Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/28/2006 7:01:54 AM EDT
ANJRPC SUES NY/NJ PORT AUTHORITY FOR JAILING HONEST GUN OWNER

February 27, 2006 - The Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc. (ANJRPC) announced that it has commenced a lawsuit against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and one of its police officers for wrongfully arresting and imprisoning for nearly five days a 57-year old Utah man delayed at Newark Airport by a baggage error while traveling from Utah to Pennsylvania.

The lawsuit seeks more than $3 million in damages for civil rights violations and a permanent injunction forcing the Port Authority to follow Federal law on interstate transport of locked, unloaded firearms that have been secured in luggage and declared by law-abiding citizens.

The Utah man, Gregg Revell, a real estate broker and family man with no criminal record and a Utah firearms permit, was flying alone from Salt Lake City, UT to Allentown, PA to retrieve a car he bought and drive it home. He was travelling with a firearm for personal protection. As required by Federal law, the firearm was unloaded, cased, locked and inside his luggage when he declared it at check-in in Salt Lake City on March 31, 2005.

Due to an airline-caused baggage error, Mr. Revell missed his connection from Newark to Allentown and had to stay overnight in New Jersey. When he checked in at Newark Airport the next morning to complete his travels, he again declared his firearm, as required by FAA regulations. He was then arrested for possession of a firearm without a New Jersey state license, and imprisoned in Essex County jail for five days until his family arranged bail, which had been initially set unusually high at $15,000 cash (no bond).

But Mr. Revell’s travels were protected by the Firearms Owner Protection Act, a Federal law passed in 1986 to protect law-abiding citizens who travel with firearms. (See 18 U.S.C. § 926A.) That law trumps state and local gun laws and protects interstate travel with firearms under certain circumstances, all of which were present in Mr. Revell’s case. Several months after the arrest, all charges were withdrawn and the prosecutor’s case administratively dismissed.

"The Port Authority blatantly violated Federal law when it arrested Gregg Revell," said Scott Bach, President of the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA Board of Directors. "Those charged with enforcing the law have a special responsibility to follow it themselves," Bach continued. "Mr. Revell’s arrest is part of a pattern of similar misconduct by the Port Authority throughout the New York-New Jersey metropolitan areas."

"This lawsuit is intended to send a signal not only to the Port Authority but to every agency and officer responsible for policing our airports and highways: if you violate the rights of law-abiding gun owners, you will be held fully accountable." The lawsuit also names the arresting Port Authority police officer, Scott Erickson, as a defendant.

Once inside Essex County prison, Mr. Revell was subjected to numerous atrocities. He was thrown into a holding cell with 28 inmates, many of whom were admitted murderers and rapists. He endured a repulsive vomit-covered bed and toilet, was denied his blood pressure and migraine medication, innoculated against his will, given inedible food, strip-searched, and left only with his wits to survive.

"I did nothing wrong yet was arrested and subjected to the worst treatment imaginable for almost a week," said Mr. Revell, who has 8 children, 8 grandchildren and has been married for 36 years. "I brought this lawsuit together with the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs because I want to stop this kind of abuse from ever happening again," said Revell. "No one should ever have to experience what I experienced," he said. "I paid the price, but I’m committed to making sure no one else does."

View a copy of the Complaint here

View a copy of the Firearms Owner Protection Act here
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:06:18 AM EDT
Does anyone have the links to the story?
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:08:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/28/2006 7:09:26 AM EDT by johndel]
I think this was posted in the NJ hometown forum.. I'll see if I can find the link.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=8&f=9&t=224983
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:09:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 20rdMag:
Does anyone have the links to the story?



www.anjrpc.org/fopalawsuit.htm
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:09:21 AM EDT
someone needs to remind ny/nj that until they seceede that the laws of the United States apply to them.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:10:37 AM EDT
I hope they nail the fucking fascists in jersey for this.

They have a long track record of not giving a shit about facts and locking people up.
The only way to stop them is to hurt their pocketbook big.

How long before you think they knew they violated Federal law?
I bet they knew with one day and it took 4 more for the guy to be released and they didn't release him, his family posted bail or he would have sat there until the dismissed the charges.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:13:16 AM EDT
And yet another citizen gets screwed by the leftist agenda.

