Recipient of Christie pardon: N.J. gun laws 'need to change'

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
2,796
Maybe he'll still make it as a cop. Wouldn't want to see a mistake like that lead to not having a job he dreamed about. Yes, he broke the law, but the law is a bad one and needs to be changed.




http://www.nj.com/middlesex/index.s..._advocates_ecstatic_after_christie_pardo.html




Recipient of Christie pardon: N.J. gun laws 'need to change'

NORTH BRUNSWICK — Steffon Josey-Davis was in bed Monday morning when his lawyer called with the news he's long been hoping for: Governor Chris Christie had pardoned him on the gun charge that kept him from his dream of being a police officer.

"It saved my life," Josey-Davis said. "If it wasn't for Governor Christie, I wouldn't be where I am today." In September 2013, Josey-Davis' life was derailed when he was pulled over in Highland Park for an expired registration. He told officers that he had a firearm in the glove compartment. Josey-Davis later said he'd mistakenly left it there, but under New Jersey's law, it was a second-degree crime: unlawful possession of a weapon. He eventually pleaded guilty, avoiding jail time, but the conviction barred him from law enforcement work and he lost his job as an armored truck driver.

Just this month, another New Jersey case has gained the attention of gun rights advocates: A woman who was applying for a gun permit was brutally murdered by the ex she was seeking to protect herself from, according to police and friends. "This should serve as a wakeup call," Bach said.
 
As the article notes, there are a number of victims of NJ's ridiculous gun laws -- probably many more than are circulated.

I saw the young man in question in an interview -- came across as a totally fine and sincere person. If the state can turn people like him into criminals, the whole system is flocked.

.
 
NJ should give up its police state status and rejoin the USA.

The entire US is a police state, some states are just worse than others.

I'm glad, and honestly a little surprised Christie did this, as others have stated the laws need to be changed. But that's not very likely.
 
NJ should give up its police state status and rejoin the USA.
As a believer in states' rights, I think it's entirely the choice of NJ residents how they want to vote for their officials, and what laws are enforced. They really can't "rejoin the US" because they never left, nor does anything they do exclude them from being part of the US - all the other states have their own laws regarding firearms, as well.
 
I am happy the man got a pardon from the governor and got a second chance.
It is much easier to pardon a few people than to actually lead the effort on reforming the gun laws in that state.

Let me explain..

New Jersey's "justifiable need" (for a carry license) was up again for review, as it is periodically.

The governor could have at least made an attempt to change things in that state by making an executive order that said "self defense" is one of the valid reasons for "justifiable need" in an attempt to do an end run around New Jersey's out of step and draconian gun laws. But he didn't.... He could have at least tried.

.
 
As a believer in states' rights, I think it's entirely the choice of NJ residents how they want to vote for their officials, and what laws are enforced. They really can't "rejoin the US" because they never left, nor does anything they do exclude them from being part of the US - all the other states have their own laws regarding firearms, as well.

To be elected "minority party" governor in NJ, Chris Chistie must be on the “same wavelength” as a significant number of voters. In order to even start getting favorable gun-rights laws passed in a very anti-gun state: Legislation needs to be A) introduced, B) passed by their representatives and C) signed into law by the governor.

There are very few, if any, representatives in NJ that will have anything to do with steps A & B. Either the politicians fear not being re-elected if viewed as "pro-gun" OR are one of those politicians who are non-apologetically anti-gun regardless of their constituents views. If NJ politicians can get elected and be re-elected running on an anti-gun platform, they'll continue to do so.

chuck
 
Last edited:
^^ Living in Massachusetts, we have basically the same deal. The politicians are anti-gun and make no bones about it. Pretty much any awful gun bill that gets proposed in Congress will have the enthusiastic backing of whoever the Massachusetts reps. It's almost impossible to get any good gun legislation (or any good legislation at all, for that matter) passed here. The two parties here are Republican and Democrat and they're two sides of the same coin. A Massachusetts Republican is a very liberal Democrat anywhere else.

To bring this back on topic: What Josey-Davis did wasn't wise, but I am very glad he got pardoned so that his entire life didn't get destroyed over this.
 
Pretty much any awful gun bill that gets proposed in Congress will have the enthusiastic backing of whoever the Massachusetts reps.

That's true although, as in NJ, the federal level isn't our real problem. The real problem is the state legislature and the big city and suburban voters and politicians.

Welcome to the forums knfmn. Do you belong to Mass. GOAL? They're the only organization that's working at the legislative level to keep and regain our rights.

Tinpig
 
Hmm, lets see. Let his license plate registration lapsed because he didn't renew it in advance, and was driving in a state where he knew guns are highly restricted in possession.

It's nice Gov. Christie stepped in, but this was self inflicted career endangerment, same as an anti gun journalist having a gun in his luggage at check in. Actually, the anti gunners aren't prosecuted nearly as much.

I was reading a blog that suggested some of us may not be the best candidates to carry. Guns are serious business, being places with a gun when you aren't supposed to be has consequences, and lightly considering that as part of your responsibility has consequences.

Dropping your gun in the john, ND's reholstering, getting shot and killed when you oppose a shooter coming into a large public store. It's happening, and we need to discuss that some of us aren't really capable of carry.

