1 minute ago, DonkeyPunch said:

....

That is not evidence that one is guilty until proven innocent.

 

Again - if prosecution proves that defendant possessed a handgun without a carry permit then that is all that is needed to convict.  If defendant wants to raise exemption as a defense, they have to prove that the exemption applied.

As I said before, your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired.

It's in PLAIN ENGLISH

Presumptions:

b.  Licenses and permits.    When the legality of a person's conduct under  this chapter depends on his possession of a license or permit or on his having  registered with or given notice to a particular person or agency, it shall be  presumed that he does not possess such a license or permit or has not  registered or given the required notice, until he establishes the contrary.

2 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

Again - if prosecution proves that defendant possessed a handgun without a carry permit then that is all that is needed to convict.  If defendant wants to raise exemption as a defense, they have to prove that the exemption applied.

Yes, you've repeated that several times. I'm not going to play a game of "whomever says it last wins." 

1 minute ago, njJoniGuy said:

As I said before, your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired.

It's in PLAIN ENGLISH

Presumptions:

b.  Licenses and permits.    When the legality of a person's conduct under  this chapter depends on his possession of a license or permit or on his having  registered with or given notice to a particular person or agency, it shall be  presumed that he does not possess such a license or permit or has not  registered or given the required notice, until he establishes the contrary.

Reading comprehension? I posted the same thing THREE TIMES regarding licenses/permits.

Then spend some money and ask a Firearms Attorney here in NJ

I think that's the only way you'll be satisfied as to the way the law is at present.

5 minutes ago, DonkeyPunch said:

Yes, you've repeated that several times.

Because you're not addressing it in your argument.

You contend that there is no "guilty until proven innocent".  A defendant having to prove innocence due to an exemption isn't an example of that?

I'm getting a headache just reading this thread.  The totality of the wasted time & energy is monumental.  I'm beginning to think TROLL.

Hair-splitting has risen to a new height, and unquenched "show me"  idealism is running the asylum.  

Anyone that thinks you're not guilty until proven innocent should look up the quote from the Superior Court Judge that warned we all own guns at our own peril.

Good night Nurse!

~R

4 hours ago, drjjpdc said:

Well any of the gunowners on this site knows having a 2nd amendment is small consolation.

Hey, Nice to see another North Hanover resident around these forums! 

37 minutes ago, Smokin .50 said:

... I'm beginning to think TROLL.

I thought the same thing a few hours ago as I replied multiple times and couldn't get through to him. So I did what I should have when I checked his content and found a 9+ year gap in his posts, I added him to my Ignore list, along with Greenie and a couple others.

Life is too short. As someone wise once said "Don't argue with a fool. People might not be able to tell the difference."

4 hours ago, Smokin .50 said:

I'm getting a headache just reading this thread.  The totality of the wasted time & energy is monumental.  I'm beginning to think TROLL.

Hair-splitting has risen to a new height, and unquenched "show me"  idealism is running the asylum.  

Anyone that thinks you're not guilty until proven innocent should look up the quote from the Superior Court Judge that warned we all own guns at our own peril.

Good night Nurse!

~R

Yep. 

look at the records  This gentleman hasn't been around since Aitken was arrested; now he shows up again (doing much the same thing).

And calling himself DonkeyPunch?  Sounds more like Democrat Provocateur...

 

6 hours ago, njJoniGuy said:

I thought the same thing a few hours ago as I replied multiple times and couldn't get through to him. So I did what I should have when I checked his content and found a 9+ year gap in his posts, I added him to my Ignore list, along with Greenie and a couple others.

Life is too short. As someone wise once said "Don't argue with a fool. People might not be able to tell the difference."

^^^THIS^^^^

Thanks for the detective work.  I'm a little too busy with what I have on my plate to chase leads like this.  It's nice that we look out for each other!  Thanks again & ttyl!

