Originally Posted By TheTallest:


Word salad.

Senator Edward Durr

Officially a concealed carry permit holder! One of the many reasons Senator Durr ran for office was to have the constitutional right to bear arms, specifically #CCW. No doubt we have more work ahead to fix #NJ #2A laws. As for today, it is definitely monumental.

Jan 20, 2023

TEXT ORDER Due to a change in the Court's calendar, oral argument scheduled for Thursday, January 26, 2023, shall be held at 9:30AM instead of 12:30PM. Kindly mark your calendars. So Ordered by Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 01/20/2023. (Costigan, Roberta) (Entered: 01/20/2023)

Originally Posted By Tom488:
The NJSP can't afford a proofreader?  On the back of the application:

"I have reviewed this application and I believe that the answers given by the applicant to the questions set fourth in this application are complete, true and correct in every particular"

Fourth?  Really?  Not third, or fifth?

Originally Posted By Tom488:
The NJSP can't afford a proofreader?  On the back of the application:

"I have reviewed this application and I believe that the answers given by the applicant to the questions set fourth in this application are complete, true and correct in every particular"

Fourth?  Really?  Not third, or fifth?

Originally Posted By Demeroma:
The NJSP has finally updated the instructions and application form for the permit to carry.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/93999/Opera_Snapshot_2023-01-20_131321_NJSP_WE-2679089.png

NJSP Forms

Originally Posted By grady:


I still haven't been able to get a straight answer as to whether instructors need to go through the qualification.

MD lets you waive the course/qual requirement if you show instructor credentials and get certified as an MD instructor.

NJ has given me no answers.

 February 6, 2023: Defendants submit consolidated PI opposition on bothKoons and Siegel challenges to P.L. 2022 Chapter 131, Section 7.1


 February 13, 2023: Koons and Siegel Plaintiffs submit replies in support
of their respective PI motions.


 Week of February 13, 2023: PI Hearing on consolidated challenges to
P.L. 2022 Chapter 131, Section 7.


 February 27, 2023: Defendants submit PI opposition to Siegel challenges
to other portions of Chapter 131.


 March 8, 2023: Siegel Plaintiffs submit PI reply on challenges to other
portions of Chapter 131.


 Week of March 13 or March 20, 2023: PI hearing on Siegel challenges
to other portions of Chapter 131.

For us in NJ the Heller Test is critical for Carry Permit Issuance Delays. Start using the term. Part 1.

Originally Posted By Demeroma:
The Heller Test - You're either qualified or disqualified for your 2A rights.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-etzgo6VYE

Originally Posted By johnQpublik:



I don't remember seeing qualifiers in the bill of rights.....

Restricted from carrying in any place prohibited by federal, state or local law and shall
comply with the provisions of N.J.S.A. 2C:39-6(g).

Originally Posted By Demeroma:
Woohoo!  

Finally got my permit.

Only took 131 days

eta:  No court order or guns listed but the "See below" box is checked with the stupid Monmouth county court restriction:

Old Bridge Township Police Department

Good afternoon Old Bridge 2A residents

January 25, 2023

We just wanted to once again update our residents on our progress in the processing of a permit to purchase, a Firearms Purchaser Identification Card (FID) or a permit to carry.

As a lot of you know, we have been and will continue to be out in front of the pack in processing times in comparison to other municipalities or agencies. There are however some pieces of the investigative puzzle that still slow things down such as out-of-state mental health checks or clarification/disposition of a criminal record. We are often waiting on a court to provide us with an official disposition of an applicant's prior criminal arrest charge(s). This takes time. Some states are slow in response to a mental health record check which is also conducted via U.S. Mail.

We will not take any shortcuts in our background investigations. If there's a question, we will find the answer or wait on an applicant to provide needed documentation so we are confident in approving, or if need be, denying an application.

Now, with that said, we want our residents to know what our average turn around times are as of January 2023. Again, these are averages and cannot obviously be applied to each and every applicant's unique background check. When we are suddenly inundated with applications, things slow down a bit but they do not stop! We remain diligent in our processing of your applications.

We maintained an average of 12-14 days for permit to carry applications that do not involve out-of-state checks. This means that from the time we receive your complete application till the time we approve or deny is just under 2 weeks. Those applications that do involve out-of-state checks take between 30 to 45 days.
Carry permits are entirely done on paper and utilize the postal system for documents. They are reviewed and approved on business days. We email and/or call the applicant when their permit has been approved or denied. Permits to carry are now processed locally by the Police Department and approved by the Chief's office. Our current turnaround time is approximately 2 weeks. If approved, we will create a wallet-sized ID card and laminate it once all applicable signatures are captured.

