Does anyone personally know an average Joe who has a carry permit? Not a security guy either. Just a regular guy.

I know 2 who did have permits. one gave it up a few years ago. When he moved and the new town wouldn't process the paperwork so he said screw it.the other still has it. Both are business owners politically involved. With lots of money.

I have personally seen one carry permit. The guy was in check cashing.

I've only seen one from a security guard.

I know 2 who did have permits. one gave it up a few years ago. When he moved and the new town wouldn't process the paperwork so he said screw it.the other still has it. Both are business owners politically involved. With lots of money.

 

I wonder if being politically involved and having lots of money helped?

I wonder if being politically involved and having lots of money helped?

 

If you're really wondering, can I interest you in this bridge I have to sell?

I know of one, he too has some money and has a family member in politics.

I don't think Scott Bach would throw out the 1195 number and specifically clarify that it included Leo and armored car security in front of 1 million listeners if it was not true.... If someone has a relationship with him perhaps they can ask him to post the source documentation he received in discovery?... Then again it may not be possible since the case is on going....

Baring anyone saying they have a specific source of data that call Scott's numbers into question I see no reason to think otherwise....

Update: I asked my guy to verify the retired LEO figure. The number he got is 2 year permits issued by the county judge.

Retired officers get a 1 year ID from NJSP, so, no that number doesn't include retired LEOs.

I wonder if being politically involved and having lots of money helped?

of course, while not politicians they both donated, big time to almost all political organizations. Forgot actually i know a 2 more guys that had work permits, 1 worked for an armored car company. the other was a class 2 leo and owned a security company and got a permit. All of these where in Passaic county.

Met a guy at the range a couple of weeks ago , he started loading a couple of mags after packing up, looked at him funny , he says " I carry " , asked if he was one of the priveledged few or retired LEO, he says " retired NYPD , you should get some of these , ( Hornandy CD's ) " , I hated him for just a second.

The Hornady Critical duty is good. I have it in .45 but it is +p and it has quite a kick compared to regular charge. 

a lot of cops also let it go....I know more than a few that did

 

YEs, but even going by my short list, that's only 6 dudes that do't let it go per department, and I suspect that list of about 200 is short. The number is not right. 

If you're really wondering, can I interest you in this bridge I have to sell?

 

Thanks for the offer, but I don't have enough $$ for a bridge.

So is anyone really in disbelief that so few permits are issued? I am not. I have always maintained that NJ is a close to NO issue state. 

 

Only person I know who has one is Anthony from GFH and he said his permit is stamped "valid only during course of employment" which means it's a security guard permit (but it may not have any time and place restrictions.)

Cool.... I'm one of the "1195".

If you're really wondering, can I interest you in this bridge I have to sell?

I'll sell you an NJ carry permit for half the cost of his alleged bridge.

The important figure is what percentage of applications have been granted. Overall population is irrelevant. If only 2000 people applied, 1195 isn't all that bad. I would be curious to know the total number of applications. It might be smaller than you expect. Even here on NJGF people are usually discouraged from applying as the odds of getting one are so low.

The important figure is what percentage of applications have been granted. Overall population is irrelevant. If only 2000 people applied, 1195 isn't all that bad. I would be curious to know the total number of applications. It might be smaller than you expect. Even here on NJGF people are usually discouraged from applying as the odds of getting one are so low.

Well if this was a free state then that ratio would be of interest and of value.  It is neither in New Germany.  Most don't apply because they know they will not be granted one and then will always have to check the box that they have been denied a permit in the past.  Knowing there is almost no chance to get one you have to be foolish to apply and then have a black mark on your record because of it.

Cool.... I'm one of the "1195".

 

Security guard permit, or regular justifiable need? 

Well if this was a free state then that ratio would be of interest and of value.  It is neither in New Germany.  Most don't apply because they know they will not be granted one and then will always have to check the box that they have been denied a permit in the past.  Knowing there is almost no chance to get one you have to be foolish to apply and then have a black mark on your record because of it.

 

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying here. but the ratio is if great importance if trying to prove that NJ is a defacto "no issue" state.  If over 50% of those who applied were granted, the state has a good argument that they do issue to the majority of applicants.  The state can impose restrictions on CCW as most states do. 

 

Without knowing the total number of applicants, the number of permits issued has no context.  What if only 1195 people applied?  Then NJ would have a 100% issue rate, regardless of total population.  How would you then argue that NJ does not issue?  This is why NJ2AS was trying to get as many people as possible to apply.  The more documented rejections, the more proof that NJ has a defacto CCW ban.  Arguing that no one applies because they are afraid of getting rejected is going to go nowhere in court.

