Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
Posted: 4/26/2001 12:04:14 PM EDT
The line has been crossed. I do not see how anyone can agree with this, unless you are a "hobbyist". ---- Gormley's Revenge -- Banned from your own home for gun possession Date: 4/25/2001 10:02:00 PM Written By: Evan Nappen April 25, 2001 Gun owners who suffer under the Florio/Gormley supported “Assault Firearm” ban are now being kicked out of their homes and businesses under the newest Gormley sponsored law. This law is entitled the “Drug Offender Restraining Order Act of 1999,” (DOROA) and can be found at N.J.S. 2C:35-5.7. Aggressive implementation of this law has now begun. [B]All a law abiding gun owner needs to do is be charged with possession of a so-called “Assault Firearm” and the gun law victim is automatically kicked out of his/her residence and/or business by way of a restraining order which lasts for a minimum of 2 years. It does not matter one bit that drugs were not involved. The municipal court judges have been instructed to routinely issue these DOROAS. These restraining orders are issued ex parte (without any input by the defendant or his attorney).[/B] After the issuance of a DOROA which normally accompanies the criminal complaint, there is no hearing scheduled on the DOROA. As passed, the law is void of any due process for the defendant. Just last week, I had one of these DOROAS come up in Monmouth County. My client was charged with possession of “Assault Firearm’s” which are not “Assault Firearms” (Mini-14 and Ruger 10/22). I immediately went back to the municipal court judge who issued the DOROA to try to persuade the judge to vacate the order. There is a section in the law that claims that the DOROA should not be issued to remove a person from their residence unless the judge is clearly convinced that there is a need to bar the defendant in order to protect the public safety. The municipal court judge informed me that although he issued the DOROA and was sympathetic to my clients predicament, he no longer retained the jurisdiction to make any modifications to it. This is in spite of the fact that he was the court of origin for the DOROA. The judge of the municipal court claimed that as soon as he signed the DOROA kicking the defendant out of his home, he no longer retains jurisdiction and that the Superior Court now has jurisdiction. "By the time this had been accomplished, the law-abiding gun owner had been barred from his home for one week under the threat of jail." Since there is no procedure in the DOROA law for challenging this restraining order or even affording the victim of the DOROA a hearing, my client was presented with a situation in which he had no opportunity to be heard on challenging the restraining order’s issuance. I therefore created and filed emergency papers with the Superior Court to try to get my client back in his home. Fortunately, the Monmouth County Superior Court and the Monmouth County Prosecutor’s Office took the appropriate action, which was initiated by my creative filings. The Monmouth County Superior Court vacated and dissolved the restraining order. By the time this had been accomplished, the law-abiding gun owner had been barred from his home for one week under the threat of jail.
Link Posted: 4/26/2001 12:04:48 PM EDT
(continued) My client resided with his wife in a home on 20 acres of property. On a simple charge of possession of a so-called ““Assault Firearm”” in which the defendant holds a valid New Jersey Firearms Identification Card and poses a threat to no one, my client suffered this injustice which could have lasted for years. None of these facts were presented to nor considered by the judge of the municipal court who issued the initial DOROA. This is a serious situation for law-abiding New Jersey gun owners. False charges for possession of an “Assault Firearm” frequently occur in New Jersey. I have personally handled many cases falsely charging “Assault Firearm” violations. These cases include the new Marlin Model 60’s (which hold less than 15 rounds), Colt Match Target rifles and their clones, SKS’s with a fixed magazines, 1927 Thompson/Auto Ordinance .45’s, M1 Garand Rifles, MAK-90’s, Marlin Camp Carbine’s, Remington 7600’s, Russian Dragunov’s, and Springfield M1A’s without a bayonet lug, just to name some of the common false charges made against law-abiding New Jersey gun owners. In the name of “the war on drugs,” be prepared to be kicked out of your home with no due process thanks to Florio, Gormley, and Whitman. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This article may be freely reproduced with credit given to the author, Evan F. Nappen, Esq., (732-389-8888). For more information about New Jersey Gun Law, see http://www.evannappen.com and purchase and read Nappen II: New Jersey Gun, Knife & Weapon Law.