Gosh, I hope he wins.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:16:15 AM EDT
Copy of the FOPA interstate travel statute:

Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:20:00 AM EDT
3 Mil is not enough. Civil rights lawsuits should be at least 30 million to get some notice.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:37:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/28/2006 7:38:18 AM EDT by Poodleshooter]

Originally Posted By CRC:
Copy of the FOPA interstate travel statute:

Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.


NY and NJ have routinely considered landing at an airport (or stopping to get gas,food,etc) to be the end destination,and have arrested accordingly. That's how NY has nailed folks with handguns who ended up having to declare them in NYC. They claim that the airport is a destination that does not constitute a "place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm".
So far it seems that their strategy has been to temporarily incarcerate,then release without prosecution so they don't have to face a court decision that might uphold the FOPA interpretation.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:38:46 AM EDT



is there any way to sue to get people (like prosecutors, DA's, judges, arresting officers, etc.) shitcanned? if there isn't, there needs to be.

getting money out of the .gov doesn't "teach" anyone anything. those responsible need to (at least) be relieved of their duties permanently. it would be more appropriate for them to be sentenced to the exact thing this man endured...


Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:53:22 AM EDT
Poodleshooter,

Are you kidding?

Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:55:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sixgunsblazing:
3 Mil is not enough. Civil rights lawsuits should be at least 30 million to get some notice.



Yep. If I were the judge: "I grant 3 mil to the complaintant AND all you eftards involved get to spend 5 days in the same cell he was in."
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:57:26 AM EDT
Heard about this yesterday on Cam & Company/NRA News on Sirius Satellite Radio yesterday. Good case.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:58:58 AM EDT
tag for updates
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 7:59:57 AM EDT
I agree that 3 million is nowhere near enough. When fines are imposed upon the peasant class for civil rights infringements they are scaled to be generally devastating, probably requiring a lifelong debt or sale of the home to be able to pay them.

$3M is just an administrative inconvenience to a state, it needs to be more of the order of $3B, requiring laying off employees, cutting services and doing other unpopular things guaranteed to cause a significant reaction at the ballot box.

A couple of fines like that, and NY/NJ might start to take notice.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 8:00:22 AM EDT
Go get 'em Mr. Revell!

Link Posted: 2/28/2006 8:00:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Barrelburner:
Heard about this yesterday on Cam & Company/NRA News on Sirius Satellite Radio yesterday. Good case.



So is the NRA getting involved?

Link Posted: 2/28/2006 8:01:47 AM EDT
I hope Mr. Revell retires rich.

I also hope that whomever made the decision to put Revell in jail is fire and loses his pension.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 8:02:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PhilipPeake:
I agree that 3 million is nowhere near enough. When fines are imposed upon the peasant class for civil rights infringements they are scaled to be generally devastating, probably requiring a lifelong debt or sale of the home to be able to pay them.

$3M is just an administrative inconvenience to a state, it needs to be more of the order of $3B, requiring laying off employees, cutting services and doing other unpopular things guaranteed to cause a significant reaction at the ballot box.

A couple of fines like that, and NY/NJ might start to take notice.



+1

Link Posted: 2/28/2006 8:05:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Poodleshooter:
NY and NJ have routinely considered landing at an airport (or stopping to get gas,food,etc) to be the end destination,and have arrested accordingly. That's how NY has nailed folks with handguns who ended up having to declare them in NYC. They claim that the airport is a destination that does not constitute a "place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm".
So far it seems that their strategy has been to temporarily incarcerate,then release without prosecution so they don't have to face a court decision that might uphold the FOPA interpretation.



Well their plan is f*cking stupid, because anyone they take action against instantly has standing to challenge their actions in court. Detaining him and arresting him was a violation of federal law, and thus they have opened themselves for a pretty big individual tort case.

It should be a slam dunk in Federal court.

The NRA ought to be all over this.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 8:07:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/28/2006 8:10:25 AM EDT by Barrelburner]

Originally Posted By CRC:

Originally Posted By Barrelburner:
Heard about this yesterday on Cam & Company/NRA News on Sirius Satellite Radio yesterday. Good case.



So is the NRA getting involved?


I believe that The Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc. (ANJRPC) has the ball on this one.

They are not just suing the agencies, but the individual arresting officer as well.

