as fewer things will get reported. If you reduce too much, it will flip the other direction and that would be bad. We're no where near the levels that these RIFs will make any difference one way or another.

bs..when the Skells in Trenton, AC, and Newark are wearing t-shirts proclaiming the Layoff date as "D-Day" (something you wont ever see in the media) then the Criminals know EXACTLY what the RIF's are going to do. Let me address the gonzales case as well..the court stated that there cant be a CIVIL LIABILITY for "Not Protecting" someone, not that there isnt a "Duty" to protect. Simple fact is there is a VERY small percent age of Police to the population, regardless of what some folks here claim. INCLUDING Municipal, State, Federal, and Corrections, as well as about 2000 retired members (for PBA, i dont know how many retirees are carried on FOP's roles) the NJ State PBA has about 36000 members, and FOP has about 13,000. Let's be generous and say on all levels there are 45K active LEO's. Corrections..figure around 15K between state and Counties, that brings you down to 40,000. Take off another 1500 or so for Federal between FBI, DEA, Fed Corrections, ICE, NPS and so on. that leaves us with about 38,500 for state, county and local LE. Take about 1200 off of THAT for the layoffs this year, so we're at 37,300 as a rough estimate of total LE. Without reducing that number further for those not actually on the street, such as Admin, and specialty units (Homicide, major Crimes, Special Victims, ect) NJ states population as of last year was 8,707,739. One LEO per 233 people....which doesnt sound like a bad ratio..until you look at it more realistically, and that number jumps closer to 1/1000, or more depending on a plethora of factors. My department for example. we have a population of around 45K. On an average night from 10pm to 6 am, we have SIX officers on the street, a ratio of 1/6667. ALL it takes is a good, rolling domestic, a bad car accident, and a DWI, and now we have ONE guy for that 45,000. Let's say we have a Bad night, and we have that Domestic, serious MVA, and throw in a rolling bar fight, where we have to call for help from the neighboring towns. In the middle of that, we get a 911 call for another domestic. We free someone up, but ti takes 15 minutes before they get to the location, and it ends up as a homicide. SHOULD that police Department be Civilly Liable for not "protecting" that person, when there was physically NOBODY that could respond? THAT was the crux of Gonzales. We have a Duty to TRY, and we do the best we can, but since we dont have that "Police State" people love to try and peg us as all we can do is our best.

It really doesn't matter if they are required to protect us because until they can instantly teleport to a crime in progress they are almost always going to be be there after the fact. Thats just reality.

 

In my opinion it is quicker to deal with the crime in progress yourself (if possible) then call the police afterwards. Call during the crime in progress if you have the time or another person to man the phone.

 

This post is referring to if someone is in your house. Not just any random crime.

Pipes,

 

I can't speak for everyone, but I wasn't being accusatory, and i apologize if you read it that way. I understand that:

 

1 - you guys can't be everywhere...

2 - nobody has the power to predict when/where something bad is gonna happen...

3 - the very idea of holding police liable for crimes committed simply because they arrived after the fact is absurd.

 

We all don't have a cop walking alongside of each one of us, nor should we. Personal responsibility still means something.

 

Not all of us here think "badged up moron" when we're talking about LE.

We all don't have a cop walking alongside of each one of us, nor should we. Personal responsibility still means something.

 

Not all of us here think "badged up moron" when we're talking about LE.

 

+1

bs..when the Skells in Trenton, AC, and Newark are wearing t-shirts proclaiming the Layoff date as "D-Day" (something you wont ever see in the media)

 

Source please? All I see are quotes here:

http://www.policeone.com/police-administration/articles/2799485-NJ-police-layoffs-bring-sadness-and-chaos/

https://www.fop.net/servlet/display/news_article?id=2801&XSL=xsl_pages%2Fpublic_news_individual.xsl&nocache=25508242

 

and a few other places quoting "officer John Williamson" and Derrick Hatcher from the FOP who quotes John Williamson.

 

Where's the pictures? Surely this would be big news? After all, these folks have a vested personal interest in keeping as many cops in their departments as possible "See look what the criminals will do! Fear works, pictures of the proof work even better. If you think the media wouldn't cover it, you're sorely mistaken.

 

Even you have now blown it up. It was just Newark Gang members, now it's AC and trenton gang bangers running out to T-shirt shops for some custom pressings.

 

This has all the makings of an Urban legend, it shouldn't be difficult to snap a photo from a collar.

 

 

then the Criminals know EXACTLY what the RIF's are going to do.

