New Laws in New Jersey Today

[bushmaster1313]

Six new gun control measures were signed into law today, including a ban on many magazines greater than 10 rounds. New Jersey residents and those passing through need to take heed.

One of the new laws makes it even harder for ordinary folks to get an already impossible to get carry permit. One thing that people can do is to support and encourage the NRA -- who is backing a challenge to New Jersey's shall issue carry permit system.

[redlevel]

Many due process questions about the so-called “red flag” law.
Do I understand that a person’s gun rights may be denied on the
Word of ONE “Health Care Professional”?

Glad I am in Georgia, gnats and all.

[amazingflapjack]

Bring the Flag.

[Old cop]

While I have LEOSA certification when I go to NJ I switch out all my hollow points for FMJ in my J frame, plus reloads. A friend, and retired cop in NJ, says this is not necessary but I don’t want to take any chances. Anyone know the real deal?

[pharmer]

I moved out of NJ almost 40 years ago. If'n I'm lucky I'll never visit again. Joe

[paulh]

Will it make a difference? Not to me except I'm now an official but not registered felon

[LoboGunLeather]

I'm just sitting here thinking about why I would ever want to go to New Jersey anyway. I don't know anyone there very well, and their elected representatives seem to be opposed to me for some reason I can't imagine. Really, why would I ever go there?

[pharmer]

Originally Posted by LoboGunLeather

Really, why would I ever go there?

NJ is a lot like California. Problems come from north of the Raritan river and Trenton/Camden area. My family had a summer home 1960-'75 in Brick on the northern end of the "Pine Barrens." Spent endless days in the woods with my Red Ryder and after 1964 my Marlin B/A.22. The beach was 6 miles away and Seaside Heights 15. I did all my "growing up" there and it was literally a blast. It's so long ago and far away, seems like somebody else's life movie in my head. Truly sad what's happened to the "Garden State." (I can't hardly remember buying fruit or vegetables except in dead of winter). Joe

[bushmaster1313]

Originally Posted by redlevel

Many due process questions about the so-called “red flag” law.
Do I understand that a person’s gun rights may be denied on the
Word of ONE “Health Care Professional”?

Glad I am in Georgia, gnats and all.

I am not going to even try to make a legal interpretation of the new red flag law. A-1181

But it sort of says that
(a) if a health care professional has a duty to warn that a patient is going to hurt someone (the duty to warn is old law), the health care professional must under the new law report this to the police chief but not give over clinical information.
(b)The police chief may then use this information to determine if the person is not fit to own guns under New Jersey Law.
(c) If the police chief makes the determination, the matter then gets referred to a judge to make the same determination.
(d) If the judge makes the same determination, the judge "may order" that any guns owned by the person must be surrendered to law enforcement and may order that the surrendered guns are to be "disposed" under the law of seized goods.
(e) If there is probable cause to believe that the ordered surrender was not complied with, the judge may order the guns seized.

Read fairly, the law seems to say that if a health care professional gets wind of a threat by a patient, the health care professional must report it to the police, and if the patient is a gun owner, the police is then allowed to run the same kind of exhaustive background check that takes place the first time you try to buy any gun and each time you try to buy a pistol.

Thus, a health care professional by themselves cannot cause a person's guns to be seized, but in practice that is likely what will happen

An amended version of the bill is here, I am not sure what actually passed

*******************

Also new is A1217 a version here
And I am not rendering a legal opinion on this one either.

This very complicated law seems to allow a domestic partner, family member, etc., to petition a court for a protective order to force a person to surrender their guns and ammunition, first temporary and then permanent.

In other words, it sort of says that almost anyone in any present or former relationship can go to a judge and say:
So-and-so is really a danger,
They have guns, and
Their guns should be taken away -- Right Now!

[American1776]

I grew up in NJ, have close family there, and visit there every week. I do not live there, thank goodness.

I seem to recall that one of the earlier drafts of the new gun laws had a 5 round restriction. I guess that didn't fly, even in the PRNJ.

Even back in the 1970's when my dad had to go through the legal process in NJ of buying a .22 revolver and a shotgun, he had to be interviewed by the police, undergo fingerprinting, and wait several months.

Today, in some parts of NJ, it's worse. Police stations simply refuse to process permits to purchase handguns, and applicants need to hire lawyers in order to compel the police departments to process their applications.