They say it is the perfect case, because under FOPA the arrest was clearly illegal, and the arrested person is of impeccable character.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 8:24:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
Poodleshooter,

Are you kidding?



It's a really limited number of cases, but that's what I've seen. They always seem to let these usually older,nice guy gun owners go after awhile in the pokey. It ends up being a lawsuit, but that never seems to stop NY and NJ from continuing to do this,and refusing to get their LEOs to follow the Fed law vs the local statutes.
As John_Wayne777 mentions, it is stupid, but they appear to not learn anything from it,or more likely they simply don't care about losing money over the course of a handful of cases. I think they're only afraid of being totally slapped down in a Fed court over violating FOPA,so they just take their hits with the false arrest lawsuits.


Link Posted: 2/28/2006 8:33:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:

Originally Posted By Poodleshooter:
NY and NJ have routinely considered landing at an airport (or stopping to get gas,food,etc) to be the end destination,and have arrested accordingly. That's how NY has nailed folks with handguns who ended up having to declare them in NYC. They claim that the airport is a destination that does not constitute a "place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm".
So far it seems that their strategy has been to temporarily incarcerate,then release without prosecution so they don't have to face a court decision that might uphold the FOPA interpretation.



Well their plan is f*cking stupid, because anyone they take action against instantly has standing to challenge their actions in court. Detaining him and arresting him was a violation of federal law, and thus they have opened themselves for a pretty big individual tort case.

It should be a slam dunk in Federal court.

The NRA ought to be all over this.



considering the capital investment that needs to be made in order to bring suit against a government agence or municipailty, i'd say that this strategy is a winning one.

NJPA can arrest you for whatever the hell they want, and do so on your dime (tax dollars), with an entire team of other legal persons (judges, prosecutors, CI's, etc.) pulling for them, also on your dime. it doesn't cost them a cent.

now, for little 'ol me to fight back against this type of treatment, i would have to put ALL of my finances on the line just for a *chance* at justice. that's not a battle many can, or even will, fight.


Link Posted: 2/28/2006 8:37:05 AM EDT
Although the description of his booking is likely embellished rather dramatically the fact is that NJ and one officer in particular went way overboard and are gonna fork over some $$$.

I would hope it sends a signal to other overzealous agencies and individual officers to knock that shit off.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 11:42:01 AM EDT
Soldiers returning from Europe have long been warned about travelling through NY/NJ with their Privately Owned Weapons (POW). Cases exactly like this (missed flights) have been happening for well over 20 years. I hope this guy takes them for big time scrilla.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 11:55:42 AM EDT
SCOTUS? I'd imagine if NY/NJ lose they would cry state's rights.

i hope this goes down BIG and opens the door to challenging other ridiclous gun laws in other municipalities
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 11:57:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/28/2006 11:58:21 AM EDT by CK1]
I'd rather the plaintiffs not sue for money but to force the defendents to start firing people. Divert their pensions toward paying Gregg Revell for monetery compensation. You see, it's not the state's money, it's the taxpayer's money that pays the $3mil tab.

By firing some administrators and politicians, that will send a VERY clear message that behavior such as this will not be tolerated. Leaving the crooks who made the mess in office just invites them to repeat it. Make the punishment salient and tangible to the assholes in office and soon they'll all get the idea to lay off law-abiding folks. Otherwise, NJ will bump up its income tax or sales tax to offset the cost of litigation next year.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 11:59:21 AM EDT
That is exactly why it should be $3billion (not million) -- when the citizens of that state start to suffer for the actions of their elected representatives -- guess who isn't going to be an elected representative much longer?
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 12:45:10 PM EDT

Some cops just need a swift kick in the nuts. Maybe they should go after the criminals and not a law abiding citizen. It doesn't matter really, as long as the cop went home safely
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 3:50:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 3:58:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2006 3:59:45 PM EDT by OLY-M4gery]
Usual Ar15 hand wringing and dramatics.

First I hope he wins.

Next, no matter how much money he gets, it's money that taxpayers will pay.

Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. The people that MADE the policy should get............................

The guy should be compensated for 5 days in jail, lost wages, legal fees, etc. he shouldn't be set for life because he was arrested.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 5:08:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Usual Ar15 hand wringing and dramatics.

First I hope he wins.