Link Posted: 4/26/2001 2:59:26 PM EDT
Yup, that pretty much crosses the line. I thought CA was bad. I hope they have better luck voting those scumbags out of office than we have.
Link Posted: 4/26/2001 3:11:47 PM EDT
I'm not buying it. There is an error in there somewhere, and I don't mean the gun control law.
Link Posted: 4/26/2001 3:22:26 PM EDT
1)What is this supposed to accomplish??? 2)If you are single and are now kicked from your home where do you supposed to go? 3)What are you being kept from doing exactly? 4)Is this supposed to keep you from your family? 5)Who came up with this STUPID law, and how is it even remotly connected with a home restraining order? Gun owners are the "Jews" of this century... BISHOP
Link Posted: 4/26/2001 3:22:45 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mattja: Yup, that pretty much crosses the line. I thought CA was bad. I hope they have better luck voting those scumbags out of office than we have.
View Quote
I don't think that is going to happen.The state of NJ is over-run with liberal scum.VERY few pro gun politicians.Your talking about a state that requires a Firearms ID card (a two+ month process that requires fed.,state,and local fingerprinting and backround checks)to buy a Red Ryder BB gun.
Link Posted: 4/26/2001 4:07:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/26/2001 5:37:55 PM EDT
"Yup, that pretty much crosses the line." Goddamn right it does. If that were me I'd come out throwing lead. I don't care who hears me say it.
Link Posted: 4/26/2001 5:53:28 PM EDT
This is the scariest thing I've read in a very long time. -LevelHead-
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 1:53:49 AM EDT
It would be interesting to hear how they plan to enforce such a law. A man's home is his castle. If there was ever something in your life to go postal over, that would be the one. Sounds like a dangerous game to me.
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 2:10:42 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbrog|io: The line has been crossed. I do not see how anyone can agree with this, [u]unless you are a "hobbyist".[/u]
View Quote
Not sure what you mean by "unless you are a hobbyist" [red][size=4] P.R.K.
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 3:00:16 AM EDT
Imbrog|io, So much for feeling safe because all you have is a .38 and a [b]10/22[/b]![:)]
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 3:02:23 AM EDT
My god, that is just totally insane. Is it something in the air or water up there that makes those bastards crazy?
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 3:30:58 AM EDT
We're talking New Jersey, right? With all these strict gun laws, no doubt the Mafia has stopped using guns to cap 'n whack. [red][size=4] P.R.K.
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 5:28:43 AM EDT
What's really scary is now they have made ownership of a black rifle prima facie evidence of drug involvement.
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 9:19:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2001 9:20:08 AM EDT by Imbroglio]
Originally Posted By prk: Not sure what you mean by "unless you are a hobbyist" [red][size=4] P.R.K.
View Quote
People who buy guns just to target shoot and/or shoot in competitions. Always the first ones to run out to register and hand their guns in. Major rationalizers of gun control just as long as they get to keep punching paper. 2nd Amendment is a mere formality.
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 9:47:31 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 9:51:40 AM EDT
It only is nonsense if you think the 2nd Amendment was written to protect duck hunting, skeet shooting, and benchrest shooting.
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 10:04:38 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 10:41:54 AM EDT
God bless Texas!
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 10:53:04 AM EDT
Yes, that crosses the line. If this was a federal thing, I would pack all my stuff into my boat and sail the hell out of this f*cking country. The republic is lost. There will be no revolution, no glorious uprising. It's time to make a new republic somewhere else. This time, we won't include any stupid ambiguities in the second amendment. They meant well, but oh how they f*cked that one up. I'm sorry, I'm ranting, but if this is true, I'm taking down my flag. This can't be true, can it? Wouldn't the NRA have sent out something about this? Bill Wallace
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 11:19:20 AM EDT
Makes me glad I live in Washington. Kyle
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 11:22:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2001 11:22:00 AM EDT by Cible]
There is some detail missing, obviously. P.S.: And don't say "broad" in the same message as "Imbrog|io"; it's just cruel to tease him.
Link Posted: 4/27/2001 11:44:21 AM EDT
Its in NJ, so I don't care. Just like I don't care about California or NY. As long as it isn't here, then I don't care. Oh, wait...it is here. damn.
Top Top