[panther]

I grew up in NJ too. I was in the Asbury Park area from birth to the mid 70's. My family didn't have guns, but I remember being chased out of a sporting goods section of a store because i was looking at BB guns and I wasn't 18 yet.
It was a very nice, blue collar. family friendly area with decent schools and nice homes. Now the homes that working class people could afford, sell in the half million dollar range, and up. Taxes are high, crime is high, it's a whole different world. Most of my family, and people I grew up with, are scattered around the country. Just our memories of the old days remain.

[pharmer]

Originally Posted by American1776

Even back in the 1970's when my dad had to go through the legal process in NJ of buying a .22 revolver and a shotgun, he had to be interviewed by the police, undergo fingerprinting, and wait several months.

Just the thumbprint, it was on the upper right hand corner of the FOID. The purchase "permit" was only good for 90 days and I had to get my FOID card from the chief of police in my town signed by him. Joe

[TTSH]

Originally Posted by pharmer

I moved out of NJ almost 40 years ago. If'n I'm lucky I'll never visit again.

Likewise. I did a lot of work in NJ during my career and drove through a few times for other purposes... but now I'm old and retired and I have zero need or interest to visit or drive through NJ ever again... Thank God!

Originally Posted by paulh

Will it make a difference? Not to me except I'm now an official but not registered felon

Here in the People's Republic of MA, we gun owners are all considered unindicted felons-in-waiting... that the result of the 7/20/2016 decree from our anti-2A AG lady.

You get used to it after a while.

[ladder13]

I try not to pile on in situations such as this, I did live in NY, rated the worst state for gun owners by many pro gun organizations year after year. I certainly know the pain.
Having moved to a often called “free state”( I don’t like the term because no state is truly free), I find it a whole different mindset, at least for now.
Always be on your toes though, take nothing for granted, the anti’s take no breather.

[paulh]

I can remember back in the late 80's going to my Chief to get a pistol purchase permit on my way to work in Atlantic Highlands and bringing home my S&W 357 that same day. There was a sports shop there that sold used firearms. The guy was amazed I had the permit the same day

[steelslaver]

I fondly remember going to my gun dealer, filling out the form, checking the boxes, signing and dating it, handing him my money and walking out the door with a couple guns. It was Tuesday of this week.

[mick27]

Ar Jays !!

[touchoneoff]

Originally Posted by bushmaster1313

Six new gun control measures were signed into law today, including a ban on many magazines greater than 10 rounds. New Jersey residents and those passing through need to take heed.

One of the new laws makes it even harder for ordinary folks to get an already impossible to get carry permit. One thing that people can do is to support and encourage the NRA -- who is backing a challenge to New Jersey's shall issue carry permit system.

It will never stop. Glad I don't live there.

[lrrifleman]

I attended a US Law Shield seminar today that was aimed to cover the 6 new laws enacted by the State. I came away with three major takes.

First, under the 180 Grace period before enactment of the 10 round maximum magazine law, people with these magazines can only surrender them to a licensed FFL, the police, or permanently limit capacity of ten rounds, permanent methods of limiting are not identified. We are still subject to prosecution if we use, transport or destroy the magazines.

Second, law enforcement is not protected from the magazine capacity limits. Off duty LEO'S and retiree cops will be subjected to the 10 round limit.

Third, people that have had firearms seized but never picked up the seized property have had their second amendment rights legally denied for future purchases. This has been an unadvertised law for 10 years.

On the horizon is legislation aimed at reducing magazine capacity to 5 rounds and a push to ban semi-auto long arms that have a forward grip (read forearm).

The state is getting speaker with every breath!

[TexasArmed]

Originally Posted by TTSH

Likewise. I did a lot of work in NJ during my career and drove through a few times for other purposes... but now I'm old and retired and I have zero need or interest to visit or drive through NJ ever again... Thank God!


Here in the People's Republic of MA, we gun owners are all considered unindicted felons-in-waiting... that the result of the 7/20/2016 decree from our anti-2A AG lady.

You get used to it after a while.

By the way I shoot left handed and I really had a hard time
finding a holster similar to the Fobus. Finally found one custom
made by a company in Maine that makes them.
At least you have some companies there making holsters.

[CH4]

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

Your friend is correct. LEOSA removes those restrictions. Now, whether or not the local beat cop knows that is another question . . .

