Yep . Our mayor in this 2 mile wide by 3 mile long town is is so far left he is almost full circle to the right again. I'm sure the police in this town , who I like , were put in a no win situation.

Here ...

 

http://www.northjersey.com/news/North_Arlington_police_lock_down_schools_after_reports_of_armed_gunman.html

Conversely , also around the same time frame of a man walking/driving around town with a gun was responded to and it turned out it was a large teen from another town that was on his way to the library to gun down another boy over a girl.

 

I feel for the police who have to make decisions and somehow try to balance everyone's rights while keeping everyone safe. They violate someone's rights , they are called names , the ignore something and some overgrown kid from Newark kills one of our town children..crucifixion of the department.

Conversely , also around the same time frame of a man walking/driving around town with a gun was responded to and it turned out it was a large teen from another town that was on his way to the library to gun down another boy over a girl.

 

I feel for the police who have to make decisions and somehow try to balance everyone's rights while keeping everyone safe. They violate someone's rights , they are called names , the ignore something and some overgrown kid from Newark kills one of our town children..crucifixion of the department.

 

 

I believe what you're talking about is someone different that this example above. In the above example, the guy was found to be in legal possession of he weapon, so they made-up false charges, just because. I know we're only reading one side of the story, etc, but if you take it at face value, that's what you have. What you're talking about is someone who probably didn't own that gun legally and if they did, had illegal intent.

Oh , absolutely. But unfortunately for the fella carrying his legally , it happened on the heels of the nefarious kid ..so the town was shook up and in crackdown mode. not saying it is right ..but I guess the police were able to charge him for not having it cased? See now , that could be a charge handed down even though the law does not really say it has to be cased walking to your car from your house. IMO in my short time , the ambiguity of the law in NJ has been very frustrating to try and decipher and adhere to. Just look at the pages of debates that occur here over it..if the law was written clearly there would be no debate.

 

So was the guy breaking the law because his shotgun was not cased? 3 pages of follow up debate I'm sure.

 

You know , it seems like they want you to screw up , so they all get together , drink , and play Mad Libs when writing these statutes.

Oh , absolutely. But unfortunately for the fella carrying his legally , it happened on the heels of the nefarious kid ..so the town was shook up and in crackdown mode. not saying it is right ..but I guess the police were able to charge him for not having it cased? See now , that could be a charge handed down even though the law does not really say it has to be cased walking to your car from your house. IMO in my short time , the ambiguity of the law in NJ has been very frustrating to try and decipher and adhere to. Just look at the pages of debates that occur here over it..if the law was written clearly there would be no debate.

 

So was the guy breaking the law because his shotgun was not cased? 3 pages of follow up debate I'm sure.

 

You know , it seems like they want you to screw up , so they all get together , drink , and play Mad Libs when writing these statutes.

 

 

Yea not right, but the guy should of had enough common sense not to do it. I agree.

If you are carrying an unloaded long gun , and are a FID card holder, not a prohibited person, and not in a prohibited area (e.g. school zone), you cannot be charged with Unlawful Possession.

 

In a NJ suburb where people are not used to seeing people walking around with guns (as in hunting rural areas), the cops will be called, and you will probably be arrested on unlawful possession charges just because the cop doesn't know any better. If they did know, then most likely you will be arrested on disorderly conduct at a minimum. Other states that have open carry, have case-law that prevents LE from using petty misdemeanor charges like disorderly conduct to arrest people who are within their rights and law to open carry. I know of no such legal precedent in NJ, and I'm not about to be the test subject!

 

2C:33-2. Disorderly conduct

a. Improper behavior. A person is guilty of a petty disorderly persons offense, if with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof he

 

(1) Engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior; or

 

(2) Creates a hazardous or physically dangerous condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.

 

b. Offensive language. A person is guilty of a petty disorderly persons offense if, in a public place, and with purpose to offend the sensibilities of a hearer or in reckless disregard of the probability of so doing, he addresses unreasonably loud and offensively coarse or abusive language, given the circumstances of the person present and the setting of the utterance, to any person present.

 

"Public" means affecting or likely to affect persons in a place to which the public or a substantial group has access; among the places included are highways, transport facilities, schools, prisons, apartment houses, places of business or amusement, or any neighborhood.

 

L.1978, c. 95, s. 2C:33-2, eff. Sept. 1, 1979.

He probably had NO idea he was breaking a law. If I remember the people talking about it it turned out he was going hunting :/

 

Stupid you know...what is the safety value of saying you have to walk around with a long gun cased or shielded from view? Is the BG saying "oh gee I better hide it then " . You know , odds are the bad guy will hide until he is ready to use it , or he is going to visibly menace with it if he wants to ..regardless of the law ! He will not be following any ccw or open carry laws period. Laws like that only shield people from having to look at them..i.e PC B.S ..and it gets Joe Hunter a misdemeanor charge because of crappy parking.

 

I guess my point is I feel the police department often gets put into a no win. Damned if you do and damned if you don't . This town is steeped over the last 40 years in political corruption ,and indictments for our politicians and judges have happened in recent history. Political strong arming and alliances often tie the hands as you go down the chain of command.

Recognizing in advance that the answers given to my question will have very little practical value, I am curious what people think would happen if an individual, lawfully carrying an unloaded long gun (ie with an FID card and not in a prohibited area)) was faced with an imminent deadly threat, loaded his long gun, and shot his assailant. Assume it was a clear case of justifiable self-defense. Do you think there would be some charge nonetheless and what could that be?

The problem with walking around with an unloaded long gun is the catch-all of "possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose". Unlawful purpose is not spelled out, thus you are always in danger of being charged with it.

Recognizing in advance that the answers given to my question will have very little practical value, I am curious what people think would happen if an individual, lawfully carrying an unloaded long gun (ie with an FID card and not in a prohibited area)) was faced with an imminent deadly threat, loaded his long gun, and shot his assailant. Assume it was a clear case of justifiable self-defense. Do you think there would be some charge nonetheless and what could that be?

 

Aggravated Assault, unlawful possession of a loaded weapon, and murder if the bad guy died are a few that I can think of. Not to mention the civil suits the bad guy will most likely bring on.

 

Remember, in NJ, outside your home you have an obligation to do everything possible to avoid the need to use deadly or any force at that matter to defend yourself, especially if there is any chance that you can retreat. Also, the use of force must be proportionate with the threat at hand. As in you must be threatened with a deadly weapon facing serious bodily harm (as in disfigurement, loosing organs, etc) with absolutely no avenues open to escape in order to even begin justifying the use of deadly force to protect yourself.

The problem with walking around with an unloaded long gun is the catch-all of "possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose". Unlawful purpose is not spelled out, thus you are always in danger of being charged with it.

 

How so?, they would have to prove that you have either committed or about to commit a crime using the weapon. "unlawful" indicates that there is a defined law that is being broken.

Recognizing in advance that the answers given to my question will have very little practical value, I am curious what people think would happen if an individual, lawfully carrying an unloaded long gun (ie with an FID card and not in a prohibited area)) was faced with an imminent deadly threat, loaded his long gun, and shot his assailant. Assume it was a clear case of justifiable self-defense. Do you think there would be some charge nonetheless and what could that be?

 

 

One could argue that if you had enough time to load your gun, you had enough time to flee.