Rosey

2 hours ago, W2MC said:

Yep. 

look at the records  This gentleman hasn't been around since Aitken was arrested; now he shows up again (doing much the same thing).

And calling himself DonkeyPunch?  Sounds more like Democrat Provocateur...

 

Welp, I guess today is the day to wipe my monitor, lol!  Around here you call sumbuddy a "DP" & you're in a fight, lol!

3 1/2 weeks to BACON collection!  

20 hours ago, PK90 said:

I can run someone over on purpose while going to the range to shoot my hollowpoint ammo. Can I be charged with illegal possession? NO.

ETA: One can only be charged of illegally possessing HPs if they are outside the exemptions, PER THE LAW. There is no such thing as an add-on charge. It's like stopping someone for driving with a headlamp out, and you find that they were drunk. Charge them with DUI and the equipment violation. If not drunk, or no other violation is there, let them go. Is the headlamp an add-on charge? NO.

In NJ you would probably be charged with having bump stocks.

Still, I would love to know the whole story.  What was the weapons charge?

Charges dismissed.

https://bearingarms.com/cam-e/2020/03/13/criminal-charges-dismissed-roosevelt-twyne/

39 minutes ago, kc17 said:

Charges dismissed.

https://bearingarms.com/cam-e/2020/03/13/criminal-charges-dismissed-roosevelt-twyne/

Good!

"This Office has elected to exercise its prosecutorial discretion and has administratively dismissed all charges pending against Mr. Twyne," the office said in a statement to Newsweek. "It is not in the interests of justice to continue his prosecution."

 

How nice of them. The fact the law doesn't support the charges had nothing to do with it, for sure. Just imagine, the DA doesn't now the laws he has the duty to enforce.

Nappen...

28 minutes ago, WP22 said:

"This Office has elected to exercise its prosecutorial discretion and has administratively dismissed all charges pending against Mr. Twyne," the office said in a statement to Newsweek. "It is not in the interests of justice to continue his prosecution."

 

How nice of them. The fact the law doesn't support the charges had nothing to do with it, for sure. Just imagine, the DA doesn't now the laws he has the duty to enforce.

So how does Mr. Twyne recover damages for this?

26 minutes ago, JHZR2 said:

So how does Mr. Twyne recover damages for this?

Civil suit. 

41 minutes ago, JHZR2 said:

So how does Mr. Twyne recover damages for this?

Maybe someone can clarify this for me: did the guard's carry permit which he had on his person that night have restrictions on it or not?  Prosecutor's position seems to be that the judge issuing the permit limited it to carrying only while on duty.  If that's the case, then he did not have the right to wear his firearm when driving home from work and needed to transport unloaded and secured like the rest of us.  On the other hand, if the permit he was issued contained no restrictions on it, and he was never served with the underlying order granting the permit but imposing the conditions, then he had the right I believe to rely upon that to lawfully transport with a loaded firearm on his hip.