Yep, but unfortunately Congress didn’t contemplate magazine capacity.

[Muss Muggins]

Originally Posted by CH4

Yep, but unfortunately Congress didn’t contemplate magazine capacity.

There are two things a state may restrict a LEOSA carrier from. Magazine capacity ain’t one of them . . .

(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that—
(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or
(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.

18 U.S. Code S 926B - Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Edit: Although I will admit that other states have enacted restrictions, which have yet to be litigated to their conclusion . . .

[bushmaster1313]

Originally Posted by lrrifleman

I attended a US Law Shield seminar today that was aimed to cover the 6 new laws enacted by the State. I came away with three major takes.

First, under the 180 Grace period before enactment of the 10 round maximum magazine law, people with these magazines can only surrender them to a licensed FFL, the police, or permanently limit capacity of ten rounds, permanent methods of limiting are not identified. We are still subject to prosecution if we use, transport or destroy the magazines.

It is possible you are mistaken

NJ Statutes are notoriously difficult to search. The Bill in question, A2761, may have been signed into law, but as of June 12, 2018 I could not find the changes in the online statutes from the NJ State Legislature. Nevertheless, I think a very recent version of the magazine bill is Here: A2761 According to what I could find so far, the 180 grace period that was added to N.J.S. 2C:39-3 reads as follows:

5. (New section) Except as provided in section 7 of P.L. , c. (C. ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill), a person who legally owns a semi-automatic rifle with a fixed magazine capacity exceeding 10 rounds or a large capacity ammunition magazine as defined under subsection y. of N.J.S.2C:39-1 which is capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition on the effective date of P.L. , c. (C. ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill) may retain possession of that rifle or magazine for a period not to exceed 180 days after the effective date of this act. During this time period, the owner of the semi-automatic rifle or magazine shall:

a. Transfer the semi-automatic rifle or magazine to any person or firm lawfully entitled to own or possess that firearm or magazine;

b. Render the semi-automatic rifle or magazine inoperable or permanently modify a large capacity ammunition magazine to accept 10 rounds or less; or

c. Voluntarily surrender the semi-automatic rifle or magazine pursuant to the provisions of N.J.S.2C:39-12.

My personal take, AND THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE: Under "5.a" above, and assuming this is part of the final bill signed into law, it looks like there is a 180 day grace period to transfer a legally owned 11-15 round magazine to anyone who is legally allowed to possess it. A reasonable reading would be that this includes transferring it to a person in a state that allows that person to have 11-15 round magazines. But remember -- the official policy in NJ is that anyone who does anything related to firearms in NJ does so at their own risk of violating the law.

Be careful out there

[Warren Sear]

Originally Posted by LoboGunLeather

I'm just sitting here thinking about why I would ever want to go to New Jersey anyway. I don't know anyone there very well, and their elected representatives seem to be opposed to me for some reason I can't imagine. Really, why would I ever go there?

You wouldn't like Canada or Mexico then either!

[CH4]

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

There are two things a state may restrict a LEOSA carrier from. Magazine capacity ain’t one of them . . .



18 U.S. Code SS 926B - Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Magazine capacity has not been addressed by LEOSA. Therefore you have to abide by the laws of whatever state/locale you're in. There has been some talk of addressing the mag issue, but so far nothing has been done.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has ruled that State and local laws and regulations applying to magazines do apply and the exemption provided by LEOSA applies only to firearms and ammunition.

The original law did not mention ammunition, thus creating enough concern from the LE community due to officers being arrested in states with hollow point ammunition bans. This concern resulted in an amendment to LEOSA that Obama signed in 2010, which included, in part, re-classifying ammunition not forbidden under federal law. However, there still is no mention of hi-cap mags listed in LEOSA, therefore it’s been interpreted that LEOs are subject to prosecution if importing or possession of hi-cap mags into states that have those types of bans. If you have any info that clarifies this issue, I’d love to see it.

FWIW here's what I have from the Hon. Steve Manion, U.S. Magistrate Judge for the District of New Jersey, who still does the Sheepdog Academy on a part-time basis. This is from his '13 LEOSA seminar:

LEOSA does not expressly address magazine capacity for carry, however, state magazine bans that preclude range qualification are arguably preempted.
For e.g., State or agency X requires active LEOs to use a 15 rd mag to qualify. The same State bans mags above 7 rds. That ban unlawfully precludes RLEOs from qualifying under LEOSA.