 

Yeah, the streets will be deserted like Omega Man and they can rampage at will. It just means that the cops that are left will go out and gather them up like cordwood.

 

Let me address the gonzales case as well..the court stated that there cant be a CIVIL LIABILITY for "Not Protecting" someone, not that there isnt a "Duty" to protect. Simple fact is there is a VERY small percent age of Police to the population, regardless of what some folks here claim. INCLUDING Municipal, State, Federal, and Corrections, as well as about 2000 retired members (for PBA, i dont know how many retirees are carried on FOP's roles) the NJ State PBA has about 36000 members, and FOP has about 13,000. Let's be generous and say on all levels there are 45K active LEO's. Corrections..figure around 15K between state and Counties, that brings you down to 40,000. Take off another 1500 or so for Federal between FBI, DEA, Fed Corrections, ICE, NPS and so on. that leaves us with about 38,500 for state, county and local LE. Take about 1200 off of THAT for the layoffs this year, so we're at 37,300 as a rough estimate of total LE. Without reducing that number further for those not actually on the street, such as Admin, and specialty units (Homicide, major Crimes, Special Victims, ect) NJ states population as of last year was 8,707,739. One LEO per 233 people....which doesnt sound like a bad ratio..until you look at it more realistically, and that number jumps closer to 1/1000, or more depending on a plethora of factors. My department for example. we have a population of around 45K. On an average night from 10pm to 6 am, we have SIX officers on the street, a ratio of 1/6667. ALL it takes is a good, rolling domestic, a bad car accident, and a DWI, and now we have ONE guy for that 45,000. Let's say we have a Bad night, and we have that Domestic, serious MVA, and throw in a rolling bar fight, where we have to call for help from the neighboring towns. In the middle of that, we get a 911 call for another domestic. We free someone up, but ti takes 15 minutes before they get to the location, and it ends up as a homicide. SHOULD that police Department be Civilly Liable for not "protecting" that person, when there was physically NOBODY that could respond? THAT was the crux of Gonzales. We have a Duty to TRY, and we do the best we can, but since we dont have that "Police State" people love to try and peg us as all we can do is our best.

 

It's not just Gonzales, it's also South v. Maryland, Bowers v. Devito, Susman v. City of Los Angeles, DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, Davidson v. City of Westminister, Antique Arts Corp. v. City of Torrence, Ne Casek v. City of Los Angeles, Bowers v. Devito, Hartzler v. City of San Jose, Warren v. District of Columbia, Westbrooks v. State of California, Souza v. City of Antioch on and on and on. Look them all up. I can do this all day. Case after case after case. Police have no duty, civilly or otherwise to protect the citizens. None. Zero. Zip. Zilch.

 

All that said, this does not mean they don't try or that they are indifferent. Far from it. My brother is a deputy sheriff. I've known plenty of cops, most are good guys. Some are aholes. Most would take a bullet for citizens. The fact is however that they have NO DUTY to protect citizens.

 

I understand there are times you're short staffed. You do what you can and that's that. If enough people die from it, it'll change.

In this state I will believe it when I see it. My mayor here in Woodbridge decided to lay off the custodians instead of teachers or cops. I don't see the ranks of cops going down anytime soon regardless of what these clowns say. It's all scare tactics to raise your property taxes!!!!!

The police have no duty to protect you, see the supreme court case Castle Rock v. Gonzales. The police have some deterrent effect and arrests take criminals off the street but for the most part they arrive after the deed is done and fill out the reports afterward. A 20% reduction in police via layoffs etc. will have no noticeable impact on crime. It will affect how long it takes them to respond but 99.999% of the public would be none the wiser. Crime statistics will probably go down as fewer things will get reported. If you reduce too much, it will flip the other direction and that would be bad. We're no where near the levels that these RIFs will make any difference one way or another.

 

 

Nice to see someone else knows cops have no duty to protect you. Try telling this to some people and they think your nuts.

Well, at least its being talked about, that's all it seems to be at this point, maybe to score points in the last few days before the elections?

 

Still, it might be a good idea to push NOW, for a bunch of changes, before the Republicans win some elections here shortly and screw things up (which they most certainly will, eventually).

I'll chime in from Lacey Twp.

Municipal building closed one day per week, employees take furlough day on those days, three part timers laid off.

Police get no furloughs and gain 1 special police officer.

I'd still like my carry permit and laws changed. There has been a rash of b&e's.

I'll chime in from Lacey Twp.

Municipal building closed one day per week, employees take furlough day on those days, three part timers laid off.

Police get no furloughs and gain 1 special police officer.