Next, no matter how much money he gets, it's money that taxpayers will pay.

Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. The people that MADE the policy should get............................

The guy should be compensated for 5 days in jail, lost wages, legal fees, etc. he shouldn't be set for life because he was arrested.



Do we have a volunteer for the next victim?

In any case I'ld love to see this one result in a SCOTUS ruling on 2nd Amendment applicability to the states. But it will probably not get that far and if it does just narrowly looked at on the FOPA.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 6:28:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PaDanby:

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Usual Ar15 hand wringing and dramatics.

First I hope he wins.

Next, no matter how much money he gets, it's money that taxpayers will pay.

Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. The people that MADE the policy should get............................

The guy should be compensated for 5 days in jail, lost wages, legal fees, etc. he shouldn't be set for life because he was arrested.



Do we have a volunteer for the next victim?

In any case I'ld love to see this one result in a SCOTUS ruling on 2nd Amendment applicability to the states. But it will probably not get that far and if it does just narrowly looked at on the FOPA.






No in saying I hope he wins, and the people that wrote the policy should have to account for it, I am also hoping the policy gets changed, and the travelling public stops getting hassled.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 6:36:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2006 6:39:57 PM EDT by jrzy]

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Usual Ar15 hand wringing and dramatics.

First I hope he wins.

Next, no matter how much money he gets, it's money that taxpayers will pay.

Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. The people that MADE the policy should get............................

The guy should be compensated for 5 days in jail, lost wages, legal fees, etc. he shouldn't be set for life because he was arrested.



Bullshit!
It's their God damned job to know if you are breaking a law or not.

Edited to add:
WTF are you talking about? "Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department"
If the policy is beat and subjugate would that be OK too?
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 6:41:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Usual Ar15 hand wringing and dramatics.

First I hope he wins.

Next, no matter how much money he gets, it's money that taxpayers will pay.

Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. The people that MADE the policy should get............................

The guy should be compensated for 5 days in jail, lost wages, legal fees, etc. he shouldn't be set for life because he was arrested.



Bullshit!
It's their God damned job to know if you are breaking a law or not.



+1
"Just following orders...." & all that.
The brownshirts responsible need to spend the week in lockup at bare minimum to see how much they like it. The brass responsible? COC forbids further comment.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 6:47:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Usual Ar15 hand wringing and dramatics.

First I hope he wins.

Next, no matter how much money he gets, it's money that taxpayers will pay.

Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. The people that MADE the policy should get............................

The guy should be compensated for 5 days in jail, lost wages, legal fees, etc. he shouldn't be set for life because he was arrested.



Bullshit!
It's their God damned job to know if you are breaking a law or not.

Edited to add:
WTF are you talking about? "Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department"
If the policy is beat and subjugate would that be OK too?




Coupla things..................

If they have done it in th past, and convictions have been abtained, then it would seem that the practice has been upheld in Court.

Next, and think careful, if you never make it uncomfortable for the people that write the policy, just the people that actually go out and try to do the job they are paid to to by their employer, the way their employer wants them to do it, you will never get the policy changed.

Funny, I thought it would be good to make the people who make the policies responsible for when they make bad policy...........................
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 6:48:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By RiffRandall:

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Usual Ar15 hand wringing and dramatics.

First I hope he wins.

Next, no matter how much money he gets, it's money that taxpayers will pay.

Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. The people that MADE the policy should get............................

The guy should be compensated for 5 days in jail, lost wages, legal fees, etc. he shouldn't be set for life because he was arrested.



Bullshit!
It's their God damned job to know if you are breaking a law or not.



+1
"Just following orders...." & all that.
The brownshirts responsible need to spend the week in lockup at bare minimum to see how much they like it. The brass responsible? COC forbids further comment.



Fuck yourself, you piece of shit.

If you can't post an original thought from that ass you call a brain just don't post.

Link Posted: 3/1/2006 6:51:30 PM EDT
I opened the thread thinking it was about a FUPA joke.....
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 6:58:40 PM EDT
This is the first case that I've heard of at a NJ airport under these circumstances. You are not required to have a license to possess a handgun in NJ. NJ generally does recognize USC 926a when traveling through NJ.

NY has never recognized USC 926a when traveling through NYS with an unlicensed handgun. Unless you fall under one of the exceptions you are subject to arrest and prosecution for an unlicensed handgun.