Perhaps, but lets look at the law.  It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL from the get go with the "right to keep and BEAR arms".  2nd. loading and unloading a firearm is itself a potential avoidable dangerous activity which the state feels it has to regulate.  And, it also damages the ammunition. Third, it is absolutely ridiculous that a trained security guard should have his whole life destroyed because he may have left it is his holster under his control (which is the safest place for it by the way), or with a magazine still in it, and that it would result in a FELONY while attorney-wads in this state and their government-sponsored counterparts plea bargain real criminal thugs down who don't even get charged for the real felonious firearms charges as they commit violent acts.  Lets also explore the fact that the guy was pulled over for having tinted windows, tinted windows.  Guess it was a slow night.   That's probably also a felony in this state unless you are a Judge, District Attorney, or Politician.  It would seem that they weren't acting as peace officers, but singling out a poor soul of African American heritage who was just making his way home.    Not to mention that it would appear that the overzealous law enforcement (perhaps Jackboots) charged him with BOGUS charges concerning the ammunition type which points to the fact that these clowns not only lacked judgement and discretion, but really don't undestand the law that they have decided as a career to enforce, and/or were trying to get this non-law enforcement brother with ANYTHING that they could.    And,  though the Citizen was issued by his company with non HP ammo and competent ammo for the task NOT even carrying hollow point, HP is actually safer and more effective than the ball ammo related to the peasants.  And that the Critical Defense and/or HP ammo is a better and safer tool and that those hypocrite uniformed citizens should recognize, and most likely have based on what they are/were carrying.    I wonder what type of ammunition the police officers were carrying as they made their arrest?  I guess protecting their lives from criminals is more important than this American citizen protecting his life that they have taken into custody?  Perhaps in his line of work it was a good idea to have tinted windows as he left his jobsite.  And as a final point, perhaps Roselle Park is actually a dangerous place to be in and live in, especially at that time of night and this armed citizen feared for his life.  Maybe it is even so  because these guys weren't actually going after the real bad guys and doing their real jobs, but instead harrasing citizens on their way home while the real criminals and druggies were out and about.   As it stands, though, the real villain might be the DA who has not dismissed this ridiculous case.    I wonder how often the judge proscriibing all of those conditions that must be met for personal carry are met by that said judge and whether or not he or she as a judge actually exercises his or her right to carry and where and how often and with what restrictions and ammunition that activity is carried out, and whether or not he or she has tinted windows on his vehicle(s).  Lets open that up for scrutiny with the DA as well and the officers when they are off duty.    

 

Don't worry!

this young man caught the eye of super Lawyer!

Evan "The Attention Whore" Nappen

That's like winning the Lottery

F-U Nappen!.

2 hours ago, Downtownv said:

Don't worry!

this young man caught the eye of super Lawyer!

Evan "The Attention Whore" Nappen

That's like winning the Lottery

F-U Nappen!.

Hes like the johnny cochran of 2a.  Better that hes on our side than the other side. 

I heard that all charges were dropped, but he was transporting it outside his locked container but didn`t say if it was on his person.

https://www.newsweek.com/roosevelt-twyne-new-jersey-gun-laws-1491859

We are so Blessed to have Evan Nappen.

 

 

I only read the first 2 pages of this thread before posting so I hopefully am not being repetitive. In those 2 pages people are talking about hollow points being an "add on crime". Add on my ass, somewhere  on the form, I forget the thread title (its from years ago) there was a thread about some guy getting arrested AND convicted for having a 44 mag round with a spent primer and a hole drilled through the case on his key ring. No other crime it being added on to. Just some cop saw his key ring with that on it and promptly arrested him before he could injure or cause a death with it.

Quote

Twyne’s Permit to Carry a Handgun specifies the Smith & Wesson handgun that he was carrying at the time of the stop. Twyne also possesses a SORA (Security Officer Registration Act) Card, a New Jersey Firearms Purchaser Identification Card, and lawfully purchased/registered his handgun with a New Jersey permit to purchase.

WOW

ALL THAT TO CARRY IN NJ AND THEY STILL ARRESTED THE GUY????

Do we need any more examples?

We know that our politicians hate NJ, its residents, the constitution and freedom.

But is it safe to say that the average citizen should do whatever possible to avoid interactions/contact with the police?

For decades, minority communities have been yelling and screaming about police criminality and abuses. 

Many of us, me included, ignored their cries for help and justice. 

I guess its our turn?

On 3/13/2020 at 7:01 PM, Downtownv said:

Don't worry!

this young man caught the eye of super Lawyer!

Evan "The Attention Whore" Nappen

That's like winning the Lottery

F-U Nappen!.

Youre mad at a lawyer whose specialty is defending Americans from unconstitutional/immoral NJ laws?

