That is until the other gray area is brought into play. FOPA doesn't specifically define what the place of origin is. Some argue that its your home or property (I believe that). Others argue it means the state in which your trip originates.

 

Since in NJ, you are legal to carry your handgun on your person in your home or business, using the first description works if you start out in NJ without a NJ carry permit. If the latter is true and the state is what they mean by place of origin, then we aren't covered under FOPA unless we have a NJ carry permit.

 

Let me reiterate that I think these nj laws are all hogwash and that I'm just playing devils advocate for the purpose of discussion.

Your car is your property, and you want to carry inside it. Doesn't it make it legal no matter where you go, as long as you don't step out of the vehicle until you get to your "legal" destination? Lol

Vladtepes and everyone else, let me make this clear also. I AM WITH YOU GUYS!!! I didn't just pay $170 bucks for a piece of plastic I can't use! I can't STAND NJ's BS. Reason I brought it up is because I'm unsure as to what the actual rules are. I agree, once I leave NJ, what I do is my business as long as its legal. However, say we get pulled over in NJ to or fro, and somehow the cop asks do you have a firearm in the vehicle and you answer yes. The next question is gonna be either where are you headed or where are you coming from.

 

"I am coming from PA where I have a valid license to carry a firearm.."

"prior to reentering NJ I unloaded my weapon and secured it in the trunk of my car per NJ guidelines to transport"

 

"why did you need to have a gun in PA?"

 

"I knew I would be passing through some bad areas (Philadelphia for example).. so since I have a valid permit that PA recognizes I brought my firearm with me.."

Vladtepes and everyone else, let me make this clear also. I AM WITH YOU GUYS!!! I didn't just pay $170 bucks for a piece of plastic I can't use! I can't STAND NJ's BS. Reason I brought it up is because I'm unsure as to what the actual rules are. I agree, once I leave NJ, what I do is my business as long as its legal. However, say we get pulled over in NJ to or fro, and somehow the cop asks do you have a firearm in the vehicle and you answer yes. The next question is gonna be either where are you headed or where are you coming from.

 

Why on earth are you answering that question at all? Unless the officer sees you leaving a range/gun store, he's on a fishing expedition and has no probable cause to search your car. The safest thing to do is ask if you are being detained or are you free to leave. Asserting your rights might lead to a ticket (if he pulled you over for speeding, for example), but that's better than 7 years in the pokey.

This has been posted before, but it's important enough to put here as well.

 

I highly recommend taking the time to watch the video posted by kenw - it is an excellent talk and contains extremely valuable information. I have personally made all my friends and family watch this very talk.

 

And for the sake of beating a dead horse, NEVER admit to having a gun in your car (or anything else for that matter). Don't lie, just politely refuse to answer his questions and request to be on your way. I refuse to answer anything other than the bare minimum questions - I won't even disclose where I'm going if they ask, regardless if I have firearms in the car or not. My rights are more important to me than a couple hundred bucks for a traffic ticket.

 

If you admit to having a firearm in your car in NJ, the next question isn't going to be 'where are you going', it will be 'please step out of the vehicle' shortly followed by 'please place your hands behind your back'. That you were going to/from the range is an affirmative defense against the felony charge of criminal possession of a weapon that you will face. Remember, in PRoNJ, you are guilty until proven innocent (if the judge allows it that is).

 

So,

LEO: Do you have any weapons in the vehicle?

 

You: No (lie) of course not - WRONG

You: Yes, I'm going to the range - WRONG

You: Sure is nice weather we're having officer. How about them Jets? - CORRECT

You: I'm sorry officer, but as a proud American who greatly appreciates all that has been given to defend our rights and freedoms, I will have to respectfully refuse to answer your questions as I never consent away my rights. Am I free to go or am I under arrest? - CORRECT

 

In my short time here, there seems to be a good amount of misunderstanding on how to properly handle a traffic stop - perhaps someone should make a sticky as this is extremely valuable knowledge if you appreciate your freedom.