“States” with 10 round magazine limits: D.C., California, Hawaii and Massachusetts. LEOSA does not preempt these magazine restrictions when carrying. See D.C. Official Code § 7- 2506.01; Cal. Penal Code § 12020(a)(2), (b); Haw. Rev. Stat. § 134-8(c); and Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 140, § 121). Note that various cities around the nation also ban magazines above ten rounds.

States with 15 round magazine limits: New Jersey. N.J.S.A. 2C:39-1y.

N.Y. Penal Law § 265.00(23) was amended in 2013. “Section 38 of the bill amends Penal Law 265.00(23) to ban all large capacity magazines that have the capacity to hold more than ten rounds of ammunition including those that were grandfathered in under the original assault weapons ban and creates a new ban on magazines that hold more than seven rounds of ammunition. Magazines that can hold more than seven rounds but not more than ten rounds and are currently possessed will be grandfathered in, but may only contain seven rounds of ammunition.
Exceptions are made for large capacity magazines that are curios or relics.”

So, if you have a pre-ban 10-round mag you can carry 7 rounds in it. The law does not prohibit topping off with one round in the chamber.

If carrying in CA, D.C., HI, or MA carry no more than 10 round magazine(s). If in NY, carry a 7 round mag or pre-ban 10 round mag with 7 rounds in the mag.

If carrying in New Jersey carry up to 15 round magazine(s).
Although dated, some of the LEOSA cases are discussed here:

hr218leosa.com

[Muss Muggins]

Originally Posted by CH4

If you have any info that clarifies this issue, I’d love to see it.

ispcapt is the forum member expert on this as far as I'm concerned, and I am paraphrasing/relying on memory regarding his previous comments. If I/you have time, a search on past LEOSA threads may prove fruitful . . .

Edit: I had a couple minutes, so I did a quick search. According to some comments ispcapt made on a thread about New York state a year or so ago, LEOSA does not exempt mag limits. I carry a revolver out of state, so I never stop to think about it. By way of history, ispcapt was apparently on the statewide LEO committee that drafted IL's LEOSA compliance laws . . .

[steelslaver]

You guys can argue about it all you want and even come to an conclusion that its ok to carry a high cap magazine under LEOSO. But, when you are in such a state if stopped and charged your arguments or decision doesn't mean squat. Bail, an attorney and some time hashing it out in a state court and then possibly a higher court will all be on you. Lots of people have been found to be with in the law for various actions after being charged, jailed sentenced. Still doesn't mean it was in anyway enjoyable, convenient or cheap.

Jf you insist your right and go to one of these states I wish you all the best.

[Muss Muggins]

Totally agree with this. As I've mentioned earlier either here or on another post, in some states, LEOSA is merely an affirmative defense, which means you get to raise it at trial. Also, you're only as far away from a night in jail as the arresting officer thinks you are . . .

Originally Posted by steelslaver

You guys can argue about it all you want and even come to an conclusion that its ok to carry a high cap magazine under LEOSO. But, when you are in such a state if stopped and charged your arguments or decision doesn't mean squat. Bail, an attorney and some time hashing it out in a state court and then possibly a higher court will all be on you. Lots of people have been found to be with in the law for various actions after being charged, jailed sentenced. Still doesn't mean it was in anyway enjoyable, convenient or cheap.

Jf you insist your right and go to one of these states I wish you all the best.

[badge]

Mr. Manion stated in his LEOSA class that retired LEO's must abide by the states Magazine capacity restrictions. I asked that question specifically. To do otherwise would mean any number of things including being a test case.

[Old cop]

Originally Posted by steelslaver

You guys can argue about it all you want and even come to an conclusion that its ok to carry a high cap magazine under LEOSO. But, when you are in such a state if stopped and charged your arguments or decision doesn't mean squat. Bail, an attorney and some time hashing it out in a state court and then possibly a higher court will all be on you. Lots of people have been found to be with in the law for various actions after being charged, jailed sentenced. Still doesn't mean it was in anyway enjoyable, convenient or cheap.

Jf you insist your right and go to one of these states I wish you all the best.

Totally agree and that’s why I switch out my carry ammo to FMJ or round nose lead. I don’t want an expensive and embarrassing hassle @ the hands of an uninformed cop.

