I just filed an OPRA request for the NJ AG guidelines on holding a gun buyback. If you have been following this issue, you may remember that the Mercer County Prosecutor, Joe Bocchini, used the AG's guidelines as a rationalization for violating NJ statutes to effect the gun buyback, recently held in Trenton. I thought it might be interesting to see exactly what these "guidelines" say.

 

Here is my request...

 

I am requesting a copy of the Attorney General's guidelines for holding a "gun buyback". These guidelines were referenced by the Mercer County Prosecutor as a rationalization for violating numerous NJ Statutes in the execution of Trenton's recent (05/05/2012) Gun Buyback. I was under the impression that the law was the law and the AG could not give special dispensation to violate same.

 

Mr. Bocchini's statement (as published in the on-line version of The Trentonian of 05/15) follows:

TRENTON -- Mercer County Prosecutor Joe Bocchini started the conversation off the record. He came back on the record to say Saturday's "Food For Guns" exchange was quote-unquote illegal if you go by the letter of the law. But not really. Because Jersey's Attorney General Guidelines for gun buybacks or exchanges allows police types to operate within the spirit of the law, and that's why Bocchini said the writer of the letter below doesn't know what he's talking about and should chill out. "The law doesn't apply to this operation," Bocchini said at 6 tonight.

 

As you can see, he admits the illegality of the act, but rationalizes the violation using the requested guidelines.

 

Thank you.

 

We'll see what happens.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

Admiring your efforts P.B. !

Admiring your efforts P.B. !

 

x2 Bob, im really glad to see you calling them out on their bull.

x3, Go get em Bob!

Well done. Your efforts are to be lauded.

OH CRAP, NOW YOU'VE DONE IT!! You used common sense and came to a logical conclusion. KUDOS to your efforts Bob!

 

This could get real interesting, as I don't recal anyone ever taking them to task on this issue before. Middlesex Co. just had a Buy-Back as well (or is it coming-up, not quite sure).

 

As a side-note, years ago while attending an Outdoor Show at Raritan Center in Edison, I visited with a NJ State Trooper who had a table there at the Show. He was handing-out copies of the Summary of the 2C Statutes on Firearms. A blue-colored multi-page folded hand-out that explained most of the pertainent laws governing the use of firearms. Everything from Machine Guns to Destructive Devices to Carry Permits to simple Transportation issues. On the back page, in BOLD, "None of this information is intended to be construed as actual law, and is therefore subject to interpretation by the County Prosecutors". I'm paraphrasing slightly, but the main point is the interpretation factor. I guess that I wasn't the only one to read the back of the hand-out, and then question the Trooper why he was sent there to hand-out paperwork that was so explicit but at the same time extremely vaugue, for the follwing year, there was NO BOOTH for a Trooper to hand-out said blue forms.......

 

Anyway--my hat is off to Bob! Let's hope that the black helicopters aren't circling his house by now, lol!

 

Dave

Thanks Bob for doing this on behalf of MOST of us!

Nothing better than a man on a mission. Way to go, Bob! The effort has gone farther than I could have ever imagined. Just to get him to admit that the buy-back was illegal is a major milestone. Keep up the great work.

Good for you Bob, thank you. Was Holder associated with this one too? ;-)

Nice job Bob..

 

I think what makes this interesting is that the prosecutor is actually engaging in a back and forth. Usually they keep their traps shut and we wind up arguing with a brick wall. This is definitely fun to watch. Keep up the good work!

 

I think what makes this interesting is that the prosecutor is actually engaging in a back and forth. Usually they keep their traps shut and we wind up arguing with a brick wall. This is definitely fun to watch. Keep up the good work!

 

He actually only responded that one time - and he's probably still trying to get his foot out of his mouth. The author/blogger of the article is trying to get Bocchini to come on Trentonian TV and face me live. I said I'd come on, but not until I saw what the guidelines actually say - assuming there are guidelines. I don't think it will ever happen. People have short memories and by the time my OPRA request is resolved it will be a dead news issue. Not that I'll necessarily let it drop - depends on the AG document.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

Pizza Bob for Governor!

Good work Bob !

Nice, Bob, very nice. Remind me not to make you angry.

+1

Pizza Bob you're my hero.

Make 'em squirm in Trenton.

The arrogance is simply stunning.

Another chapter in the gun buyback saga. Here's the update, along with the AG's guidelines. I still take exception to the fact that the AG has any authority to issue guidelines that differ dramatically from the original laws as an "interpretation of legislative intent." It's all crap - smoke-and-mirrors - government speak. Obviously, the AG knows that the gun buybacks fall within "that grey area" if they had to issue supplemental guidelines to the law in order to legitimize gun buy-backs.

 

http://incrediblekulk.blogspot.com/2012/05/part-5-attorney-general-guidelines-for.html

I've read them over and there are several areas where an argument can be made as to legality. The biggest handicap is not knowing whether this particular buyback adhered strictly to the these guidelines.

 

Transportation of guns to the surrender site is one area. The position in the guidelines is that the voluntary surrender statute exempts the person surrendering a firearm from the transport statutes. But the voluntary surrender statute specifies prior notification . The buybacks consist of concurrent notification and surrender and it becomes a judgement call on the part of LE if a person stopped on the way to a surrender site is sincere in their intent or using the surrender as a means to escape prosecution.

 

They are quite specific about having the Voluntary Surrender Form completed, but then say to attempt to get the name of the person surrendering the firearm, but do not require it. Isn't that a paradox? The guidelines specify that NCIC checks should be made on every firearm - laudable, but are they doing it?

 

Andrew provided the link - how about some input from the board. Read over the guidelines and proffer an opinion about legality - overall or of specific sections of the guideline.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob