Does anybody know if there are any plans to challenge any of the gun laws in NJ?

In particular, I think that the "may issue" CCW statute ought to be challenged as I think leaving it up to some police chief or judge to decide your need to carry is arbitrary and capricious by definition...

Any news from the so-called "Garden State" on the Heller front?

Well, that is interesting....

But as far as NJ??? I DOUBT IT.

The Heller case addressed packing in the home mostly and even outlined places that are/should be off limits (gov't facilities etc.) To us it's common sense. But to alot of NJ, it reads, "Oh you may buy a FEW (non-prohibited) pistol(s) for your house, but carrying outside? DIE SUCKER!!!"

Sen. Lautenberg D-NJ has said publicly to this effect (re, Heller) that, 'all we need now is two more (liberal) judges (on the SCOTUS)...'

Shall Issue, May Issue, Kiss My Ass Issue....would probably remain the same nationwide as it is now, more or less and for now.

I'd still would like to see some sort of legal challenge in NJ and would try to support it as best I can, but it is easier to successfully reverse global warming, reduce gas prices to $0.25 / gallon of super and colonize & terraform the Martian surface for full human habitation first. I am NOT joking.

We will never get anywhere until gun owners march on Trenton and speak up.

I had this very conversation with a knowledgable guy at Rays a few weeks back when Heller was decided.

I said something about how I hope NRA gets CCW here and he said something to the effect of, "NJ will never have CCW, because not enough people in power or in this state's population give a rat's ass about guns, much less allowing people to carry them."

Unfortunately, I agree with him and Ogive. And, I just don't believe enough people in this state want it.

There was ONE distant shred of light. He seemed to think that Heller would be ultimately a good thing for ARs of all types. But, the way he explained it any benefits would be about 10 years away to clear out all of the litigation this will cause.

Face it all. NJ blows donkey donuts. We have to have our fun within our limited rights, which is why I'm building a dedicated 22lr AR15.

Heller says nothing about CCW other than states are free to ban it (while it says this in dicta, given that it's Scalia saying this, that tells you a lot). HOWEVER, Heller interestingly hints to there being a constitutionally protected right to carry open.

Regarding this whole CCW in NJ thing...

I hear rumors that the NRA is going to bat against NJ on their May-Issue policy. If this is true, I (& prolly many others), thank the NRA.

Two big problems in Jersey: First, the police are extremely well organized and virulently anti-gun (especially the state police, who have serious political clout).

Second, the pro-gun groups are weak and disorganized.

I remember when I lived there 20 years ago, the police chief of the town of Fanwood publicly stated that he wanted everyone in his town to own a gun because it would discourage violent crime. He was practically crucified.

tk

All it would take is one good court case. And being in Federal Court, state politics wouldn't matter too much.

quote:

Originally posted by unokubi:
Two big problems in Jersey: First, the police are extremely well organized and virulently anti-gun (especially the state police, who have serious political clout).

Second, the pro-gun groups are weak and disorganized.

I remember when I lived there 20 years ago, the police chief of the town of Fanwood publicly stated that he wanted everyone in his town to own a gun because it would discourage violent crime. He was practically crucified.

tk

Unfortunately, that's not true. In principal, you're correct; but the application is an entirely different matter. Let's say that a federal judge rules that Jersey's ccw law is unconstitutional (which is unlikely).

The NJ Legislature would still have to pass a law outlining new standards and procedures that are legal, which would undoubtedly stonewall the process from a different angle. Then you would have to go back to the court, which would issue an injunction, and the Legislature would go at it again...

Short of the court taking over the process, it's very difficult for a federal court to impose its will upon a state legislature. You really do need to win over the legislators themselves.

tk

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
All it would take is one good court case. And being in Federal Court, state politics wouldn't matter too much.

quote:

Originally posted by unokubi:
Two big problems in Jersey: First, the police are extremely well organized and virulently anti-gun (especially the state police, who have serious political clout).

Second, the pro-gun groups are weak and disorganized.

I remember when I lived there 20 years ago, the police chief of the town of Fanwood publicly stated that he wanted everyone in his town to own a gun because it would discourage violent crime. He was practically crucified.

tk

What may, and I'm hoping will, evolve, is a national standard. Basically a maximum allowable level of regulation of gun ownership/carry. This would spell out under what grounds ownership/ccw could be denied. It's going to take a number of cases, some going back to the supremes, to do this.

quote:

Originally posted by unokubi:
Unfortunately, that's not true. In principal, you're correct; but the application is an entirely different matter. Let's say that a federal judge rules that Jersey's ccw law is unconstitutional (which is unlikely).

The NJ Legislature would still have to pass a law outlining new standards and procedures that are legal, which would undoubtedly stonewall the process from a different angle. Then you would have to go back to the court, which would issue an injunction, and the Legislature would go at it again...

Short of the court taking over the process, it's very difficult for a federal court to impose its will upon a state legislature. You really do need to win over the legislators themselves.

tk

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
All it would take is one good court case. And being in Federal Court, state politics wouldn't matter too much.

quote:

Originally posted by unokubi:
Two big problems in Jersey: First, the police are extremely well organized and virulently anti-gun (especially the state police, who have serious political clout).

Second, the pro-gun groups are weak and disorganized.

I remember when I lived there 20 years ago, the police chief of the town of Fanwood publicly stated that he wanted everyone in his town to own a gun because it would discourage violent crime. He was practically crucified.

tk

I agree: That's clearly the only sensible approach. It would be a tough one to get through Congress, though.

tk



[QUOTE]Originally posted by BBMW:
What may, and I'm hoping will, evolve, is a national standard. Basically a maximum allowable level of regulation of gun ownership/carry. This would spell out under what grounds ownership/ccw could be denied. It's going to take a number of cases, some going back to the supremes, to do this.

^
Congress doesn't need to be involved. Just the courts.

I see New Jersey getting worse for gun owners. I recently tried to order some handgun ammunition from a popular supplier online and was blocked by this message:

“Federal, state, or local law prohibits us from sending the following item(s) to the shipping address you entered: As of April 1, 2008, New Jersey statutes will not allow sales of handgun ammunition to New Jersey.”

Why don't you?

BBMW, not to be flippant,but the national carry is called the 2nd Amendment!
We as gun owners need to remind ourselves of this.
Otherwise "they" win.
They twist things around with legal-speak until we agree with their point of view which is exactly what they want.

Actually, under the Heller decision, I would think that open carry would be protected. Unless Scalia's doctrine of self-defense is ultimately embraced by the lower courts.

tk

deepocean,

I lived there for 28 years, believe me, I get it. I was only talking about what I think the Heller decision applies to.

I grew up in what was then a rural part of NJ. It was common to see men walking around with rifles. I shot competitive .22, and it was common for local farmers to call me and my cohorts to clear their fields of gophers.

By the time I was an adult, you would have taken your life in your hands to walk up the street with a rifle over your shoulder.

tk

Having the constitution say it is not enough when you get hauled into court (likely in cuffs and an orange jump suit). Either there has to be court precedent based on the what is said in the constitution, or you have to try to set the precedent yourself (an uncomfortable proposition if you wearing an orange jump suit and cuffs). You may not like it, but that's the way it is

Fortunately, after 218 years, the first domino has falled (Heller). It'll take a few more before we get what we want (a pratical application of the Second Amendment that gets directly applied to individuals who desire to own and carry the firearms of their choice in areas where doing so is not politically popular.)

quote:

Originally posted by tedbo:
BBMW, not to be flippant,but the national carry is called the 2nd Amendment!
We as gun owners need to remind ourselves of this.
Otherwise "they" win.
They twist things around with legal-speak until we agree with their point of view which is exactly what they want.

Well the NJ assembly I think is in session already(?)

So any news about the NRA challenge to NJ?

Lord knows, NJ needs a Texas sized ASSWHOPPING regarding this subject.