New jersey law on ammo - definitive!
- Thread starter njlawman
- Start date
- Status
NavyLCDR
member
tominct said:
Ummm... yeah. Tom, with his Connecticut license plates and Connecticut driver's license is going to tell a New Jersey cop that he is going to the range with a magazine full of hollow points, or maybe a loose round drops out his pocket or glovebox during a stop. tominct = Tom in Connecticut. Heck, I've had the "oh crap" experience of reaching into my pocket for something and finding a loose round in there while standing on the military base.
I, personally, do not get too much of a warm and fuzzy inside that will work.
njlawman said:
Respectfully, njlawman, New Jersey law enforcement and prosecutors just don't have the reputation for being as cooperative as you claim they will be. I am sure there are good guys who will look the other way, but I would not bet my freedom on it.
crossrhodes
Member
Best solution
Stay the hell away from NJ. It's not gun friendly to lawful citizens and from what I've seen on this forum and in news paper articles it won't take much to make a law abiding citizen a criminal. Sorry njlaw, but you really didn't answer anything. It's an unfriendly and un-natural fear of firearms state and will adjust (twist) the law accordingly to convict anyone. To many incidents to prove otherwise. Some what resembles TSA's line of thinking. Sorry for bitter words but it is what it is.
Stay the hell away from NJ. It's not gun friendly to lawful citizens and from what I've seen on this forum and in news paper articles it won't take much to make a law abiding citizen a criminal. Sorry njlaw, but you really didn't answer anything. It's an unfriendly and un-natural fear of firearms state and will adjust (twist) the law accordingly to convict anyone. To many incidents to prove otherwise. Some what resembles TSA's line of thinking. Sorry for bitter words but it is what it is.
Nicky Santoro
Member
NJlawman,
Thank you for the effort you put into this thread. That being said, I wish to point out a couple of facts. The average Jersey cop doesn't know poo from pastry about firearms laws and will proceed on the basis that whatever you are doing with firearms is most likely illegal. It will cost the gun owner a whole bunch of legal fees to sort that out. The second fact is that your typical grand juror is stupid and hoplophobic and will vote to indict in any case involving firearms, facts and reason not withstanding. Nine consecutive Wednesdays on a grand jury proved that to me.
Thank you for the effort you put into this thread. That being said, I wish to point out a couple of facts. The average Jersey cop doesn't know poo from pastry about firearms laws and will proceed on the basis that whatever you are doing with firearms is most likely illegal. It will cost the gun owner a whole bunch of legal fees to sort that out. The second fact is that your typical grand juror is stupid and hoplophobic and will vote to indict in any case involving firearms, facts and reason not withstanding. Nine consecutive Wednesdays on a grand jury proved that to me.
Thank you to njlawman for offering his professional viewpoint. We seldom get that.
"Just say going to the range..."
Or just say you're moving from Maine to Texas?
Here's this guy, who is dumb as a brick for sure, but got prison for passing through NJ while moving to Rockport TX. I know that's not 'going to the range' but it tells me that 'going to the range' is a risky defense, especially if it's a falsehood. http://www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-Democrat/index.ssf/2011/11/texan_passing_through_new_jers.html
Disclaimer: This guy is dumb and requires no pity from us. I'm not defending him. He's an idiot. But he was just passing through and got a prison term for it. That gives me very little confidence that lying about 'going to the range' will be the magic phrase to keep us out of trouble.
"Just say going to the range..."
Or just say you're moving from Maine to Texas?
Here's this guy, who is dumb as a brick for sure, but got prison for passing through NJ while moving to Rockport TX. I know that's not 'going to the range' but it tells me that 'going to the range' is a risky defense, especially if it's a falsehood. http://www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-Democrat/index.ssf/2011/11/texan_passing_through_new_jers.html
Disclaimer: This guy is dumb and requires no pity from us. I'm not defending him. He's an idiot. But he was just passing through and got a prison term for it. That gives me very little confidence that lying about 'going to the range' will be the magic phrase to keep us out of trouble.
A summary worth reading
The OP did not come right out and say he is with the NJSP Ballistics Unit (he may not be able to state the "official" position of the unit in a public forum) but he has provided a good overview of the issues surrounding NJ ammunition. I have had the opportunity to meet some of the guys from the Unit at a seminar and discuss some firearms-related issues with them. I was impressed by the fact that they seemed to strongly support citizens' ownership and use of firearms while at the same time being in the unenvialble position of having to interpret some of NJ's draconian laws for other agencies with the result being that such ownership or use was being impeded.
I appreciate the fact that someone with apparent knowledge tried to provide a guide to a subject that has seen a good deal of debate on this forum and elsewhere. While certain aspects of the law are clear, in that we in NJ may possess or use HP ammo under certain conditions, there are other conditions where we can't and still more where the interpretation of the law is grey. Since I have no risk tolerance when it comes to the criminal law, I stay inside the bright lines of what I can do, and don't push toward what I can't. Even if no jail time is meted out, illegal possession of HP ammo at $1,000 per round is a little steep. And yes, if the only concern in one's life were firearms, NJ is not the ideal location. However, many people call NJ home due to family, job, or just plain happenstance and for them the issue becomes how to maximize the enjoyment of what they can do rather than moaning about what they can't, all the while working toward getting better laws passed. Someday we may join the rest of the Union in that regard!
