So now that it's law, will local PDs be calling up the FBI and saying, "Hi, you don't know me, but I'm from the X PD. Can you tell me if Y is on your terror watch list? I need that info before I issue him and FID."

 

My guess is they'll get a laugh and a hangup.

 

This could all be very comical, UNLESS they refuse to issue the FID, pending (never happening) verification of terror watch list status.

So now that it's law, will local PDs be calling up the FBI and saying, "Hi, you don't know me, but I'm from the X PD. Can you tell me if Y is on your terror watch list? I need that info before I issue him and FID."

 

My guess is they'll get a laugh and a hangup.

 

This could all be very comical, UNLESS they refuse to issue the FID, pending (never happening) verification of terror watch list status.

 

It would probably have to be done at the NJSP level.. no way every local PD would call 1-800-TER-LIST.  NJSP will add it to the list of things they do in addition to NICS.

 

The bigger question is will that even be possible?  FBI or whoever maintains the list may not even let NJSP have access to it.

 

 

The bigger question is will that even be possible?  FBI or whoever maintains the list may not even let NJSP have access to it.

Exactly. The list is presumably "secret" for a reason. They're not going to compromise national security to satisfy the whim of a few sub-human NJ legislators.

The bigger question is will that even be possible?  FBI or whoever maintains the list may not even let NJSP have access to it.

Yeah right, do you think the Fed [under the current admin] is going to balk at the chance to keep firearms out of people's hands? 

There are a host of problems with the bill.  The problem relating to your question is this.

 

On the FBI site, they indicate that the list will not be shared with any other entity.  That includes the NJSP, Local PD, me, you or any other agency or person.  I wrote a 2 page dissertation on the problems with this law.  Handed it in to several legislators in person.  Emailed it to several others, including the Gov.  

 

And it would appear they all said "pfsh.  You need to go away with your logic and science."

 

 

And it would appear they all said "pfsh.  You need to go away with your logic and science."

Maybe the Governor at least isn't that clueless. He may have realized the bill has absolutely no teeth and is therefore nothing but a symbolic sop to throw to the hysterical masses who insist that "something" must be done.

 

It doesn't say anything about confirming that someone isn't on the list. Only that if they're on the list, they can't get an FID. So, you're presumably eligible until proven otherwise.

Here is the rebuttal, for those interested

 

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/49668-my-rebuttal-re-a3687-terrorist-watch-list-purchase-ban/

Yeah right, do you think the Fed [under the current admin] is going to balk at the chance to keep firearms out of people's hands? 

 

After Snowden and the NSA stuff, I'm sure they're worried about any outside agency grep'ing their data.

I wouldn't worry too much about the actual mechanics. Should they ever move to enforce this provision, it will throw false positives, and we will have plenty of test case plaintiffs under which to file lawsuit.

 

There is no way for enforcement to survive due process challenges. Just let it play out: this is not a victory for gun controllers.

Yeah right, do you think the Fed [under the current admin] is going to balk at the chance to keep firearms out of people's hands? 

 

 

I don't think they care as much about the firearms as much as they care about security.  Giving that list, or even letting people compare a name to that list is another security risk.  The way things are going with the secrets of the Feds, pretty sure they would never allow it.

 

Maybe the Governor at least isn't that clueless. He may have realized the bill has absolutely no teeth and is therefore nothing but a symbolic sop to throw to the hysterical masses who insist that "something" must be done.

 

It doesn't say anything about confirming that someone isn't on the list. Only that if they're on the list, they can't get an FID. So, you're presumably eligible until proven otherwise.

 

This is what I'm hoping as well.  Christie knows it can never be enforced, the anti's will just assume that it is and will be happy in their bubble.  Then things will go along as usual.

 

Same thing with the mental health records really, it violates HIPAA which is a national law.  No way a state can violate that just for NICS checks.

 

no way every local PD would call 1-800-TER-LIST.

 

 

I bet Bush himself came up with that number.

Even assuming the feds confirm a name is on the list they would have to provide further info to confirm identity beyond a name. If John Smith is on the list that doesn't mean every John Smith in NJ is suddenly barred. The feds would have to open the John Smith file to disclose the particulars of how Smith got on the list and a description and ID numbers and all of that. Are the feds gonna do that?

 

Evan Nappen has got another case going to the NJ Supreme Court if someone gets barred on the basis of a mere name match, that is for sure.

 

In essence this bill gives an instant, secret and totally unreviewable discretionary denial to the feds over anyone in NJ. They could stop permit issuance entirely by just adding every name to the list who applies. Without any standards as how to get on the list it could be done easily. At the very least it allows feds to google and NSA data mine every applicant as they apply. This bill was passed before Snowden leaked the data on the NSA remember. We only recently have discovered that the tinfoil hat crowd was not far off in terms of what levels of surveillance and snooping our government is doing.

 

 

 

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

After Snowden and the NSA stuff, I'm sure they're worried about any outside agency grep'ing their data.

Grep. Now there's a command I haven't used in a long time. Good one.

In essence this bill gives an instant, secret and totally unreviewable discretionary denial to the feds over anyone in NJ. They could stop permit issuance entirely by just adding every name to the list who applies. Without any standards as how to get on the list it could be done easily. At the very least it allows feds to google and NSA data mine every applicant as they apply.

Don't they already have that with the NICS check?   If the Feds wanted a trigger for secret scrutiny they already have it. 

I agree with you about the unreviewable aspects of the list and the lack of due process. 

Grep. Now there's a command I haven't used in a long time. Good one.

 

Man I used that 2 months ago and didnt even pick up on that, nice catch

Grep. Now there's a command I haven't used in a long time. Good one.