You: Sure is nice weather we're having officer. How about them Jets? - CORRECT

You: I'm sorry officer, but as a proud American who greatly appreciates all that has been given to defend our rights and freedoms, I will have to respectfully refuse to answer your questions as I never consent away my rights. Am I free to go or am I under arrest? - CORRECT

 

 

 

good luck with either of those answers.. I am NOT saying that this is right.. but immediately following those types of answers expect to have your balls broken for as long as humanly possible.. expect to wait for the K9 to come because the officer smells what he believes might be marijuana.. and be prepared to go through that whole ridiculous process while dealing with freezing cold winter.. police have tools that will allow them to break your balls while walking the line of legal not legal.. they are at day 3 hour 11.. of a 12 hour shift they don't want to listen to your amateur lawyer babble.. they want to get through the stop.. see if you have anything that matters... and be on their way..

 

the one instance I will agree with you.. is I would NEVER consent to a search.. if they feel they have probable cause then let them take it in their hands..

 

cops are just regular people who have good and bad days.. some are good people some are jerks.. some like to go on random "fishing" trips others don't... so I will normally just comply.. answer small talk questions that have nothing to do with anything.. to try to expedite being on my way.. I have nothing to hide.. so even if they are "fishing" there are no fish to be caught.. I generally treat cops with respect.. and they generally return that respect..

That hasn't been my experience. I make every point to show the officer respect to the point of profusely apologizing for not cooperating, and generally the officer returns the respect in kind. If he wants to be a douche about it and not show me respect in return, then I have no problem wasting his time. Go ahead, get the K9, make me wait in the cold - I don't care, I have nothing to hide and never consenting away my rights is more important. If he finds something that he thinks is an arrestable offence, at least the law will be on my side. I don't think the majority of LEOs want to waste their time to play Gestapo though.

 

Understand, I do make a point to make small talk and to be as friendly as possible. The key here is to show respect, and you most certainly can show your respect without consenting away your rights.

 

For a typical traffic stop without firearms in your vehicle, you can take your chances and be as verbose as the officer wishes if you so choose. Admitting to firearms in your vehicle though is just a horrible, horrible idea. You will go to jail, you will not pass go, nor will you collect $200. This is the advice I have received from several police officers I know - their SOP on firearms is automatic arrest, no questions asked.

 

Now I used to be of a similar mindset - no reason not to help these guys out doing their job - until it bit me in the a**. The last time I cooperated, I spent a day in jail, lost 2 rifles, and spent $15k in lawyer fees - all for a bogus felony complaint that didn't so much as result in an indictment. Everything you say can, and will, be used against you - even if you think it is totally innocent.

 

But hey, maybe my tin foil hat is a little too tight...

That hasn't been my experience. I make every point to show the officer respect to the point of profusely apologizing for not cooperating, and generally the officer returns the respect in kind. If he wants to be a douche about it and not show me respect in return, then I have no problem wasting his time. Go ahead, get the K9, make me wait in the cold - I don't care, I have nothing to hide and never consenting away my rights is more important. If he finds something that he thinks is an arrestable offence, at least the law will be on my side. I don't think the majority of LEOs want to waste their time to play Gestapo though.

 

Understand, I do make a point to make small talk and to be as friendly as possible. The key here is to show respect, and you most certainly can show your respect without consenting away your rights.

 

For a typical traffic stop without firearms in your vehicle, you can take your chances and be as verbose as the officer wishes if you so choose. Admitting to firearms in your vehicle though is just a horrible, horrible idea. You will go to jail, you will not pass go, nor will you collect $200. This is the advice I have received from several police officers I know - their SOP on firearms is automatic arrest, no questions asked.

 

Now I used to be of a similar mindset - no reason not to help these guys out doing their job - until it bit me in the a**. The last time I cooperated, I spent a day in jail, lost 2 rifles, and spent $15k in lawyer fees - all for a bogus felony complaint that didn't so much as result in an indictment. Everything you say can, and will, be used against you - even if you think it is totally innocent.

 

But hey, maybe my tin foil hat is a little too tight...

 

I transport guns only in accordance with federal and state law.. so even if I have a gun in the car.. it should be a non issue..