I'd still like my carry permit and laws changed. There has been a rash of b&e's.

 

 

Ya that figures. Lay off the part timers. They make all the money!

In this state I will believe it when I see it. My mayor here in Woodbridge decided to lay off the custodians instead of teachers or cops. I don't see the ranks of cops going down anytime soon regardless of what these clowns say. It's all scare tactics to raise your property taxes!!!!!

By year's end, including the layoffs this month and next in Newark, Trenton, Atlantic City, and Camden there will have been about 1200 Police laid off in NJ, and another 300 or so firefighters..that isnt a scare tactic, those are actual numbers. As far as Furloghs go, the way the law is written, is that the ENTIRE DEPARTMENT gets furloghed..therefore if you want to furlogh your cops, they ALL go on that day. THAt is why it is not lawful to Fuurlogh Police, Fire, or EMS.

 

Oh and Mal, the D-Day stories started in trenton, went from there to AC, and are currently going in In Newark. NONE of the regular newspapers or reporters will touch this, nor will any of the departments officially recognize it, but it IS out there, whether or not YOU Believe the stories or not.

By year's end, including the layoffs this month and next in Newark, Trenton, Atlantic City, and Camden there will have been about 1200 Police laid off in NJ, and another 300 or so firefighters..that isnt a scare tactic, those are actual numbers. As far as Furloghs go, the way the law is written, is that the ENTIRE DEPARTMENT gets furloghed..therefore if you want to furlogh your cops, they ALL go on that day. THAt is why it is not lawful to Fuurlogh Police, Fire, or EMS.

 

Oh and Mal, the D-Day stories started in trenton, went from there to AC, and are currently going in In Newark. NONE of the regular newspapers or reporters will touch this, nor will any of the departments officially recognize it, but it IS out there, whether or not YOU Believe the stories or not.

 

 

No, this is a scare tactic. Why on God's green earth would you lay off Cops and Firefighters? Know what happens... people say "I don't care what you need to do to get their jobs back, DO IT...Raise my taxes if you have to"! I have seen it in my home town.. The citizens vote down these silly school budgets and then teachers and administrators say "we'll have to teach your kids in trailers... we mean it if this budget gets shot down again..."

 

So the budget gets shot down, they spend $500,000 for a few trailers and put them on the FRONT lawn of the school and parents cry... "no, this is horrible we'll do whatever you need"! Meanwhile, they raise the taxes, expand the schools and end up with empty rooms. Freaking ploy....

 

They'll cut whatever will freak people out then raise taxes to further their corrupt agenda.

Cedar Knolls..... small town. Laying off quite a few people.... including 2 police officers. Just found out yesterday.

 

No scare tactics.... realility ...

I wish they would lay off everyone in my town cept the two cops I know. At least they get to shoot the real predators in town once a year or so.(that'd be bears).

 

Maybe that way they wouldn't spend 18 million dollars on a "town center" that ended up just being a road. Or perhaps maybe we wouldn't have had the town manager or whatever he was titled taking Vacations at Atlantis with his hoochie mama assistant on town dime or maybe the current Mayor(A developer) selling off the unbuildable lots to the town as "Green space". Hell, we wouldn't have had a sewer system that can't be used because it's not connected to the main part of the process plant. OOPS! Who knew liquids have to run down hill or get pumped up? What is this gravity thing you speak of?

 

Lay them ALL off. Incompetent a$$holes. All building needs a varience...gee, that'll be $500 or $5000 right into the slush fund, thank you very much, may I have another sir?

vernon is BY far the most corrupt town in sussex county. I live in a neighboring town and I read all about it. I feel bad for you, but at least the Vernon PD is relaxed and doesn't bother most people like say Sparta

No, this is a scare tactic. Why on God's green earth would you lay off Cops and Firefighters? Know what happens... people say "I don't care what you need to do to get their jobs back, DO IT...Raise my taxes if you have to"! I have seen it in my home town.. The citizens vote down these silly school budgets and then teachers and administrators say "we'll have to teach your kids in trailers... we mean it if this budget gets shot down again..."

 

So the budget gets shot down, they spend $500,000 for a few trailers and put them on the FRONT lawn of the school and parents cry... "no, this is horrible we'll do whatever you need"! Meanwhile, they raise the taxes, expand the schools and end up with empty rooms. Freaking ploy....

 

They'll cut whatever will freak people out then raise taxes to further their corrupt agenda.

