How. A judge has to approve it. Judges don't report to the attorney general.

 

You're saying the judge will ignore the AG? I think some of them will try, but a lawsuit will be the result. 

You're saying the judge will ignore the AG? I think some of them will try, but a lawsuit will be the result. 

 

even if that was the case, who decides the outcome of the lawsuit?   a judge.  

 

 

where in the law does it give the attorney general any power to define justifiable need.  i'd even say that the attorney generals made up "substantially identical" criteria isn't law but I'm not a lawyer.  i'd love for someone to explain that to me.  but i am definitely not 100% sure on my own.  

even if that was the case, who decides the outcome of the lawsuit?   a judge.  

 

That doesn't matter. They have to follow the law. If the law says that "self defense" is sufficient justifiable need then they have to abide by it. And if all judges agreed then there would be no need for appellate courts, nor the Supreme Court. 

 

 

where in the law does it give the attorney general any power to define justifiable need.  i'd even say that the attorney generals made up "substantially identical" criteria isn't law but I'm not a lawyer.  i'd love for someone to explain that to me.  but i am definitely not 100% sure on my own.  

 

 

Justifiable need is in the administrative code which is written by state agencies and published in the New Jersey register. In this case, it is the Attorney General who wrote the rule for justifiable need, based on the practices of police chiefs (which was part of the Siccardi decision).

looks like i have some reading to do.  

 

You're saying the judge will ignore the AG? I think some of them will try, but a lawsuit will be the result. 

 

 

Every judge will ignore the AG, not a judge.

  

 

Every judge will ignore the AG, not a judge.

On what basis? What law will they reference in their ruling?

Understand that if they do that they enter very very dangerous territory. Especially if a higher court or a federal court smacks them down.

Like our state Supreme Court follow the State Constitution when they let Lautenberg run?

On what basis? What law will they reference in their ruling?

This law:

 

Specify in detail the urgent necessity for self-protection, as evidenced by specific threats or previous attacks which demonstrate a special danger to the applicant's life that cannot be avoided by means other than by issuance of a permit to carry a handgun.

Administrative code is law. And it can only be changed by the legislature or by regulation, and through a regulatory method to include a public comment process.

 

By what law can the AG change N.J.A.C or Statutes of New Jersey with the wave of a hand?

BTW, where are you in the "I'm from New Jersey but I'm not going to do a damn thing but complain" thread?

 

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/70429-expand-pa-carry-to-legal-ccw-holdersaction-needed/

 

Five years ago I ran into the same thing. I offered to help and I got squat. I was disgusted. Somebody finally contacted me but I moved on. I came back and said I felt bad.

 

The feeling is gone. I feel fine now.

This law:

 

 

Administrative code is law. And it can only be changed by the legislature or by regulation, and through a regulatory method to include a public comment process.

 

By what law can the AG change N.J.A.C or Statutes of New Jersey with the wave of a hand?

 

I never said it was just a wave of hand. But the AG has the power to change it.

 

The regulatory method is here:

 

http://www.state.nj.us/education/code/process.htm

 

Yes, there may be public comments but this stands a much better chance than getting something through the legislature in its current form.

 

It's not like the public comments are binding anyway. Look at the MVC's rules on Tesla and car dealerships. Lots of outcry about that one but in the end the rules were adopted. 

BTW, where are you in the "I'm from New Jersey but I'm not going to do a damn thing but complain" thread?

 

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/70429-expand-pa-carry-to-legal-ccw-holdersaction-needed/

 

Five years ago I ran into the same thing. I offered to help and I got squat. I was disgusted. Somebody finally contacted me but I moved on. I came back and said I felt bad.

 

The feeling is gone. I feel fine now.

 

I saw that but the next two weeks are tough for me as I am out of town for quite a bit, including a four day conference in Connecticut. When was this going down anyway?

I never said it was just a wave of hand. But the AG has the power to change it.

 

The regulatory method is here:

 

http://www.state.nj.us/education/code/process.htm

 

Yes, there may be public comments but this stands a much better chance than getting something through the legislature in its current form.

 

It's not like the public comments are binding anyway. Look at the MVC's rules on Tesla and car dealerships. Lots of outcry about that one but in the end the rules were adopted. 

 

 

Here's what

 

Justifiable need is in the administrative code which is written by state agencies and published in the New Jersey register. In this case, it is the Attorney General who wrote the rule for justifiable need, based on the practices of police chiefs (which was part of the Siccardi decision).

 

I think it was the NJSP Superintendent that wrote the justifiable need section of the NJAC.  Added to law in 1991.  Details are several pages back here:   http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/53610-news-regarding-pa-ccw-reciprocity/page-10#entry880264

NJSP is under the AG, in the department of law and public safety.

Either way, it's a regulation written by the agency and not a statute. It can be changed without the legislature.

Regulations (NJAC) have expiration dates and need to be renewed every few years. When this happens, there is a public comment period and I think all comments become part of the NJ register.   Although it would have no effect,it would be interesting if we had thousands of well thoughtout comments by thousands of residents formally recorded as objecting the next time this comes up for renewal.

And....how do we find out when it comes up for renewal?

 

 

This signature is AWESOME!!!

It looks like the PA House Judiciary committee has a meeting scheduled for 7/27/14. Any idea if they'll be voting on 2398 at that time?

 

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/cteeInfo/Index.cfm?CteeBody=H&Code=24

Like our state Supreme Court follow the State Constitution when they let Lautenberg run?

You mean Lou--- err, I don't need another black mark. 

Here is a thumbs up for PA House Bill (proposed legislation) #2398

http://www.legis.sta...br=2398&pn=3919

 

It looks like the PA House Judiciary committee has a meeting scheduled for 7/27/14. Any idea if they'll be voting on 2398 at that time?

 

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/cteeInfo/Index.cfm?CteeBody=H&Code=24

 

 

Why don't you call them and ask. And then ask when would be a good time to stop by and talk to them.

And....how do we find out when it comes up for renewal?

 

 

This signature is AWESOME!!!

 

You mean this?

 

http://www.njsp.org/info/pdf/firearms/njac-title13-ch54.pdf

 

Every 5 years.

 

It was renewed last year (it was also renewed in 2007, per the expiration date) pretty much automatically, because I'm sure nobody even noticed. 

 

So in 2018 it's next up for renewal.