I transport guns only in accordance with federal and state law.. so even if I have a gun in the car.. it should be a non issue..

Hey man, whatever works for you. I just hope you understand the gravity of the state of affairs in NJ. If you posses a firearm - especially a pistol without a carry permit - following the law to the T will not protect you from being arrested and hauled off to jail. You have a pistol unloaded and locked in your trunk on the way to the range - you go to jail. You have an unloaded and locked long gun with FID and the LEO has the slightest bit of uncertainty - you go to jail. You are guilty until proven innocent - that is not a joke, it is a fact of life as a gun owner in NJ. You very well may go free in the end, but not after going though a horrible experience and losing a large chunk of change, your firearms, and possibly your job and future income. There is a whole list of law-abiding, responsible people in this state who have experienced this first hand - why risk adding yourself to this list by incriminating yourself to an LEO?

 

Just remember, the firearm laws in NJ are simply not rational and are explicitly designed to be hostile to law-abiding gun owners - when dealing with an LEO, their first and foremost job is to enforce these irrational and hostile laws and not to promote some ideal of justice.

Hey man, whatever works for you. I just hope you understand the gravity of the state of affairs in NJ. If you posses a firearm - especially a pistol without a carry permit - following the law to the T will not protect you from being arrested and hauled off to jail. You have a pistol unloaded and locked in your trunk on the way to the range - you go to jail. You have an unloaded and locked long gun with FID and the LEO has the slightest bit of uncertainty - you go to jail. You are guilty until proven innocent - that is not a joke, it is a fact of life as a gun owner in NJ. You very well may go free in the end, but not after going though a horrible experience and losing a large chunk of change, your firearms, and possibly your job and future income. There is a whole list of law-abiding, responsible people in this state who have experienced this first hand - why risk adding yourself to this list by incriminating yourself to an LEO?

 

Just remember, the firearm laws in NJ are simply not rational and are explicitly designed to be hostile to law-abiding gun owners - when dealing with an LEO, their first and foremost job is to enforce these irrational and hostile laws and not to promote some ideal of justice.

 

the answer is so unbelievably SIMPLE..

I am prepared to defend myself against any BS charges the state may throw at me, providing I am following the law.. I refuse to live in fear of my government.. the government must fear the power of the people.. that is the ultimate check in checks and balances..

No offense, but if you are so willing to let a guy with a badge and gun bully you out of your 4th and 5th Amendment rights, I would say that very clearly is living in fear of the government and its actors.

 

Also remember, after they drop their nonsense charges, they have absolutely zero liability for your damages and you have zero standing to challenge the laws you were arrested under. The only person who loses is you.

 

You can save yourself all this trouble by simply refusing to incriminate yourself. You have the right to do so - use it or lose it.

Also remember, after they drop their nonsense charges, they have absolutely zero liability for your damages and you have zero standing to challenge the laws you were arrested under. The only person who loses is you.

 

there is a difference between being casual and allowing conversation during a motor vehicle stop.. and waving my rights.. I specifically said I would not authorize a search.. but I am also not going to refuse to speak to a police officer during a traffic stop who is conducting a legitimate investigation.... if you think that this exchange is normal.. and going to benefit you.. you are out of your mind..

 

officer "Sir you were speeding today.. I recorded your speed using radar going 15mph over the speed limit.. did you realize you were going that fast?"

you "boy those Jets are really playing well this year"

officer "excuse me? what are you talking about.. did you realize you were speeding? are you in a hurry to get somewhere or something?"

you "wow the leaves really are a really pretty this time of year..."

officer "is there something wrong with you? are you going to cooperate with me?"

you "I sure do like ice cream when it is hot out"

officer "please step out of the vehicle sir.."

 

your recommendation to avoid all lines of questioning are going to IMO create a very hostile environment during something that may otherwise go smoothly.. there are obvious exceptions to this.. sometimes a cop will ask you leading questions to try to deduct things.. those questions CAN hurt you, but you just have to be careful to think about the question and give a fair straightforward answer.. answer the question but do not aid in a fishing exercise..