I'll be sure to pass that long to the couple of dozen kids I KNOW are now looking for Jobs out of state, or out of LE altogether. In My town we were told we had to cut $560,000 from the budget to prevent 5 layoffs and 18 demotions. We agreed to pay cuts and a couple of other concessions that cut the budget by $610,000. As of now the Layoffs are still scheduled for Dec 31st.

bs..when the Skells in Trenton, AC, and Newark are wearing t-shirts proclaiming the Layoff date as "D-Day" (something you wont ever see in the media) then the Criminals know EXACTLY what the RIF's are going to do. Let me address the gonzales case as well..the court stated that there cant be a CIVIL LIABILITY for "Not Protecting" someone, not that there isnt a "Duty" to protect. Simple fact is there is a VERY small percent age of Police to the population, regardless of what some folks here claim. INCLUDING Municipal, State, Federal, and Corrections, as well as about 2000 retired members (for PBA, i dont know how many retirees are carried on FOP's roles) the NJ State PBA has about 36000 members, and FOP has about 13,000. Let's be generous and say on all levels there are 45K active LEO's. Corrections..figure around 15K between state and Counties, that brings you down to 40,000. Take off another 1500 or so for Federal between FBI, DEA, Fed Corrections, ICE, NPS and so on. that leaves us with about 38,500 for state, county and local LE. Take about 1200 off of THAT for the layoffs this year, so we're at 37,300 as a rough estimate of total LE. Without reducing that number further for those not actually on the street, such as Admin, and specialty units (Homicide, major Crimes, Special Victims, ect) NJ states population as of last year was 8,707,739. One LEO per 233 people....which doesnt sound like a bad ratio..until you look at it more realistically, and that number jumps closer to 1/1000, or more depending on a plethora of factors. My department for example. we have a population of around 45K. On an average night from 10pm to 6 am, we have SIX officers on the street, a ratio of 1/6667. ALL it takes is a good, rolling domestic, a bad car accident, and a DWI, and now we have ONE guy for that 45,000. Let's say we have a Bad night, and we have that Domestic, serious MVA, and throw in a rolling bar fight, where we have to call for help from the neighboring towns. In the middle of that, we get a 911 call for another domestic. We free someone up, but ti takes 15 minutes before they get to the location, and it ends up as a homicide. SHOULD that police Department be Civilly Liable for not "protecting" that person, when there was physically NOBODY that could respond? THAT was the crux of Gonzales. We have a Duty to TRY, and we do the best we can, but since we dont have that "Police State" people love to try and peg us as all we can do is our best.

 

I agree. The police are not the problem. The NJ2AS supports the efforts of the police. There is only so much they can do. A rational carry law would do a lot to deter crime. Let's not make the mistake of blaming the police for a societal problem. They deserve our respect and support. If there is an individual case of abuse, it is no different than any other profession. Deal with the individual. We don't want to paint *ANY* group (except perhaps the anti-gunners :-) ), with a wide brush. I appreciate the service police offers provide, and the risks they endure in the performance of their jobs.

+1

 

+1 - in fact I doubt any rational member here feels that way.

vernon is BY far the most corrupt town in sussex county. I live in a neighboring town and I read all about it. I feel bad for you, but at least the Vernon PD is relaxed and doesn't bother most people like say Sparta

 

+1. The Vernon cops are all pretty good guys, I know two enough that we chit chat for a minute if we see each other and the others I've had contact with(bear break-in, theft from my vehicle, during the big ice storm, identity theft, etc.) were friendly, weren't off putting or jerks at all. One even cut me some slack when my Chinese food was getting cold.

 

The town manager/council/Rinker/Bunny Rabbit and her crew are all loathsome, contemptible jerks.

 

There are some drug issues in town, occasional drunk driver and occasional "convenience" thefts when cars are unlocked, but for the most part, there's no ongoing violent crime. I haven't heard about any layoffs but I don't follow the vernon politics. It pisses me off too much.

I'll be sure to pass that long to the couple of dozen kids I KNOW are now looking for Jobs out of state, or out of LE altogether. In My town we were told we had to cut $560,000 from the budget to prevent 5 layoffs and 18 demotions. We agreed to pay cuts and a couple of other concessions that cut the budget by $610,000. As of now the Layoffs are still scheduled for Dec 31st.

 

I am sorry to hear that. These freaking politicians will "cut their nose to spite their face"... They will LAY these people off until the mass of citizens complain and tell them they'll do anything to get them back including higher taxes. When things do not make sense, follow the money trail and the power trail. There is SO much waste that these townships could cut back on and probably save 30% or more without cutting Cops, Firefighters and teachers.