Symptoms?

You get outed trying to conceal carry.
Your weapon has hit the ground more than once in five years.
You discover you're armed where you aren't supposed to be - like the Post Office.
You don't care to worry about any of the above.

Which results in

Getting tackled in a Walmart parking lot.
Having to leave the building to cover your poor gun retention.
Or, getting arrested with expired tags in a no possession state.

There is a less than lethal category of Darwin Awards we don't talk about, make excuses for, and then anoint when "some nice guy" gets caught - but the root cause is not taking it seriously enough.

None of this would happen if the gun owner would raise their standards of conduct to what is obviously the minimum - which they failed to accomplish.

The forums are full of it - incidents - and we need to quit making these guys saints when they were really just being too casual to do it right.
 
No matter what

has happened in the recent past, NEVER< EVER< NEVER< EVER< EVER trust a New England Republican politician around your gun rights.
 
Besides GOAL there is also an organization called Comm2A that is a civil rights organization that promotes the 2nd Amendment. So we have both GOAL that works with the legislators and Comm2A that works in the courts.
-mike
 
Hmm, lets see. Let his license plate registration lapsed because he didn't renew it in advance, and was driving in a state where he knew guns are highly restricted in possession.

It's nice Gov. Christie stepped in, but this was self inflicted career endangerment, same as an anti gun journalist having a gun in his luggage at check in. Actually, the anti gunners aren't prosecuted nearly as much.

I was reading a blog that suggested some of us may not be the best candidates to carry. Guns are serious business, being places with a gun when you aren't supposed to be has consequences, and lightly considering that as part of your responsibility has consequences.

Dropping your gun in the john, ND's reholstering, getting shot and killed when you oppose a shooter coming into a large public store. It's happening, and we need to discuss that some of us aren't really capable of carry.

Symptoms?

You get outed trying to conceal carry.
Your weapon has hit the ground more than once in five years.
You discover you're armed where you aren't supposed to be - like the Post Office.
You don't care to worry about any of the above.

Which results in

Getting tackled in a Walmart parking lot.
Having to leave the building to cover your poor gun retention.
Or, getting arrested with expired tags in a no possession state.

There is a less than lethal category of Darwin Awards we don't talk about, make excuses for, and then anoint when "some nice guy" gets caught - but the root cause is not taking it seriously enough.

None of this would happen if the gun owner would raise their standards of conduct to what is obviously the minimum - which they failed to accomplish.

The forums are full of it - incidents - and we need to quit making these guys saints when they were really just being too casual to do it right.
armed where you aren't supposed to be - like the Post Office.

It's illegal to be armed in a Post Office?! Is there a rationale for that?
 
armed where you aren't supposed to be - like the Post Office.

It's illegal to be armed in a Post Office?! Is there a rationale for that?

No idea on the rationale, but here's an article of interest on six places you can't carry according to federal law:

http://www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/no-guns-allowed/2014/11/16/id/607272/

It says "Federal post offices have been labeled by the U.S. government as "sensitive places" where guns can be legally banned."

According to another article, the ban has been in effect since 1972, so I assume that Post Offices are simply covered under the umbrella of federal buildings, the same way as assaulting a postal employee counts as assaulting a federal government employee . . . even though they aren't. Heck, they moved the main USPS domain from a .gov to a .com years ago. Anyway, I'm guessing it's just a spillover of the USPS's entanglement with the federal government.

The article does note that a federal judge ruled that carry into a post office parking lot is legal. So, leaving the gun in the car while conducting business is an option now for concealed carriers. (Though you may want to check all the facts on that one before doing so. IANAL, and the internet and news outlets aren't the most reliable sources of legal information.)

Here's a more detailed article on the ruling.

"The problem is the court issued a very limited ruling. So narrow in fact that the ruling apparently only applies to Mr. Bonidy and the parking lot of the Avon Post Office, under the specific circumstances set forth in the case. Unless your name is Tab Bonidy and you are looking to carry a gun in the parking lot of the Avon Post Office, this case doesn’t really help you."
 
Last edited:
Is it illegal to be armed in a Post Office? Sure. But some do it.

Is it illegal to fail to renew your plates? Sure, but some do it.

Is it against the law to be in possession of a handgun in NJ? Sure - but some still do it.

In the last two cases, tho, dedicated LEO's patrol and exercise discretion about whether it's illegal. In this specific case, the driver was not only obvious about not renewing his plates, he told the officer he had a gun illegally in his possession.

Attempting to anoint him with sainthood as the victim of an oppressive police states? He certainly gives creditable evidence he shouldn't handle firearms. Maybe not even drive for awhile. He doesn't take responsibility well and consider the consequences.

Not my hero.
 
How did the officer know the plates were expired before the stop?
Did he run the plates or use a scanner? Not totally familiar with this case
The sticker on the plate for registration was eliminated years ago as a cost saving measure by NJ
 
The same thing happened in Oregon this year. The vote went down according to party lines. Now everything has to go through a background check therefore negating my 03 C&R license. I wrote to the legislators expressing my sentiments on the bill but not one of those voting for it had the courtesy to reply. The Democrats will never get one of my votes ever again, I will take extreme pains to vote for their opposition the rest of my life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top