 

pulled over for speeding (10mph over on the parkway)

officer "where you headed sir"

you "ughh.. I am headed to work I am running really late"

 

now he KNOWS that you were intentionally speeding AND he knows WHY you were speeding.. all from one simple question.. and that might weigh into deciding if you get a ticket or not.. but that is as I stated.. assuming you did something wrong.. which has next to nothing to do with the situation you are describing... the situation that you are describing involves LEO escalating a situation of simple legal firearms transportation to a punishable criminal offense.. things like that DO happen.. but they normally happen due to lack of education.. and uncertainty.. the pistol grip shotgun thread is a perfect example.. an overzealous cop thinking it was a prohibited weapon.. coupled with the gun being "within reach" created a questionable situation.. the firearms owner stated that "the seller said it was legal" not a good defense.. if you understand the wording of the assault weapons ban.. and you can articulate to the officer the law.. he may or may not believe you.. but at least you have a shot.. a cop saying "this is a prohibited weapon" and you saying "Joe Smith at Cabellas said it was fine!?!?!?" is not going to get you far.. instead sighting that the ban in NJ deals with magazine capacity.. flash hiders.. etc.. and explaining that as long as a pump shotgun meets the length requirements there are no other real qualifications for legality.. would likely get you much further.. he may even recognize that you took the time to understand the law.. and maybe are even more versed in it than he is.. but that may not even work.. and at that point.. you just have to fight it.. the "silent treatment" isn't going to get you anywhere..

 

No offense, but if you are so willing to let a guy with a badge and gun bully you out of your 4th and 5th Amendment rights, I would say that very clearly is living in fear of the government and its actors.

 

You can save yourself all this trouble by simply refusing to incriminate yourself. You have the right to do so - use it or lose it.

 

as far as throwing my rights away.. admitting to doing something legal (transporting a gun to the range in accordance with NJ law) is not incriminating.. unless of course you are not supposed to have a firearm to begin with.. since I am a legal firearms owner.. operating within the specifications of the law.. what do I have to be concerned with..

officer "Sir you were speeding today.. I recorded your speed using radar going 15mph over the speed limit.. did you realize you were going that fast?"

you "boy those Jets are really playing well this year"

officer "excuse me? what are you talking about.. did you realize you were speeding? are you in a hurry to get somewhere or something?"

you "wow the leaves really are a really pretty this time of year..."

officer "is there something wrong with you? are you going to cooperate with me?"

you "I sure do like ice cream when it is hot out"

officer "please step out of the vehicle sir.."

 

Classic

Classic

 

Tell me that is not EXACTLY how it would go down.. LOL

I think you've totally misunderstood my position. I suggest you take the time to reread my previous posts as well as watch the video posted by kenw. The job of the officer is not to determine if you are within the law or not - that is the job of the court system - if there is the slightest bit of doubt, you go to jail so the court can decide.

 

I never suggested pursuing the absurd suggestion you exampled. Clearly being down right stupid to the police officer isn't going to help you and that is not at all what I said. Obviously, you'd want to cooperate as far as the traffic stop goes, but answering any questions outside the scope of the stop is a bad practice. If you don't have your weapons in the vehicle, how much you answer is up to you - I typically avoid answering where I am going simply because it's none of his (or the government's) business. As long as you're polite and respectful, it shouldn't be a problem. If you do have weapons in the car, you should never, ever answer any more than the absolute minimum.

 

For example, the LEO asks you where you are going and you reply 'XYZ range', you may have just given him probable cause that you have potentially illegal weapons in your car. If you then proceed to actually admit you have firearms in the car, he WILL remove you from the vehicle and search your car, no consent needed. Your firearms may very well be 100% within the law, BUT THAT IS NOT FOR THE LEO TO DECIDE. He will arrest you, take you to jail where you will sit until you post bail or the court decides the issue. The law is interpreted by lawyers, not police officers, and explaining the law up one side and down the other is NEVER going to change the fact that you're spending the night in jail.