Grep isn't a command.. it's a way of life..

Grep isn't a command.. it's a way of life..

Simple commands that do one thing well and can be linked together to do exactly what's needed. Source code available to the community for improvement.

Just like Windows 7...not.

I prefer grope.

 

Peek, poke, grope.

Ah basic.  How I miss thee.

Here is the rebuttal, for those interested

 

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/49668-my-rebuttal-re-a3687-terrorist-watch-list-purchase-ban/

 

Thats very nice.

 

The only other thing I would have added are some examples of those who are on the list: Ted Kennedy, Mark Ruffalo, a 6yo Christian girl etc.

 

And the fact that people are being listed to meet quota:

 

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/marshals-innocent-people-placed-on-watch-list-to-meet-quota

This whole terrorist watch list names being denied civil rights may actually turn out to be a good thing for us in the long run. I am guessing right now somebody is already putting together a lawsuit over it. (if not why aren't we) Since this is something so blatantly unconstitutional it will hopefully reach the supreme  court and than be struck down. That in  turn would give us an easy avenue to challenge things like losing your rights to firearms when some one takes out a restraining order against you just because they hope to make you look worse in court even though you never did any thing that warrants then taking a restraining order against you. 

 

In the long run such unconstitutional things such as this can help far more by laying down the basis for the logic needed for the lower courts to actually start treating the Second Amendment as a right instead of a privilege, and in turn hopefully the rest of the government follows suit.  

This whole terrorist watch list names being denied civil rights may actually turn out to be a good thing for us in the long run. I am guessing right now somebody is already putting together a lawsuit over it. (if not why aren't we) Since this is something so blatantly unconstitutional it will hopefully reach the supreme  court and than be struck down. That in  turn would give us an easy avenue to challenge things like losing your rights to firearms when some one takes out a restraining order against you just because they hope to make you look worse in court even though you never did any thing that warrants then taking a restraining order against you. 

 

In the long run such unconstitutional things such as this can help far more by laying down the basis for the logic needed for the lower courts to actually start treating the Second Amendment as a right instead of a privilege, and in turn hopefully the rest of the government follows suit.  

but i have to ask....when the system is going in the more law less rights direction...what did it take a couple months to get this horsecrap signed into law?...now...how many years does it take to get it before and a decision from the supreme court?....its as with everything else in govt...loaded with "guidelines and proper channels and timelines etc"...when its in the interest of the people getting their rights back.......but when its about taking/denying rights its rapid paced..do whatever it takes legal or otherwise( like jump bills to different non relevant commitees mid vote when they see it not passing)

 

how many people will be denied a right based on a super duper top secret nobody can know who or why the people are on it list ...and if im not mistaken i also understand that being denied essentially makes you a person prohibited from owning/possessing firearms?......and how many years/how much money will it take to battle the government in court.....id say the average citizen (studies say most are 4 paychecks from the curb) will run out of legal funds far before the govt.......how convient a new way to deny people and not have to justify because its "top secret"  and cant be spoken of..........guess the christy online armchair political analysts were wrong.....

well since we dont know whos on the list we have to assume everyone is on the list. therefore everyone is denied and guns are no longer legal to sell in nj. your rights end where my feelings begin.

but i have to ask....when the system is going in the more law less rights direction...what did it take a couple months to get this horsecrap signed into law?...now...how many years does it take to get it before and a decision from the supreme court?....its as with everything else in govt...loaded with "guidelines and proper channels and timelines etc"...when its in the interest of the people getting their rights back.......but when its about taking/denying rights its rapid paced..do whatever it takes legal or otherwise( like jump bills to different non relevant commitees mid vote when they see it not passing)

 

how many people will be denied a right based on a super duper top secret nobody can know who or why the people are on it list ...and if im not mistaken i also understand that being denied essentially makes you a person prohibited from owning/possessing firearms?......and how many years/how much money will it take to battle the government in court.....id say the average citizen (studies say most are 4 paychecks from the curb) will run out of legal funds far before the govt.......how convient a new way to deny people and not have to justify because its "top secret"  and cant be spoken of..........guess the christy online armchair political analysts were wrong.....

How long until the case makes it to the supreme court? My guess 2-5 years, unfortunately for us, due to our political situation in NJ Court cases are the fastest way to increase our rights. Court cases such as this will help lay down the logic needed for more questionable laws to be challenged and be successful in over turning. For the restraining order example, If your ex takes out a restraining order on you, you lose your right to firearms until the courts decide weather or not the restraining order is valid. You are losing your firearms rights without Due process , It's the same exact thing as loosing your rights due to having your name put on a terror watch list. Unfortunately if you tried challenging the restraining order laws on firearms, I guarantee that all the lower courts will find it constitutional, due to the fact that lower the lower courts tend to vote in favor of gun laws and in this case they will not want to take responsibility for over turning protection of women, and the supreme court probably will not hear it, and even if they did the question of morality here would probably be enough for a vote in favor of the law. 

 

With the terror watch list there is a lot less moral ambiguity to cloud the decision making, due to the terror watch list having so many names it is provable that it has a lot of incorrect information. Once the law is struck down due to it being a violation of due process from the supreme court it paves the way for other cases to be brought forward with due process violations, and since that type of due process violation has already been found in violation of the constitution those other laws would have to be struck down for consistency's sake.

 

In NJ at least for now this is our fastest option to restore our rights, since the only other way would be for a culture shift in NJ to happen. Right now though, what we our considering big victories have been simply preventing the passing off some new gun laws, which quickly got washed away after Newtown.