You realize Paul is covered under LEOSA right??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act

 

I'm not complaining about Paul carrying one bit. I just never saw anyone carry that wasn't LEO. Remember, I have been in NJ for practically all my life, we are not used to seeing or talking about guns in these here parts..........

 

If I were him I would also carry. He has a lot of stuff there and is way off the beaten path. No one would be able to hear or help him quickly should something bad go-down. Yes, he has cameras eveywhere which is VERY smart on his part, and so is openly carrying a sidearm. He also has a lot of cool ways to protect his property! Wish I had his liscense, but my back account wouldn't want it................

What if its an apt and mailbox is on ground floor what you guys think?

What if its an apt and mailbox is on ground floor what you guys think?

 

I think no. It is common area not your personal area.

What I was thinking exactly

The first time I went to Pauls he walked out of his house carrying.

 

Special privileges for special people.

 

Google "LEOSA"

Special privileges for special people.

 

Google "LEOSA"

I sense sarcasm... You seem to be quite confrontational, and I'm not sure why. Retired LE being able to carry is a federal thing, not state.

I guess I still don't understand the purpose of carrying. You can't legally use it outside of your home to defend yourself, regardless of whether you're allowed to carry on your property or not. Yes, you may be able to use it to distract an attacker, and then retreat inside.....use it outside and you're in for a world of hurt.

 

 

Ok your at your mailbox, mowing your lawn, doing something outside the house. Now a group of people approach you try and attack you and you fear for your life.

 

The way NJ is you are immediately thinking I need to retreat to my home and while that is what you supposed to do , but do you obey the law or protect yourself. I know it been said many time, and it is true, at least for me "I would rather be tried by 12, than carried by 6"

 

Not that would be option 1, but if no other options are available you have to do what you have to do.

 

As far as you comment about knowing your surroundings and and being aware, I agree, better to use street smarts and avoid problems in the first place.

 

Harry

I sense sarcasm... You seem to be quite confrontational, and I'm not sure why. Retired LE being able to carry is a federal thing, not state.

 

I have been noticing the same thing, not sure if it's to come in here and stir the pot, or just a loss of meaning not seeing expressions in the written word.

 

However I will give you, you have pointed out a few over the time I have been here before many others here that something wasn't right and the 2 I can think of were spot on.

 

Harry

DJD0770, I've heard so many different opinions on transfer laws and exemptions, I don't know what to believe.

But the subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 you quoted for me don't seem germaine to the matter of a non-owner's handling of a handgun.

From what I've read and was told, (including on this forum) the only exemption for a non-owner of a particular handgun to legally handle the same is at a range or gunshop.

We are legal only by exemptions. If you can show me where NJ law specifically permit a spouse/friend/etc. to handle your handgun outside of the shop/range I'll gladly yield.

There's a ton of misinformation out there about NJ firearm laws (e.g. hollow points.). I don't want to be adding to it.

Not long ago I had a police officer over for dinner and he was telling me that I was guilty of a serious crime by not having trigger locks on my unloaded firearms at home. Of course, he was wrong.

This was pointed out to you in the first page of this thread in bold and large words. The exemptions are for those other places.

I fail to see how carrying concealed to and from his mail box will prevent the ability to do so from being taken away.

 

It doesn't. Might one be more inclined to defend a right that one is actively exercising?

Thanks for straightening this out for me.

The only instance this would be an issue , is if my wife or kids needed to use one of my firearms to defend themselves at home when I was away.

BTW, my understanding was based on articles and discussions like the one below.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_scott_bach/2008/01/stop_on_your_way_to_target_pra.html

It doesn't. Might one be more inclined to defend a right that one is actively exercising?

This is true. Although I'm an advocate of liberty regardless of whether it's a right I commonly practice or not.

Thanks for straightening this out for me.

The only instance this would be an issue , is if my wife or kids needed to use one of my firearms to defend themselves at home when I was away.

BTW, my understanding was based on articles and discussions like the one below.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_scott_bach/2008/01/stop_on_your_way_to_target_pra.html

 

Hammerhead i totally hear you. I found out about a wife not being able to defend herself with your gun about 3 months ago. So we are working on her getting her own credentials and a dog for early warning. In the meantime the gun is still accessible.

This is true. Although I'm an advocate of liberty regardless of whether it's a right I commonly practice or not.

 

I see where you're coming from. For me, it's a matter of principle over preparedness. If there were restrictions on riding a bicycle in public, but none such restrictions on bike usage on your property, I'd be inclined to ride my bike the 30 feet to the mailbox too.

 

I'd also be fighting for bicyclists' rights

I just CC'd to my mailbox and then I shot it. I tried to take a pic but it aint going to work in the dark with this camera. I can post a pic in the morning. It's not going to be exciting. And, it's not going to survive the winter. It seems our plowmen are on crack. I lose 1.5 mailboxes and posts per year. Even though I moved them way back from where they are supposed to be.

Have you missed One very important line : in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section

 

which states :subsection g. All weapons being transported under paragraph (2) of subsection b., subsection e., or paragraph (1) or (3) of subsection f. of this section shall be carried unloaded and contained in a closed and fastened case, gunbox, securely tied package, or locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is being transported, and in the course of travel shall include only such deviations as are reasonably necessary under the circumstances. :thsmiley_deadhorse:

Have you missed One very important line : in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section

 

which states :subsection g. All weapons being transported under paragraph (2) of subsection b., subsection e., or paragraph (1) or (3) of subsection f. of this section shall be carried unloaded and contained in a closed and fastened case, gunbox, securely tied package, or locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is being transported, and in the course of travel shall include only such deviations as are reasonably necessary under the circumstances. :thsmiley_deadhorse:

 

Huh? I don't get it. You're not transporting if you haven't left home.