 

Instead, if you politely refuse to answer where you are going or that you have firearms he will have no grounds to conduct a search (assuming you don't have ammo or crack pipes rolling around on the floor). Sure he can take you out of the car and bust your balls about it, but he can't search the car or otherwise discover you have firearms in the vehicle. You might get a ticket, you might lose an hour of your day, but in the end, the LEO has no evidence that you have a firearm and you'll be going home that night.

 

Again, let me repeat - mere possession of a firearm in the state of NJ is likely grounds for arrest. You should never hand them a reason to arrest you, and there is absolutely no reason to EVER admit to having a firearm. By law, the police can NOT do anything to help you in this situation - it is up to the courts to decide if you are within your rights. Anything you say can, and will be used against you, but nothing can be used to help you.

 

I didn't just pull this advice from behind - any lawyer and most LEOs will tell you the exact same thing.

 

And just to be clear, this is a result of NJ's incredibly abusive firearm legislation. You effectively have no rights to a firearm in this state. Before the McDonald decision, you simply did not have a constitutionally protected right to arms, and it will take time before this right is reflected in practice.

No offense, but if you are so willing to let a guy with a badge and gun bully you out of your 4th and 5th Amendment rights, I would say that very clearly is living in fear of the government and its actors.

why is it that just because he has a badge and a gun and asks you a legitimate question you consider it bullying? He's trying to do his job, and you're trying to make it difficult for him. He can bust your balls more than you can bust his. You might cry foul and say he's wrong, but the moment he pulls you over, he's calling the shots. In the end you will be the one who will really be inconvenienced.

Sigh... Please watch the video and take some time to research and understand why you should never talk to an LEO in such a situation. Please also don't take my point out of context.

 

He is doing his job, and part of that job is to convince you to waive your rights so he may enforce the law. Those questions are there solely to probe you for any additional crimes - answering them (in the context of having a firearm in your vehicle) gains you NOTHING. Don't get me wrong, I would never fault an LEO for this, but you need to realize his interests run completely orthogonal to your own. In this situation, an LEO is NEVER your friend and can not help you - he is prohibited by law from doing so. It is your responsibility, and yours alone, to protect your self interests.

 

Look, we have a set of constitutionally protected rights - specifically those protected by the 4th and 5th Amendments in this case - for the very purpose of protecting us from tyrannical regulations such as we have in NJ. You have these rights, use them. Waiving them for the sole purpose of not hurting an LEO's feelings or some misguided belief it will make your life easier is plain foolish.

 

And again, my point isn't to speak poorly of LEOs - I personally don't hold them responsible for merely doing their jobs - the problem is a set of broken laws that infringe on our rights and freedoms.

Looks to me limaxray has had experiences with being pulled over with legally owned and transported firearms, cooperated and still got the shaft.

 

I'd take the advice for what it is. We have rights that permit us to politely refrain from answering a LEO's questions. It can be as simple as "my friend is a cop,and he let me know that its not in my best interested to answer any questions, I hope you understand. Is there anything else that I can do for you?"

 

What we do with our rights is an individual decision. Sometimes being completely compliant to the LEO's questions is the way to go. I know people who were pulled over going to the range and they let it all out. Fortunately for them the cop was cool and let them be on their way. For others it could be a night in jail, and 15K worth of legal expenses. I think the point is you have options.

 

It is almost universally known that the less you tell cops the better IF everything hit the fan and you wound up arrested and prosecuted. This is the same basis as to why defendants hardly ever take the stand. In essence you are admitting things to the cop, and no matter how in the right you feel you are, is in effect you being on the stand for all intents and purposes.

 

For me with a hatchback, its pretty obvious I have firearms in the car, so my only real defense is following transportation exemptions to a T and hoping for the best. Plus I have a legal insurance plan through work, with gun ownership as one of the primary reasons for having it. ;p

I know people who were pulled over going to the range and they let it all out. Fortunately for them the cop was cool and let them be on their way.

 

"fortunately for them".. seriously? this is extreme paranoia at its best....

 

For others it could be a night in jail, and 15K worth of legal expenses.