Link Posted: 3/1/2006 7:13:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2006 7:16:59 PM EDT by Wobblin-Goblin]

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
First I hope he wins.

Next, no matter how much money he gets, it's money that taxpayers will pay.

Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. The people that MADE the policy should get....


We've been down this pretty path before, haven't we? Ignorance of the law is no excuse for not following it. Neither should be, "Just following orders/policy." And yes, those who set the policy should be brought up on charges, too.

The guy should be compensated for 5 days in jail, lost wages, legal fees, etc. he shouldn't be set for life because he was arrested.

I can buy that, if as a result of all this A) "policy" is amended, B) "authorities" face criminal charges, and C) anyone who has a record of arrest or jail time as a result of existing policy has his or her record cleared of the bogus charges.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 7:41:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:

Originally Posted By RiffRandall:

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Usual Ar15 hand wringing and dramatics.

First I hope he wins.

Next, no matter how much money he gets, it's money that taxpayers will pay.

Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. The people that MADE the policy should get............................

The guy should be compensated for 5 days in jail, lost wages, legal fees, etc. he shouldn't be set for life because he was arrested.



Bullshit!
It's their God damned job to know if you are breaking a law or not.



+1
"Just following orders...." & all that.
The brownshirts responsible need to spend the week in lockup at bare minimum to see how much they like it. The brass responsible? COC forbids further comment.



Fuck yourself, you piece of shit.

If you can't post an original thought from that ass you call a brain just don't post.




How many of those you figure the staff wil let pass before you're booted?
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 7:44:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By rkbar15:
This is the first case that I've heard of at a NJ airport under these circumstances. You are not required to have a license to possess a handgun in NJ. NJ generally does recognize USC 926a when traveling through NJ.



I don't see anywhere in the NJ Statutes where his transportation of his handgun was legal under current state law. It really sucks.

2C:39-5. Unlawful possession of weapons

b.Handguns. Any person who knowingly has in his possession any handgun, including any antique handgun without first having obtained a permit to carry the same as provided in N.J.S.2C:58-4, is guilty of a crime of the third degree.

2C:58-4. Permits to carry handguns
a. Scope and duration of authority. Any person who holds a valid permit to carry a handgun issued pursuant to this section shall be authorized to carry a handgun in all parts of this State, except as prohibited by section 2C:39-5e. One permit shall be sufficient for all handguns owned by the holder thereof, but the permit shall apply only to a handgun carried by the actual and legal holder of the permit.

All permits to carry handguns shall expire 2 years from the date of issuance or, in the case of an employee of an armored car company, upon termination of his employment by the company occurring prior thereto whichever is earlier in time, and they may thereafter be renewed every 2 years in the same manner and subject to the same conditions as in the case of original applications.

2C:39-6 Exemptions.
2C:39-6. a. Provided a person complies with the requirements of subsection j. of this section, N.J.S.2C:39-5 does not apply to:

e.Nothing in subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent a person keeping or carrying about his place of business, residence, premises or other land owned or possessed by him, any firearm, or from carrying the same, in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section, from any place of purchase to his residence or place of business, between his dwelling and his place of business, between one place of business or residence and another when moving, or between his dwelling or place of business and place where such firearms are repaired, for the purpose of repair. For the purposes of this section, a place of business shall be deemed to be a fixed location.

f.Nothing in subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent:

(1)A member of any rifle or pistol club organized in accordance with the rules prescribed by the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice, in going to or from a place of target practice, carrying such firearms as are necessary for said target practice, provided that the club has filed a copy of its charter with the superintendent and annually submits a list of its members to the superintendent and provided further that the firearms are carried in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section;

(2)A person carrying a firearm or knife in the woods or fields or upon the waters of this State for the purpose of hunting, target practice or fishing, provided that the firearm or knife is legal and appropriate for hunting or fishing purposes in this State and he has in his possession a valid hunting license, or, with respect to fresh water fishing, a valid fishing license;

(3)A person transporting any firearm or knife while traveling:

(a) Directly to or from any place for the purpose of hunting or fishing, provided the person has in his possession a valid hunting or fishing license; or

