Court hearing needed?

[Bucndoe]

6 hours ago, hammer4reel said:

HMM , Isn’t that what everyone tried to tell you back in August 

There's your dinner. Glad someone remembered that dog chasing it's tail

Edited September 7, 2022 by Bucndoe

[Bucndoe]

 

 

5 hours ago, mazzgolf said:

That point 11 is wrong - at least, it appears to be applying that statute incorrectly.

2C:39-6(g) says:

Let's take a look at these, and see if they apply to the case of those with a CCW:

paragraph (2) of subsection b.: "A licensed dealer in firearms and the dealer's registered employees during the course of their normal business while traveling to and from their place of business and other places for the purpose of demonstration, exhibition or delivery in connection with a sale, provided, however, that the weapon is carried in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section."

subsection e.: "Nothing in subsections b., c., and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent a person keeping or carrying about the person's place of business, residence, premises or other land owned or possessed by the person, any firearm, or from carrying the same, in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section, from any place of purchase to the person's residence or place of business, between the person's dwelling and place of business, between one place of business or residence and another when moving, or between the person's dwelling or place of business and place where the firearms are repaired, for the purpose of repair. For the purposes of this section, a place of business shall be deemed to be a fixed location."

paragraph (1) of subsection f: "Nothing in subsections b., c., and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent: ... A member of any rifle or pistol club organized in accordance with the rules prescribed by the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice, in going to or from a place of target practice, carrying firearms necessary for target practice, provided that the club has filed a copy of its charter with the superintendent and annually submits a list of its members to the superintendent and provided further that the firearms are carried in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section"

paragraph (3) of subsection f: "Nothing in subsections b., c., and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent: ... A person transporting any firearm or knife while traveling:   (a)   Directly to or from any place for the purpose of hunting or fishing, provided the person has in possession a valid hunting or fishing license; or  (b)   Directly to or from any target range, or other authorized place for the purpose of practice, match, target, trap or skeet shooting exhibitions, provided in all cases that during the course of the travel all firearms are carried in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section and the person has complied with all the provisions and requirements of Title 23 of the Revised Statutes and any amendments thereto and all rules and regulations promulgated thereunder; or    (c)   In the case of a firearm, directly to or from any exhibition or display of firearms which is sponsored by any law enforcement agency, any rifle or pistol club, or any firearms collectors club, for the purpose of displaying the firearms to the public or to the members of the organization or club, provided, however, that not less than 30 days prior to the exhibition or display, notice of the exhibition or display shall be given to the Superintendent of the State Police by the sponsoring organization or club, and the sponsor has complied with any reasonable safety regulations the superintendent may promulgate. Any firearms transported pursuant to this section shall be transported in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section;"

So... in the case of CCW, we aren't dealing with a licensed dealer going to/from place of business (that avoids the first one), we aren't dealing with exemptions to 2C:39-5 because we don't NEED an exemption - subsection b. of 2C:39-5 says "without first having obtained a permit to carry". You have that CCW, so you do not NEED 2C:39-6 (e). for an exemption - you are already in compliance with 2C:39-5(b). (that avoids the second one). We aren't talking about members of a club going to target practice or hunting or an exhibition but besides, we again do not need an exemption from 2C:39-5 so the last ones are moot.

Why are they saying you need to lock up the gun in the trunk while traveling. That is stupid.

I would like to know the rationale for that - based on how I read that statute, you don't need to.

---

* 2C:39-5 subsections b., c., and d. are:

 

This is also new grounds for the Judges. Every Concealed Permit issued before the Supreme Court ruling was issued based on a justifiable need. In most of those cases the paperwork issued stated the locking in the trunk while not carrying because there wasn't an unrestricted allowable carry. In most cases it was at a certain place or time.

I would not be surprised if some of the forms in use by the courts are an older template and may also change going forward.

All firearms when not in use and being transported need to be locked up in the trunk anyway. This is nothing new.

Also, the CCW permit that most on here are hoping to get, is not going to be all that is wished for.

Edited September 7, 2022 by Bucndoe

[vdep217]

3 minutes ago, Bucndoe said:

Also, the CCW permit that most on here are hoping to get, is not going to be all that is wished for.

Can you elaborate on this.  Most of us want to be able to carry in the event we have no other option.  I get no schools government buildings bars etc.

[Bucndoe]

11 minutes ago, vdep217 said:

Can you elaborate on this.  Most of us want to be able to carry in the event we have no other option.  I get no schools government buildings bars etc.

I have seen lots of restrictions placed on carry permits. From the order you posted, there is going to be many restrictions, and possibly more as laws change or more enacted from the Supreme Court ruling going forward.  There will also be legal challenges and denials. Denials have already occurred.

It's not an unlimited carry whenever or wherever you want. There is also NO OPEN carry allowed with it

Edited September 7, 2022 by Bucndoe

[vdep217]

As I said it was a win that we got it.  Now it is our chance to prove ccw holders aren't the problems.  The more that get one the better chance we have at winning legal challenges against us.  Like what ny passed.  Was Saud it's unconstitutional but tge judge let it go any way

[Bucndoe]

1 minute ago, vdep217 said:

As I said it was a win that we got it.  Now it is our chance to prove ccw holders aren't the problems.  The more that get one the better chance we have at winning legal challenges against us.  Like what ny passed.  Was Saud it's unconstitutional but tge judge let it go any way

If you are referring  to the NY ruling in the last 2 weeks, the judge told them to rework their arguments and refile the suit

[vdep217]

Just now, Bucndoe said:

If you are referring  to the NY ruling in the last 2 weeks, the judge told them to rework their arguments and refile the suit

Yes that one.  

[Kype]

thats why im not jumping the gun. im waiting until at least next year to start the process. let things settle down and see how everything plays out. 

im in no need to rush this. i havent needed a gun in my waistband yet and i own 2 carry permits. all they are is another form of ID. the dmv loves me with all my forms of ID. 

[GoldRushGang]

52 minutes ago, Bucndoe said:

There's your dinner. Glad someone remembered that dog chasing it's tail

Yea but the dog was right.

[vdep217]

Just now, GoldRushGang said:

Yea but the dog was right.

Not if it's listing what guns you mat carry..

[GoldRushGang]

30 minutes ago, Bucndoe said:

There is also NO OPEN carry allowed

Security guards and armored car employees are open carry.

There is also no statute against open carry.

[GoldRushGang]

1 minute ago, vdep217 said:

Not if it's listing what guns you mat carry..

If anyone disputes that in court it will be overturned.  The law states the judge can decide what "TYPES" of "HANDGUNS" (plural)

Type of gun not what specific gun.

[GoldRushGang]

48 minutes ago, Bucndoe said:

 

 

This is also new grounds for the Judges. Every Concealed Permit issued before the Supreme Court ruling was issued based on a justifiable need. In most of those cases the paperwork issued stated the locking in the trunk while not carrying because there wasn't an unrestricted allowable carry. In most cases it was at a certain place or time.

I would not be surprised if some of the forms in use by the courts are an older template and may also change going forward.

All firearms when not in use and being transported need to be locked up in the trunk anyway. This is nothing new.

Also, the CCW permit that most on here are hoping to get, is not going to be all that is wished for.

That's absurd.  Hold on ex husband who beat me while I open the trunk and get my gun.

[GoldRushGang]

54 minutes ago, Bucndoe said:

there wasn't an unrestricted allowable carry. In most cases it was at a certain place or time

 

[Kype]

12 minutes ago, GoldRushGang said:

Security guards and armored car employees are open carry.

There is also no statute against open carry.

they are on the job.