[Arizona Ghost]

So...anyone in NJ want to sell some 16-round mags for an SW9VE?

[pharmer]

Originally Posted by Arizona Ghost

So...anyone in NJ want to sell some 16-round mags for an SW9VE?

I'm pretty sure they already had a 15 rd max limit already. Don't know if any of the makers have made those "special" though. Joe

[bushmaster1313]

Originally Posted by pharmer

I'm pretty sure they already had a 15 rd max limit already. Don't know if any of the makers have made those "special" though. Joe

Yes
There was a 15 round limit

[rwsmith]

All we can do is fight, fight, fight and then fight some more.

[rwsmith]

Originally Posted by steelslaver

You guys can argue about it all you want and even come to an conclusion that its ok to carry a high cap magazine under LEOSO. But, when you are in such a state if stopped and charged your arguments or decision doesn't mean squat. Bail, an attorney and some time hashing it out in a state court and then possibly a higher court will all be on you. Lots of people have been found to be with in the law for various actions after being charged, jailed sentenced. Still doesn't mean it was in anyway enjoyable, convenient or cheap.

Jf you insist your right and go to one of these states I wish you all the best.

That's why we need to fight from inside, now. If an individual is on the defensive in a war like this, there's nothing to be done and gun owners will be fined, jailed, considered to be felons, denied our rights for life.

[lrrifleman]

@ Bushmaster,

The seminar was conducted by Evan Nappen, the US Law Shield attorney for NJ. The comments on the magazine ban and what we can do were his words. He said we can retain these magazines at the moment and we can permanently restrict the capacity, but we can't use them or transport them.

He was asked specifically about the magazines and LEOs, he stated only on duty officers under orders could carry high capacity magazines. Off-duty officers were obligated under the new law to comply with the 10 round limit.

I respect the knowledge and wisdom within this forum, but when it comes to understanding and working within the screwy laws of NJ, I have to need the advice of the program attorney! The last thing I want is to be a test case!

[bushmaster1313]

Originally Posted by lrrifleman

@ Bushmaster,

The seminar was conducted by Evan Nappen, the US Law Shield attorney for NJ. The comments on the magazine ban and what we can do were his words. He said we can retain these magazines at the moment and we can permanently restrict the capacity, but we can't use them or transport them.

He was asked specifically about the magazines and LEOs, he stated only on duty officers under orders could carry high capacity magazines. Off-duty officers were obligated under the new law to comply with the 10 round limit.

I respect the knowledge and wisdom within this forum, but when it comes to understanding and working within the screwy laws of NJ, I have to need the advice of the program attorney! The last thing I want is to be a test case!

Nappen literally wrote the book on NJ gun law

But when you said he said you cannot "transport," was he referring to what off-duty or out of state officers were or were not allowed to do under the new law or was he referring to what regular people cannot do during the 180 day grace period.

I would agree to not transport while relying on LEOSA, or even on FOPA, but did Nappen really say that a citizen cannot sell and send a formerly legal 11-15 round magazine to an out of state purchaser during the 180 day grace period?

In any event, all persons living in or travelling through New Jersey need to be very careful to obey the New Jersey gun laws even if the laws are dumber than bricks. Violate the New Jersey gun laws and the violator is in for a world of hurt.

[adwjc]

Originally Posted by ladder13

I try not to pile on in situations such as this, I did live in NY, rated the worst state for gun owners by many pro gun organizations year after year. I certainly know the pain.
Having moved to a often called “free state”( I don’t like the term because no state is truly free), I find it a whole different mindset, at least for now.
Always be on your toes though, take nothing for granted, the anti’s take no breather.

You know what happens - word gets put, more refugees from your old state hear about the great new place you moved into, they come there and next thing you know, they are trying to make it just like the place they came from!

[adwjc]

Originally Posted by Old cop

While I have LEOSA certification when I go to NJ I switch out all my hollow points for FMJ in my J frame, plus reloads. A friend, and retired cop in NJ, says this is not necessary but I don’t want to take any chances. Anyone know the real deal?

According to my retired LEO buddies who choose to remain in NJ, they are allowed to use Expanding Full Metal Jacket or EFMJ rounds, such as Federal Guard Dog rounds.


Try google, they have a few videos of demos.


If in doubt, call the NJSP Firearms Section for a knowledgeable answer.

[Tom S.]

Hashed and rehashed.