The OP did not come right out and say he is with the NJSP Ballistics Unit (he may not be able to state the "official" position of the unit in a public forum) but he has provided a good overview of the issues surrounding NJ ammunition. I have had the opportunity to meet some of the guys from the Unit at a seminar and discuss some firearms-related issues with them. I was impressed by the fact that they seemed to strongly support citizens' ownership and use of firearms while at the same time being in the unenvialble position of having to interpret some of NJ's draconian laws for other agencies with the result being that such ownership or use was being impeded.
I appreciate the fact that someone with apparent knowledge tried to provide a guide to a subject that has seen a good deal of debate on this forum and elsewhere. While certain aspects of the law are clear, in that we in NJ may possess or use HP ammo under certain conditions, there are other conditions where we can't and still more where the interpretation of the law is grey. Since I have no risk tolerance when it comes to the criminal law, I stay inside the bright lines of what I can do, and don't push toward what I can't. Even if no jail time is meted out, illegal possession of HP ammo at $1,000 per round is a little steep. And yes, if the only concern in one's life were firearms, NJ is not the ideal location. However, many people call NJ home due to family, job, or just plain happenstance and for them the issue becomes how to maximize the enjoyment of what they can do rather than moaning about what they can't, all the while working toward getting better laws passed. Someday we may join the rest of the Union in that regard!
know the entire case before assuming that nj just threw the book at the guy. further research demonstrates that he had a prior record for violence and evading law enforcement in his home state.
nobody is debating that nj gun laws are not strict, even unreasonable in cases. but if you are a law abiding citizen not engaged in criminial activity with the gun infractions, chances are you are going to come out fine. i encourage anyone on the forum to actually show cases where there was criminal prosecution that led to charges in a valid home defense situation. few and far between if you find any. heck, a many was shot OUTSIDE his home recently while fleeing from the home he had burglarized. nj home owner that shot the man = no charges. nj is a great state, the laws (not just gun laws) suck. this coming from someone real close to it. however, the state is not out to get law abiding citizens...it is a state with very high population, enormous wealth, but also areas of crime -- all real close together. state has determined that prevention of guns is more favorable than everyone having them. not going to open that debate, but if you live anywhere in the tri-state area i can assure its not hard to see why you would not want access and carry available to just about anyone.
and thank you gmark...that was my original intention with opening post. thanks all...
nobody is debating that nj gun laws are not strict, even unreasonable in cases. but if you are a law abiding citizen not engaged in criminial activity with the gun infractions, chances are you are going to come out fine. i encourage anyone on the forum to actually show cases where there was criminal prosecution that led to charges in a valid home defense situation. few and far between if you find any. heck, a many was shot OUTSIDE his home recently while fleeing from the home he had burglarized. nj home owner that shot the man = no charges. nj is a great state, the laws (not just gun laws) suck. this coming from someone real close to it. however, the state is not out to get law abiding citizens...it is a state with very high population, enormous wealth, but also areas of crime -- all real close together. state has determined that prevention of guns is more favorable than everyone having them. not going to open that debate, but if you live anywhere in the tri-state area i can assure its not hard to see why you would not want access and carry available to just about anyone.
and thank you gmark...that was my original intention with opening post. thanks all...
Thank you, njlawman. You are a valuable resource around here. I hope you stick around.
Where the State of New Jersey suggests:
The obvious rebuttal is:
In the last three years, the US Supreme Court issued two important decisions clarifying the 2nd Amendment. In District of Columbia v. Heller the court ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self defense within the home. It also recognized that firearms and other weapons commonly used for self defense are the kind of arms the 2nd Amendment intends to allow. It also enumerated several longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession that it found were consistent with the Second Amendment, we assume the State of New Jersey is standing on those exceptions to validate its laws. In McDonald v. Chicago they ruled that the 2nd Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government. So the State of New Jersey may (in the future) face an interesting dillema if its gun laws are challenged.
Where the State of New Jersey suggests:
The obvious rebuttal is:
In the last three years, the US Supreme Court issued two important decisions clarifying the 2nd Amendment. In District of Columbia v. Heller the court ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self defense within the home. It also recognized that firearms and other weapons commonly used for self defense are the kind of arms the 2nd Amendment intends to allow. It also enumerated several longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession that it found were consistent with the Second Amendment, we assume the State of New Jersey is standing on those exceptions to validate its laws. In McDonald v. Chicago they ruled that the 2nd Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government. So the State of New Jersey may (in the future) face an interesting dillema if its gun laws are challenged.
Quote:
"So the State of New Jersey may (in the future) face an interesting dillema if its gun laws are challenged. "
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A short intro, in 1966 the Sills Act was signed into law in NJ. Yes that is correct 1966, two years before the 1968 National Gun Control Act!