For permits to purchase and FID cards, we are averaging about 8 to 10 days depending on the individual applicant's unique circumstances. These types of applications are submitted electronically and naturally process quicker.
We are constantly reevaluating how we process both the electronic and paper applications in an effort to become even more efficient. This, we feel, better serves our residents.

Please remember that you can either email, call or stop in should you have any questions concerning your application or any questions on how to obtain any of these permits. Our dedicated staff is well versed and eager to assist you.

Thank you all for your continuing support.

Acting Chief Donald Fritz, Jr.

Originally Posted By Tom488:

So what the heck does that mean?  2C:39-6g is the transportation guidelines, that says unloaded, secured in a case, and no deviations during transport.  It's the requirements for transporting WITHOUT an FID or PTC.  2C:39-6g only applies if you're relying on the 2C:39-6e and -6f exemptions to exempt you from the prohibitions of 2C:39-5b and 2C:39-5c.  The fact that you have a PTC satisfies the requirements of 2C:39-5b, which means the 2C:39-6 exemptions aren't even in play, so therefore neither is 2C:39-6g.

WTF?

Originally Posted By Demeroma:
Thanks.

Now I have to decide whether to apply to Delaware county or Pike county for a PA permit.

Originally Posted By Demeroma:
eta: the court hasn't explained why the 2C:39-6(g) is on the back of the permit but some think it's there so those with the permit don't have loaded handguns, long guns or shotguns in the trunk of their cars.

Originally Posted By KnuckleSandwich:


I'm headed out tomorrow morning to Pike. Honestly by the experience I have had, so far, alone I would recommend to go there, depending on drive time.

Originally Posted By Tom488:

Right - it's meaningless.  2C:39-6g starts off, "All weapons being transported under paragraph (2) of subsection b., subsection e., or paragraph (1) or (3) of subsection f. of this section shall be carried unloaded"
But you're not transporting under subsections b, e or f (the exemptions) - you're transporting under subsection b of section 5 of chapter 39 - BECAUSE YOU HAVE OBTAINED A PERMIT TO CARRY.

Retarded...

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Renee Marie Bumb: Motion Hearing held on 1/26/2023. Continued Hearing on 8 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order by consolidated `plaintiffs. Decision Reserved. Ordered the parties to confer and send the Court a proposed schedule to resolve the litigation all together. (Court Reporter, John Kurz (856-576-7094)) (ar1, ) (Entered: 01/26/2023)

ANJRPC ARGUES FOR RESTRAINING ORDER HALTING CARRY-KILLER LAW
WHILE LEGAL CHALLENGE PROCEEDS

January 26, 2023. This morning, the judge in the consolidated carry-killer case heard oral argument on ANJRPC's motion for a temporary restraining order halting giant swaths of the new law while the case proceeds. If granted, the motion would block the new law more broadly than previously.

ANJRPC attorney Dan Schmutter argued that the carry-killer law blatantly violates the Supreme Court's ruling in the Bruen case, and that accordingly much of the law should be suspended while the case proceeds. The NJ Attorney General argued against suspension of the law. Attorneys for the legislature, which oddly sought to intervene in the case earlier this week, did not argue, as their intervention motion has not yet been acted on by the court.

A decision on ANJRPC's restraining order request is expected in the coming days. Please watch for upcoming alerts as news breaks.

TRO Hearing Notes | 1.26.23 | Koons/Siegel Carry Lawsuit vs State of NJ

Working on this now - will be 100% done by 5pm, so check back

0945 Start of Hearing

About 25 2A Supporters in Attendance

Overall was another solid day in court for gun owners

Both Dan and the State had to pivot on several occasions due to extensive questioning by the Judge, Dan was very quick on his feet, while Angela Cai (AC), was talking herself in circles.

Hearing Started on the "Multi Use" provision of the law, where the state has creatively, tried to us something like a school to ban carry on the entire property i.e. Karate Academy in a strip mall.

Judge Bumb (JB) was frustrated at how poorly the law was drafted and how legislators failed to define key terms. She said "It should not up to the courts to clarify what the legislators said"

However, given how poorly the law was drafted, the court will have to clarify provisions, all of which JB and Dan Schmutter (DS), discussed at length and JB seemed to agree with how he, DS would refine and clarify the current Sensitive Places, all good for us, as when this case is over we will have a binding ruling to clarify the intent of the law. JB kept saying she was frustrated at how poor of job legislators did, DS said "It was in a fit of rage your honor"

The AG kept trying to play down DS, interpretation of the law as it relates to sensitive places and the plaintiffs [gun owners] should worry as much as they are. JB said " Well they are facing criminal charges"

DS did a great job walking the court through all of the plaintiffs days and standing, he really was on top of which plaintiff does what.