Huh? I don't get it. You're not transporting if you haven't left home.

This. If you haven't left the house, you're not transporting. Transporting implies that you have a destination other than where you currently are.

so whos front lawn shall we be parading around... should have a lemonade stand to go with it

I'll add "carrying in your own yard" to the list of trend items people are afraid to do in NJ.

Hypothetical gun law fun!

 

The OP's "printing" situation is pretty far fetched, but IMO even if the cop had a good reason to someone is CCW'ing on their own property, that is not grounds for him/her to take action unless that person goes on public property.

 

Yes you can carry on your own property, loaded even according to exemptions as many have pointed out. That doesn't mean that the scared sheeple that live around you won't call the cops, claiming they are under duress and feel threatened that you are carrying a pistol/rifle around outside and how they "could have swore you were taking aim at their house" or something to that effect. Instantly that can turn into an aggravated assault, terroristic threats, or some bogus disorderly conduct/disturbing the peace type of charge. LE in NJ will have no problem arresting anyone in these circumstances, as they have an entire mountain of anti-gun govt bureaucracy behind them to back them up. The "victim" would have to later prove in court that they were within exemptions, and not acting in a threatning manner.

 

Unfortunately in NJ, I have a feeling that a jury composed of NJ sheeple would take simply carrying your gun outside, uncovered, on your person would be enough to constitute "threatening behavior" even if it was within exemptions.. that would only mean they can't charge you with illegal possession.

 

Of course I'm assuming the typical NJ suburb where people live nearly on top of each other, with neighbors not knowing the first names of the people they lived next door to for 15 years.

I just CC'd to my mailbox and then I shot it. I tried to take a pic but it aint going to work in the dark with this camera. I can post a pic in the morning. It's not going to be exciting. And, it's not going to survive the winter. It seems our plowmen are on crack. I lose 1.5 mailboxes and posts per year. Even though I moved them way back from where they are supposed to be.

Are you sure it's not just your mail box. !! Signed the Garbage man

I hate it when terrorist ninja pirates try to kill me while I'm checking the mail!

 

Seriously though, if you're scared to check the mail unarmed, you should probably call a realtor.

 

^This^

 

Your front yard is a magical place where nothing bad ever happens, just like grocery stores and schools. You really only need to carry when buying cocaine or going to a liquor store.

Nothing in subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent a person keeping or carrying about his place of business, residence, premises or other land owned or possessed by him, any firearm, or from carrying the same, in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section, from any place of purchase to his residence or place of business, between his dwelling and his place of business, between one place of business or residence and another when moving, or between his dwelling or place of business and place where such firearms are repaired, for the purpose of repair. For the purposes of this section, a place of business shall be deemed to be a fixed location.

 

 

I noticed the part in bold.

 

Who does this apply to, exactly? A business owner? Employees who are allowed to carry on the private property of their place of work?

I noticed the part in bold.

 

Who does this apply to, exactly? A business owner? Employees who are allowed to carry on the private property of their place of work?

You failed to bold enough of the subsection above - notice please the underlined section below:

 

Nothing in subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent a person keeping or carrying about his place of business, residence, premises or other land owned or possessed by him, any firearm, or from carrying the same, in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section, from any place of purchase to his residence or place of business, between his dwelling and his place of business, between one place of business or residence and another when moving, or between his dwelling or place of business and place where such firearms are repaired, for the purpose of repair. For the purposes of this section, a place of business shall be deemed to be a fixed location.

 

Here's subsection g for your reference:

g. All weapons being transported under paragraph (2) of subsection b., subsection e., or paragraph (1) or (3) of subsection f. of this section shall be carried unloaded and contained in a closed and fastened case, gunbox, securely tied package, or locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is being transported, and in the course of travel shall include only such deviations as are reasonably necessary under the circumstances.

I noticed the part in bold.

 

Who does this apply to, exactly? A business owner? Employees who are allowed to carry on the private property of their place of work?

 

It is referring to section g, which is the transport statute. Owners of the business can transport unloaded firearms from home to their business and then carry them loaded when arrived.

Your front yard is a magical place where nothing bad ever happens, just like grocery stores and schools. You really only need to carry when buying cocaine or going to a liquor store.

 

Considering OP is an NJ resident who spends 99% of his time unarmed, except for his trips to Cabela's in PA and now his theoretical mailbox adventures, and has so far lived to tell the tale, I'd say there is certainly a bit of a logical disconnect.

Considering OP is an NJ resident who spends 99% of his time unarmed, except for his trips to Cabela's in PA and now his theoretical mailbox adventures, and has so far lived to tell the tale, I'd say there is certainly a bit of a logical disconnect.

 

What does "logical disconnect" mean? I need help with that one.

 

Is it anything like "normalization of deviance?"

 

*hint hint*

On your own property &c. this applies

Nothing in subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent a person keeping or carrying about his place of business, residence, premises or other land owned or possessed by him, any firearm

When travelling between permitted locations, the rest applies

or from carrying the same, in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section, from any place of purchase to his residence or place of business, between his dwelling and his place of business, between one place of business or residence and another when moving, or between his dwelling or place of business and place where such firearms are repaired, for the purpose of repair.

 

Subsection g only applies to the second part (from, between, &c).

 

Incidentally, if subsection G did apply to the first part, it would be facially unconstitutional under Heller and McDonald; Heller forced DC to allow people to possess functional, loaded, firearms at home, and McDonald applied Heller to the states.