The Sills Act basically mandated a permit system that required a (firearms owner ID card) 'permit' be obtained from the police before one could purchase a firearm. The FID (Firearms ID) Card was needed to buy rifles, BB Guns, black powder rifles. But a separate purchase permit for each pistol including BB gun pistols and black powder pistols.
In 1968 New Jersey's gun control act was challenged in court in the case "Burton vs. Sills" and (the 1966 Sills Act) was allowed to stand ..in essence "for the public good" (the judges ruled) . Even though many here would argue that the 1966 law is a blatant violation of the second amendment, it was allowed to stand.
I think part of the reason why the law was allowed to stand might date back yet even further to 1947 when New Jersey had a Constitutional Convention and left out the second amendment.
I have been studying the NJ gun law for a awhile, trying to understand how it got passed in the first place... I have been looking for exact wording of the proposed law as it was written up in 1965, opposition to the law, who voted for the law ,the actual law in 1966 and the only thing I have found is the 1968 Burton vs. Sills challenging the act unsuccessfully. It seems like there is huge gap in information for such an important subject.
From the few sources from comments from some other gun forums ...people who remember how it was before the 1966 law. New Jersey was like any other state in the U.S. when it came to gun laws, with the exception of conceal carry law where a permit was needed for that which dated back to 1924.
From what I was able to gather, open carry in some areas was tolerated. There were no restrictions on buying rifles or pistols except maybe a age restriction. NJ was like other states at the time, until the 1966 law came into being.
I think it is important to study how and why this happened and to make sure that another 1966 Sills Act does not happen again in other states. At the time, as much as I can gather, the only real well publicized gun control act to date was the Sullivan Law in New York State which went into effect in 1911.
I believe the other States like Massachusetts, Illinois, Hawaii and their permit to purchase schemes came after New Jersey's in 1966. One source I looked at said Illinois based their FOID (Firearms Owners ID) system on New Jersey's FID (Firearms ID) scheme.
"So the State of New Jersey may (in the future) face an interesting dillema if its gun laws are challenged. "
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A short intro, in 1966 the Sills Act was signed into law in NJ. Yes that is correct 1966, two years before the 1968 National Gun Control Act!
The Sills Act basically mandated a permit system that required a (firearms owner ID card) 'permit' be obtained from the police before one could purchase a firearm. The FID (Firearms ID) Card was needed to buy rifles, BB Guns, black powder rifles. But a separate purchase permit for each pistol including BB gun pistols and black powder pistols.
In 1968 New Jersey's gun control act was challenged in court in the case "Burton vs. Sills" and (the 1966 Sills Act) was allowed to stand ..in essence "for the public good" (the judges ruled) . Even though many here would argue that the 1966 law is a blatant violation of the second amendment, it was allowed to stand.
I think part of the reason why the law was allowed to stand might date back yet even further to 1947 when New Jersey had a Constitutional Convention and left out the second amendment.
I have been studying the NJ gun law for a awhile, trying to understand how it got passed in the first place... I have been looking for exact wording of the proposed law as it was written up in 1965, opposition to the law, who voted for the law ,the actual law in 1966 and the only thing I have found is the 1968 Burton vs. Sills challenging the act unsuccessfully. It seems like there is huge gap in information for such an important subject.
From the few sources from comments from some other gun forums ...people who remember how it was before the 1966 law. New Jersey was like any other state in the U.S. when it came to gun laws, with the exception of conceal carry law where a permit was needed for that which dated back to 1924.
From what I was able to gather, open carry in some areas was tolerated. There were no restrictions on buying rifles or pistols except maybe a age restriction. NJ was like other states at the time, until the 1966 law came into being.
I think it is important to study how and why this happened and to make sure that another 1966 Sills Act does not happen again in other states. At the time, as much as I can gather, the only real well publicized gun control act to date was the Sullivan Law in New York State which went into effect in 1911.
I believe the other States like Massachusetts, Illinois, Hawaii and their permit to purchase schemes came after New Jersey's in 1966. One source I looked at said Illinois based their FOID (Firearms Owners ID) system on New Jersey's FID (Firearms ID) scheme.
And what is more ironic is that my state, Kentucky (a real gun friendly state) was the said to be the first state to have a gun law...in 1813!
"In 1813, Kentucky enacted the first carrying concealed weapon statute in the United States."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/516676/posts
The same goes for Arizona, Wyoming and Vermont. OMIGAWD!
Add together all the violent crimes in all four states in an average year, and it still wouldn't be as bloody as an average weekend in Newark or Camden ... lawrs and all.
If Jersey really wants "a good laugh," maybe Jersey should look in the mirror.
Last edited:
While you may think you were making a good point, if you look at the population relative to the areas you mention and the violent and aggrevated crime arrest reports, you will actually find yourself trying to delete your post. That said, I was trying to say that NJ vs. Alaska gun laws are a laugh...
- Status