(b)Directly to or from any target range, or other authorized place for the purpose of practice, match, target, trap or skeet shooting exhibitions, provided in all cases that during the course of the travel all firearms are carried in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section and the person has complied with all the provisions and requirements of Title 23 of the Revised Statutes and any amendments thereto and all rules and regulations promulgated thereunder; or

(c)In the case of a firearm, directly to or from any exhibition or display of firearms which is sponsored by any law enforcement agency, any rifle or pistol club, or any firearms collectors club, for the purpose of displaying the firearms to the public or to the members of the organization or club, provided, however, that not less than 30 days prior to the exhibition or display, notice of the exhibition or display shall be given to the Superintendent of the State Police by the sponsoring organization or club, and the sponsor has complied with such reasonable safety regulations as the superintendent may promulgate. Any firearms transported pursuant to this section shall be transported in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section;
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 7:46:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jrzy:
I hope they nail the fucking fascists in jersey for this.

They have a long track record of not giving a shit about facts and locking people up.
The only way to stop them is to hurt their pocketbook big.

How long before you think they knew they violated Federal law?
I bet they knew with one day and it took 4 more for the guy to be released and they didn't release him, his family posted bail or he would have sat there until the dismissed the charges.




A very large and very angry +1


Oh and I just called and convinced our events planner at my work to move our users conference in 2007 from New Jersey to Las Vegas. At about 1000 attendees, that will make a small but noticeable dent in local income.

F. U. New Jersey.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 7:50:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By crashburnrepeat:

Originally Posted By jrzy:
I hope they nail the fucking fascists in jersey for this.

They have a long track record of not giving a shit about facts and locking people up.
The only way to stop them is to hurt their pocketbook big.

How long before you think they knew they violated Federal law?
I bet they knew with one day and it took 4 more for the guy to be released and they didn't release him, his family posted bail or he would have sat there until the dismissed the charges.




A very large and very angry +1


Oh and I just called and convinced our events planner at my work to move our users conference in 2007 from New Jersey to Las Vegas. At about 1000 attendees, that will make a small but noticeable dent in local income.

F. U. New Jersey.



Send the AG an e-mail telling him why.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 8:08:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By njJoniGuy:

I don't see anywhere in the NJ Statutes where his transportation of his handgun was legal under current state law. It really sucks.
....



Yes, their state laws DO really suck.
They are also superceded by Federal law in this case.

The officials involved in this officially sanctioned terrorism need to be sacked, charged with their crimes and tried.

The term "JBT" is often over used. In this case, I don't think it would be.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 8:46:27 PM EDT
I hope officer Erickson gets to spend some quality time of his own in federal "pound me in the ass" prison.

Link Posted: 3/1/2006 11:08:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:

Originally Posted By RiffRandall:

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Usual Ar15 hand wringing and dramatics.

First I hope he wins.

Next, no matter how much money he gets, it's money that taxpayers will pay.

Third, if the officers involved are following the policy of their department, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. The people that MADE the policy should get............................

The guy should be compensated for 5 days in jail, lost wages, legal fees, etc. he shouldn't be set for life because he was arrested.



Bullshit!
It's their God damned job to know if you are breaking a law or not.



+1
"Just following orders...." & all that.
The brownshirts responsible need to spend the week in lockup at bare minimum to see how much they like it. The brass responsible? COC forbids further comment.



Fuck yourself, you piece of shit.

If you can't post an original thought from that ass you call a brain just don't post.




How many of those you figure the staff wil let pass before you're booted?



The CoC forbids calling names. When he's telling the truth it isn't a violation.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 11:13:30 PM EDT
Tag for outcome.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 11:34:07 PM EDT
I’ve noticed many LEOs on this board express sentiments along the lines of:
“He was just doing his job.”


I have a question for them.

The account just doing his job jiggering numbers to float an otherwise insolvent company. Does he get to float the law? How about the truck driver that has been driving for 20 hours? Is he going to get a pass? Why not? They were just following orders.


The law is the law and the port cop needs to spend some time reflecting on that in jail. If violating federal law is policy then the cops boss needs to be bent over by bubba as well.

LEOs are subject to the same laws everyone else is. If you have a different opinion, you should not be a LEO.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 11:44:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/2/2006 12:09:10 AM EDT by Mr45auto]
.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top