 

I have never heard of any factual stories where someone was legally transporting a firearm home from the range and was arrested....

I think you've totally misunderstood my position. I suggest you take the time to reread my previous posts as well as watch the video posted by kenw. The job of the officer is not to determine if you are within the law or not - that is the job of the court system - if there is the slightest bit of doubt, you go to jail so the court can decide.

 

I have seen several videos like that....

 

there is a huge difference between over informing a police officer that you come in contact with, and just being ridiculous.. there is also a huge difference between interacting with an officer when you have NOT broken the law.. and when you have.. the information you would provide if I lean down to change my radio station and my car swerves minimally for a second, causing me to get pulled over would be far different than if I got pulled over going twice the speed limit.. videos like that are mostly telling you to keep your mouth shut so you do not accidentally incriminate yourself.. this is great advice if you have engaged in some illegal activity.. but most of the time videos like this are excessive and ignore the natural flow of society.. yes you can refuse to answer any questions... you can do that.. but two things are likely to happen.. the first is you will likely irritate the officer to not end causing him to provide no leniency and you are likely getting a ticket for whatever you were pulled over for... the second being you will likely be there far longer than if you just cooperated..

 

the point of police fishing exercises on the side of the road with traffic stops is to make normal traffic stops and look for suspicious activity that could point to more serious crimes.. this is just what cops are trained to do.. it is part of their job.. yeah some can be overboard with it.. but for the most part it is how traffic stops lead to bigger busts.. tell a cop you refuse to answer any of his questions, because you do not want to incriminate yourself.. and he is INSTANTLY going to think you are nuts.. or guilty of something.. because it is not normal activity..

 

the idea to "not talk to cops at all" is a good idea.... if you are about to be arrested.. if you have done something seriously wrong.. because every word that comes out of your mouth WILL be used to build a case against you.. but when you are engaging in legal activity? the only result is the inconvenience you are causing yourself..

 

I never suggested pursuing the absurd suggestion you exampled. Clearly being down right stupid to the police officer isn't going to help you and that is not at all what I said.

 

you did actually.. suggest exactly that..

 

So,

LEO: Do you have any weapons in the vehicle?

 

 

You: Yes, I'm going to the range - WRONG

 

You: Sure is nice weather we're having officer. How about them Jets? - CORRECT

 

Obviously, you'd want to cooperate as far as the traffic stop goes, but answering any questions outside the scope of the stop is a bad practice. If you don't have your weapons in the vehicle, how much you answer is up to you - I typically avoid answering where I am going simply because it's none of his (or the government's) business. As long as you're polite and respectful, it shouldn't be a problem. If you do have weapons in the car, you should never, ever answer any more than the absolute minimum.

 

I almost agree with this part.. we just disagree on the minimum.. for an officer to say "where are you coming from" and me to say "the county rifle range" is not going to cause any kind of situation.. the officer technically doesn't have any right to know that... but I do not find transporting firearms legally as per NJ law to be questionable.. maybe it is just different where you live or something.. but I have never heard of anything like that ever happening..

 

 

For example, the LEO asks you where you are going and you reply 'XYZ range', you may have just given him probable cause that you have potentially illegal weapons in your car. If you then proceed to actually admit you have firearms in the car, he WILL remove you from the vehicle and search your car, no consent needed. Your firearms may very well be 100% within the law, BUT THAT IS NOT FOR THE LEO TO DECIDE. He will arrest you, take you to jail where you will sit until you post bail or the court decides the issue. The law is interpreted by lawyers, not police officers, and explaining the law up one side and down the other is NEVER going to change the fact that you're spending the night in jail.

 

I have not given him any reason to think I have illegal weapons in the car... I have a FID card.. he can tell that I am not a prohibited person.. and I am transporting in accordance with the law.. that is NOT probable cause to search the car.. your comment that saying you WILL be arrested is a borderline troll type comment.. your mindset states that anyone who admits they are coming from a range.. WILL be arrested and detained until they prove their innocence.. and that is simply not true..