The overall transcripts of this hearing really could benefit gun owners should we run afoul.

JB reminded the state that "Per Bruen, the sensitive locations need to be narrow and specific.

AC said that where in the Sensitive Places law is talks about "Public Right of Way" that means stair cases and hallways, so if we went to a location with a doctors office and some other business, as long as we didnt go into that sensitive location we are fine, any hallways or staircases, etc are "public right of way" - DS refuted that was the intent of the legislators.

It was very apparent to me, that unless one of us gun owners is in like a School with a firearms, the state will never prosecute such a case until this litigation is over, as DS kept walking the court through how 2A attorney's understand the law, and AC kept saying that isn't the intent, played down prosecution, the do not want to arrest someone now as will be very bad for state unless the violation is BLACK AND WHITE.

DS did say he would be ok with the court to clarify / redefine the Sensitive Locations.

When the state says School, we should take it to be " K-12, College University", a karate Academy, or Music Lessons or Bible Study is not a School, the TRO should clarify this.

NOTE: I didn't take as many notes as when AC was talking unless it helped us further understand NJ intent, as most of the stuff she said was non sense and the just kept saying "I don't see it that way", or "that doesn't make sense", was not a good day for the state as JB sees right through what they did, so while AC would try to say well this means that, JB said "no it doesn't or that is not really what you say it is". I swear the state wants this shitty confusing law to stand, just as a deterrent to scare people from carrying, as when you peel it back the state cannot justify most of it.

AC kept saying iro Standing "The Plaintiffs have no / cannot show public threat of enforcement"

JB kept saying the Sensitive places need to be well defined and clear.

ISSUE OF STANDING

DS said he would drop some of the TRO items, if they state would concede here that they have Standing for the Preliminary Injunction Phase, the state was reluctant, JB said "the state should take this offering", basically " are you and idiot take this offer"

JB said "what does the state want 50-100 plaintiffs suing the state on standing on every aspect? JB said the state should agree standing, SO THAT THE STATE OF NJ CAN RESOLVE ALL CONSTUTIONAL ISSUES ONCE AND FOR ALL WITH THIS CASE vs a revolving door of litigation. We know this is what the state wants, JB said it's wasteful and seems she is going to force the state to go this way and rule they all have standing.

Historical Analogs

DS made it clear the state cannot find historical analogs, needs to be wide spread.

AC kept saying "WE HAVE MORE BUT NOT TODAY", JB Said like 2-3x "WHAT IS THE STATE HIDING?"

DS went into detail how the state is trying to lump sensitive places together as to pad the few historical analogs they find for each, which is not allowed under Bruen.

JB kept asking the state "Why dont you want to resolve this once and for all"

JB said "Bruen was clear" - AC kept rambling on and every time JB replied "How does that Square up with Bruen?, I dont think it does" She saw right through BS arguments.

The PI Hearing Schedule

JB is rejucting the bifurcation schedule proposed by the state, she wants all the constitutional issues resolved in one clean trial process as she knows this will get appealed to 3rd circuit. Win for us as the state wanted to break down the PI phase and get multiple bits of the apple.

AC, DS and Jensen will agree on a PI schedule.

We should expect her additional TRO either tomorrow or Monday.

**Be back shortly have a work conference call

How the Conjuctive Test set by Alito crushes the Statute of Northampton. How NJ's continued reliance on danger and dangerousness proves legal carry in public. All public. And proves there are no sensitive places if the carry is for "the core lawful purpose of self-defense."

Here is the quick summary in case you don't want to read this whole post:

the Seigel/ANJRPC TRO hearing this week is only covering other "sensitive place" restrictions not already enjoined and NOTHING ELSE AT THIS STAGE.

After Judge Bumb rules on the TRO, we'll get dates for briefs and hearings on the preliminary injunction stage of things and the list of what is being challenged in these lawsuits will grow (fees, insurance, added references, etc.). Be patient, more on that is forth coming in about 2 weeks.

After the Preliminary Injunction phase is over, we are likely to see the first attempt at an appeal to the 3rd Circuit by the State but based on the current posture of things, its not likely that we'll get any stays on these lower court decisions while this is on appeal.

FID cards and P2P's are being challenged in their entirety but it will likely take the full trial to accomplish that. Be patient, more on that in the coming months.
Some less than great updates on other cases we are monitoring. More on that at the bottom along with some other housekeeping.

Sue everybody! ATF lawsuit tracking is coming