On 3/13/2020 at 4:52 PM, Princetonian58 said:

Maybe someone can clarify this for me: did the guard's carry permit which he had on his person that night have restrictions on it or not?  Prosecutor's position seems to be that the judge issuing the permit limited it to carrying only while on duty.  If that's the case, then he did not have the right to wear his firearm when driving home from work and needed to transport unloaded and secured like the rest of us.  On the other hand, if the permit he was issued contained no restrictions on it, and he was never served with the underlying order granting the permit but imposing the conditions, then he had the right I believe to rely upon that to lawfully transport with a loaded firearm on his hip.

Are you defending the technicalities of the unconstitutional/immoral anti-second amendment NJ laws?

On 3/13/2020 at 5:12 PM, Underdog said:

Perhaps, but lets look at the law.  It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL from the get go with the "right to keep and BEAR arms".  2nd. loading and unloading a firearm is itself a potential avoidable dangerous activity which the state feels it has to regulate.  And, it also damages the ammunition. Third, it is absolutely ridiculous that a trained security guard should have his whole life destroyed because he may have left it is his holster under his control (which is the safest place for it by the way), or with a magazine still in it, and that it would result in a FELONY while attorney-wads in this state and their government-sponsored counterparts plea bargain real criminal thugs down who don't even get charged for the real felonious firearms charges as they commit violent acts.  Lets also explore the fact that the guy was pulled over for having tinted windows, tinted windows.  Guess it was a slow night.   That's probably also a felony in this state unless you are a Judge, District Attorney, or Politician.  It would seem that they weren't acting as peace officers, but singling out a poor soul of African American heritage who was just making his way home.    Not to mention that it would appear that the overzealous law enforcement (perhaps Jackboots) charged him with BOGUS charges concerning the ammunition type which points to the fact that these clowns not only lacked judgement and discretion, but really don't undestand the law that they have decided as a career to enforce, and/or were trying to get this non-law enforcement brother with ANYTHING that they could.    And,  though the Citizen was issued by his company with non HP ammo and competent ammo for the task NOT even carrying hollow point, HP is actually safer and more effective than the ball ammo related to the peasants.  And that the Critical Defense and/or HP ammo is a better and safer tool and that those hypocrite uniformed citizens should recognize, and most likely have based on what they are/were carrying.    I wonder what type of ammunition the police officers were carrying as they made their arrest?  I guess protecting their lives from criminals is more important than this American citizen protecting his life that they have taken into custody?  Perhaps in his line of work it was a good idea to have tinted windows as he left his jobsite.  And as a final point, perhaps Roselle Park is actually a dangerous place to be in and live in, especially at that time of night and this armed citizen feared for his life.  Maybe it is even so  because these guys weren't actually going after the real bad guys and doing their real jobs, but instead harrasing citizens on their way home while the real criminals and druggies were out and about.   As it stands, though, the real villain might be the DA who has not dismissed this ridiculous case.    I wonder how often the judge proscriibing all of those conditions that must be met for personal carry are met by that said judge and whether or not he or she as a judge actually exercises his or her right to carry and where and how often and with what restrictions and ammunition that activity is carried out, and whether or not he or she has tinted windows on his vehicle(s).  Lets open that up for scrutiny with the DA as well and the officers when they are off duty.    

 

 

Youve got mental patients on this forum arguing the technicalities of NJ gun laws as though they are somehow legitimate. 

Although I do understand that it does take some degree of technical analysis to comply with these unconstitutional/immoral laws. 

 

On 3/10/2020 at 1:55 PM, PK90 said:

I can run someone over on purpose while going to the range to shoot my hollowpoint ammo. Can I be charged with illegal possession? NO.

ETA: One can only be charged of illegally possessing HPs if they are outside the exemptions, PER THE LAW. There is no such thing as an add-on charge. It's like stopping someone for driving with a headlamp out, and you find that they were drunk. Charge them with DUI and the equipment violation. If not drunk, or no other violation is there, let them go. Is the headlamp an add-on charge? NO.

In your example, wouldnt the DUI be the add on charge?