 

Instead, if you politely refuse to answer where you are going or that you have firearms he will have no grounds to conduct a search (assuming you don't have ammo or crack pipes rolling around on the floor). Sure he can take you out of the car and bust your balls about it, but he can't search the car or otherwise discover you have firearms in the vehicle. You might get a ticket, you might lose an hour of your day, but in the end, the LEO has no evidence that you have a firearm and you'll be going home that night.

 

a police officer can search the car any time he establishes probable cause.. I am going to go out on a limb here and say that if a cop gets a bug up his a**.. he will make PC.. and he WILL search your car.. at the end of the day it will be his word against yours.. maybe he smelled something.. or saw something unusual.. or maybe you sit there while they bring the K9... and then maybe the K9 makes a false hit on your trunk... the point is.. as wrong as this is.. if a cop wants to search your car bad enough.. he will make PC..

 

Again, let me repeat - mere possession of a firearm in the state of NJ is likely grounds for arrest. You should never hand them a reason to arrest you, and there is absolutely no reason to EVER admit to having a firearm. By law, the police can NOT do anything to help you in this situation - it is up to the courts to decide if you are within your rights. Anything you say can, and will be used against you, but nothing can be used to help you.

 

again... absurd recommendation that anyone merely in position of a firearm gets arrested and goes to jail automatically and has to sort out the legality of the situation after the fact.. this is a ridiculous suggestion.. you know we hear these cases of overzealous police.. and the violation of rights and all that.. but then as the details really come clear.. there are real legitimate violations in play.. first you hear "man arrested while legally transporting handguns unloaded in trunk" but then you hear the details.. high capacity mags... and so on.. yeah.. there are bad cops.. yeah there are cops that make mistakes.. but for the most part they are just a bunch of regular people doing a job..

 

to sum it up..

 

if you broke the law.. then yeah.. I agree with you completely.. the less you say normally the better..

 

but if you didn't break the law? then I have to disagree.. being completely silent.. or changing the subject to something completely different when asked if you have weapons in the car is not going to likely help you.. there is NO cop in the world I have ever met, that would be satisfied with the answer "how about those Jets" when asking someone if there are weapons in the car..

 

that is where we will simply agree to disagree..

The threshold for arrest is "probable cause". In NJ, it is probable that a weapon is being transported illegally, since by definition possession of arms is illegal without the paperwork. Which, incidentally, ought to mean that showing a FID should prevent you from being arrested for possessing an unloaded longarm, since the caluse say illegal without having first obtained a FID...

 

I don't like the law, but I like time in jail less.

 

Solution is as noted. Don't talkt ot he cops beyond the minimum necessary, and don't consent to a search.

 

Incidentally, in NJ, "a police officer who wishes to conduct a consent search must have reasonable and articulable suspicion to believe that evidence of criminal wrongdoing will be found in the vehicle before seeking consent for the search." State v. Elders (Lawyers USA No. 9937055) New Jersey Supreme Court No. A-42-06. July 30, 2007. (Emphasis mine). That was the first hit I found, but it apparently goes back to State vs. Carty - http://www.newjerseycriminallawattorney.com/CM/Custom/State-v.asp - "The Supreme Court, Coleman, J., held that: (1) as a matter of first impression, for a consent to search a motor vehicle and its occupants to be valid under the New Jersey Constitution, law enforcement personnel must have a reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal wrongdoing, beyond the initial valid motor vehicle stop, prior to seeking consent to search, and (2) State trooper's testimony that driver and passenger had “appeared to be nervous” did not provide reasonable articulable suspicion for requesting consent to search."

 

Which is rather stronger protection than in some other states.

"fortunately for them".. seriously? this is extreme paranoia at its best....

 

 

 

I have never heard of any factual stories where someone was legally transporting a firearm home from the range and was arrested....

 

Call it what you like. I call it fortunate because the laws are not written in our favor. It is clearly up to the cop to determine if in fact you were on your way going to or from a shooting range. Your word against the cop's.