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying here. but the ratio is if great importance if trying to prove that NJ is a defacto "no issue" state.  If over 50% of those who applied were granted, the state has a good argument that they do issue to the majority of applicants.  The state can impose restrictions on CCW as most states do. 

 

Without knowing the total number of applicants, the number of permits issued has no context.  What if only 1195 people applied?  Then NJ would have a 100% issue rate, regardless of total population.  How would you then argue that NJ does not issue?  This is why NJ2AS was trying to get as many people as possible to apply.  The more documented rejections, the more proof that NJ has a defacto CCW ban.  Arguing that no one applies because they are afraid of getting rejected is going to go nowhere in court.

What I am saying is that in a normal state the ratio is a valid tool to analyze things.  In NJ most don't bother to apply because the downside in almost certain denial is not worth the tiny likelihood of being successful.  Yes I agree it does not help our cause because the ratio you are looking for is undoubtedly artificially high.  But that is the reality of the situation.  Its sort of like a person does not worry about speeding too much when the road is crowded and everybody is speeding, but you have to be foolish driving in the left lane at 85 mph when almost nobody else is on the road - you might get away with it, but you are just making yourself a target.  The better number to get hold of - if possible, is how many that are business owners, or have been threatened or have taken out restraining orders have been granted permits versus the number that have been denied.  IF you can show many with "justifiable need" have been denied that should be good enough to show the law is BS.

Cool.... I'm one of the "1195".

How many times did you have to be murdered before they granted it?

You really need to listen to the radio show where this was clarified.  The number includes Retired LEO, as well as conditional permits issued for work , etc etc.  The number is a tiny fraction of a percent of the NJ population and clearly shows that NJ believes that NO ONE has justifiable need.

This tells me that there are a lot of stupid retired cops who should have gotten their permit. Not that they need it anyway, they are covered under LEOSA, yet NJ still thinks it can do what it wants on the matter.  

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying here. but the ratio is if great importance if trying to prove that NJ is a defacto "no issue" state. If over 50% of those who applied were granted, the state has a good argument that they do issue to the majority of applicants. The state can impose restrictions on CCW as most states do.

 

Without knowing the total number of applicants, the number of permits issued has no context. What if only 1195 people applied? Then NJ would have a 100% issue rate, regardless of total population. How would you then argue that NJ does not issue? This is why NJ2AS was trying to get as many people as possible to apply. The more documented rejections, the more proof that NJ has a defacto CCW ban. Arguing that no one applies because they are afraid of getting rejected is going to go nowhere in court.

 

With the CA case I don't think this matters anymore. They had the same problem and few applied because of fear of denial and the "black mark of shame." You can't condition a right on a need, period. Imagine the outrage if they restricted prayer to homes and churches, and said you had to have a good reason to pray in public and said few people pray outside of those locations so there's no problem. See where I'm coming from?

We don't need a thousand people who were denied.  I once thought we did.

 

The argument is that it is unconstitutional to only allow someone to exercise a constitutional right if they are able to demonstrate an “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,” (N.J. Admin. Code § 13:54-2.4d).

 

NJ isn't just violating rights in practice - it's written right into the NJ administrative law.

Well if this was a free state then that ratio would be of interest and of value. It is neither in New Germany. Most don't apply because they know they will not be granted one and then will always have to check the box that they have been denied a permit in the past. Knowing there is almost no chance to get one you have to be foolish to apply and then have a black mark on your record because of it.

You should thank the "foolish" persons that got the "black mark" and are fighting this in court on our behalf.

 

Some people prefer a black mark to a yellow stripe.

Without shining too bright a light on a quiet operation.. I believe an organized effort was successfully made last year to develop concrete evidence that the majority of applicants are denied.

You should thank the "foolish" persons that got the "black mark" and are fighting this in court on our behalf.

Some people prefer a black mark to a yellow stripe.

 

I guess that most of these people thought that they had a good chance ("justifiable need").  It doesn't make them any less in my view of course.

 

Edit:  Just thought about something...

The number of gun owners in NJ is probably a little over 1M.  That means, that the share with CCW is about 0.1%.  It would be interesting to compare with the other states, what % of gun owners have CCW?  I bet it is quite different, enough prove that NJ is way out of mainstream.