Seems like an ordinary article until you get near the end....

 

 

And the fine for the unlocked gun is 74 bucks??? Thats it??

 

 

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/11/retired_nj_state_police_major.html

And the fine for the unlocked gun is 74 bucks??? Thats it??

 

$74 for a retired cop.

 

Felony prison time for anyone else.

 

Sounds about right!

 

EDIT: LOL at the negatives, I guess the truth hurts?

 

Leave your loaded gun unsecured in YOUR car at a rest stop sometime. See what happens when an officer finds it.

 

Don't worry, I'll write you letters while you're in prison

Never mind the unsecured, loaded pistol, whats with these creepy old guy's looking to score with a filthy trucker ? Disgusting! Bleaaaa!

$74 for a retired cop.

 

Felony prison time for anyone else.

Not that I am disagreeing with you, because you technically are right in this statement. But the reason why you are right, he is a retired cop so he can carry. Any of us found with an unlocked and loaded pistol in our car would go to prison because the only reason we can have a pistol is if we were going to the range or selling it/just bought it and taking it home....and even then it needs to be locked and separate from the ammo. This guy has the legal ability to carry in this state. I would say that a good comparison would be me going 20 over on a highway, with a valid license, registration, and insurance, would earn me a ticket of anywhere from say $74-$250 depending on the area. Then Joe Shmoe who drives with a suspended license, no insurance, and the car is unregistered, goes 20 over on that same highway......he gets a harsher penalty than I do because he should not have been driving in the first place.

the fine sounds about right to me. Figures it would be a slap on the wrist in the first place as if you are connected enough/rich enough to be able to carry in NJ you'd be able to have any serious penalties swept aside anyways.

Not that I am disagreeing with you, because you technically are right in this statement. But the reason why you are right, he is a retired cop so he can carry. Any of us found with an unlocked and loaded pistol in our car would go to prison because the only reason we can have a pistol is if we were going to the range or selling it/just bought it and taking it home....and even then it needs to be locked and separate from the ammo. This guy has the legal ability to carry in this state. I would say that a good comparison would be me going 20 over on a highway, with a valid license, registration, and insurance, would earn me a ticket of anywhere from say $74-$250 depending on the area. Then Joe Shmoe who drives with a suspended license, no insurance, and the car is unregistered, goes 20 over on that same highway......he gets a harsher penalty than I do because he should not have been driving in the first place.

 

Yes, but your example is not valid IMO because:

 

A driver's license, although technically a privilege and definitely not a right, is basically "shall issue" - unless you don't have ID, don't know how to drive, or have done some gross violation(s) of road laws, you are given a driver's license if you go to the DMV and fill out papers for one. So, for someone to be "not even supposed to be driving in the first place" they must first have done something wrong to warrant having lost their license. Not only that, but each of those violation(s) to take someone's license away they got a trial for the charges against them in which they could contest the charges and prove their innocence if they did not do anything.

 

As for gun permits, the only reason you or I can't have one, the only "crime" we ever committed to not be able to have one, was being born east of the Delaware River and not wearing a badge or having a massive bank account.

Beside being careless, what violation of the law was there in this case. Did I miss something?

Yes, but your example is not valid IMO because:

 

A driver's license, although technically a privilege and definitely not a right, is basically "shall issue" - unless you don't have ID, don't know how to drive, or have done some gross violation(s) of road laws, you are given a driver's license if you go to the DMV and fill out papers for one. So, for someone to be "not even supposed to be driving in the first place" they must first have done something wrong to warrant having lost their license. Not only that, but each of those violation(s) to take someone's license away they got a trial for the charges against them in which they could contest the charges and prove their innocence if they did not do anything.

 

As for gun permits, the only reason you or I can't have one, the only "crime" we ever committed to not be able to have one, was being born east of the Delaware River and not wearing a badge or having a massive bank account.

We have already had the discussion of rights versus privileges. Carrying in NJ is NOT a right, as I have committed no crime and am not able to carry, just like almost everybody else in this state. However, it should not matter whether it is a right or a privilege. The commonality that DOES matter between the two scenarios is that with a valid drivers license, insurance, and a registered car, I can legally drive. That retired officer can legally carry. My example IS valid due to that fact, that in both scenarios I am not breaking the law by driving, and the officer is not breaking the law by carrying.

guys, i posted this simply because if this was a regular joe with a carry permit for whatever reason he has one, it would not have been just a 74 dollar fine. I can only guess what they would have done

AGAIN, no law was broken and no charges were filed, even if you think that 2C:58-15 applies, which it does not, it is still a disorderly persons charge.

If it wasnt a retired cop or public official and just a regular permit holder do you think it would have made NJ.com?

If it wasnt a retired cop or public official and just a regular permit holder do you think it would have made NJ.com?

 

Yes, though the story would been a lot shorter. It would have been one of those little crime story blurbs they post and the guy would likely have his gun and permit taken away and facing all sorts of charges. They would throw the book at him and then pick it up and throw it at him again.

 

The media would also have a little field day with it and use it as evidence of why "people shouldn't be licensed to carry guns"

Yes, though the story would been a lot shorter. It would have been one of those little crime story blurbs they post and the guy would likely have his gun and permit taken away and facing all sorts of charges. They would throw the book at him and then pick it up and throw it at him again.

 

The media would also have a little field day with it and use it as evidence of why "people shouldn't be licensed to carry guns"

100% agreed.