 

You can be arrested for illegal posession if the cop decides he/she doesn't like your story, then you have to later prove through the criminal justice system that you were in fact going to or from a place of target practice or repair. This is how the law is written. You have two options when a cop finds you with guns... either he/she believes you are in fact transporting under exemption... or they arrest you and let the system decide. If I walk away with option A , I find myself fortunate.. who wouldn't?

Call it what you like. I call it fortunate because the laws are not written in our favor. It is clearly up to the cop to determine if in fact you were on your way going to or from a shooting range. Your word against the cop's.

 

You can be arrested for illegal posession if the cop decides he/she doesn't like your story, then you have to later prove through the criminal justice system that you were in fact going to or from a place of target practice or repair. This is how the law is written. You have two options when a cop finds you with guns... either he/she believes you are in fact transporting under exemption... or they arrest you and let the system decide. If I walk away with option A , I find myself fortunate.. who wouldn't?

 

the reason I don't find it fortunate is because the law is clearly on your side.. I sign in at the range that I shoot at.. while it is always going to be up to the officers discretion.. if the officers discretion normally sided on the side of locking people up who are legally transporting guns.. you would hear about it all day long.. why? because even when people are illegally doing things (Brian high cap mags) there is a huge public out cry.. and in that situation he was in the WRONG.. could you imagine if some random upstanding citizen was coming home from shooting skeet and got arrested and thrown in jail because the guns "might have been illegal"... people would absolutely flip out.. I am not saying mistakes are not made.. I am just saying that if stuff like that was happening.. it would be all over the place.. it is obviously not happening often.. if at all..

 

and in regards to long guns.. there is absolutely no question.. because as long as you have a FID card.. you do not even technically have to be going to the range..

*snip* could you imagine if some random upstanding citizen was coming home from shooting skeet and got arrested and thrown in jail because the guns "might have been illegal"... people would absolutely flip out.. *snip*

 

Clearly you've never read the comments on NJ.com by "BanTheNRA"... That guy called Revell(and Aitken, for that matter) a "gun runner" and said they should've melted his guns down. The vast majority of the people in this state believe that strong gun laws prevent crime, hollow points and "vest busting cop killer bullets", and that the whole country has gun registration.

 

The outcry for Aitken came from the gun community, where we all believe that the laws he ran afoul of are unconstitutional and patently wrong anyway.

Clearly you've never read the comments on NJ.com by "BanTheNRA"... That guy called Revell(and Aitken, for that matter) a "gun runner" and said they should've melted his guns down. The vast majority of the people in this state believe that strong gun laws prevent crime, hollow points and "vest busting cop killer bullets", and that the whole country has gun registration.

 

The outcry for Aitken came from the gun community, where we all believe that the laws he ran afoul of are unconstitutional and patently wrong anyway.

 

 

and with all due respect to Brian.. he was actually WRONG (high cap mags at the minimum).. yes his sentence was grossly unfair.. but he was still in the wrong no matter how you cut it.. and people went nuts.. imagine if the same situation occurred and the individual was %100 legal.. the S would hit the fan.. IMO of course.. public outcry as in the shooting community.. not so much the general public..

and with all due respect to Brian.. he was actually WRONG (high cap mags at the minimum).. yes his sentence was grossly unfair.. but he was still in the wrong no matter how you cut it.. and people went nuts.. imagine if the same situation occurred and the individual was %100 legal.. the S would hit the fan.. IMO of course.. public outcry as in the shooting community.. not so much the general public..

 

I'm pretty sure he was convicted of illegal possession of a handgun due to the judge not allowing the exceptions to be explained to the jury. In addition, the high cap magazines (which are a 4th degree felony up to 18mos each).

I'm pretty sure he was convicted of illegal possession of a handgun due to the judge not allowing the exceptions to be explained to the jury. In addition, the high cap magazines (which are a 4th degree felony up to 18mos each).

 

 

well.. as far as exemption goes.. apparently he was moving.. came to NJ was at his parents which is not his home.. and then was moving to another location in NJ? I do not remember the details.. but it was something along those lines.. and the law is unfortunately clear.. in regards to where you can and can not transport your gun.. and further.. he was going NJ to NJ so was not covered under FOPA...

 

IMO of course..