Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
GPDO Commonlaw Spouse
Joined
·
5,514 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2010/Bills/A1500/1384_I1.HTM

STATEMENT

This bill, the "Citizens' Protection Act," revises and simplifies the procedures for securing a permit to carry a handgun in the State of New Jersey.

Under the provisions of the bill, an applicant for a permit to carry a handgun would be entitled to that permit so long as he can demonstrate competence with a firearm and is not statutorily disqualified. To demonstrate that competence, the applicant would be required to include, as part of his application for the permit, a copy indicating his successful completion of a firearms safety or training course or class offered by a law enforcement agency, an educational institution, the military, or the National Rifle Association. An applicant who holds a permit to carry is deemed competent and need not submit such evidence.

Among the disqualifications set forth in the bill are the statutory disabilities which currently prohibit an individual from obtaining either a permit to purchase a handgun or a firearms purchaser identification card: a crime involving controlled substances; a condition involving chronic and habitual alcoholic or drug abuse; or some other physical or mental condition or disease which would make it unsafe for the individual to obtain a permit to carry a handgun.

The bill also extends the term during which a permit to carry remains valid. At present, a permit to carry remains valid for two years; under this bill, a permit would be valid for five years.

Finally, the bill deletes subsection b. of N.J.S.2C:39-2 which provided that with regard to any firearm permit or license, an individual was deemed to be in violation of the law "until he establishes the contrary." This approach is inconsistent with traditional American legal jurisprudence and, therefore, should be ended.

In its current form, the law governing the issuance of permits to carry a handgun requires an applicant to demonstrate to the Superior Court a "justifiable need" in order to obtain a such permit. The court's interpretation of what constitutes a "justifiable need" makes it virtually impossible for citizens of New Jersey to obtain permits to carry.

The "right-to-carry" can serve as a significant deterrent to crime. An analysis of the nation's 30 "right-to-carry" states has revealed a significant reduction in crime in those states compared with the national average. For example, aggravated assaults are 19.4 percent lower in "right-to-carry" states; robbery is 38.4 percent lower; homicide is 37.9 percent lower; and handgun homicide is 41.1 percent lower. In California, where the "right-to-carry" is permitted in certain counties, a comparison of the crime rates in those counties with those which do not permit their residents to carry reveals lower crime rates in the "right-to-carry" counties. Similarly, Florida has experienced lower crime rates since enacting its "right-to-carry" statute. The homicide rate in Florida has dropped 22 percent; the handgun homicide rate is down 29 percent. Finally, even convicted robbers have indicated that if they suspected that a potential victim might be armed they would probably look for someone else to rob.
Still nowhere near where it should be, but much better than it currently is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,195 Posts
HydroAuto said:
STATEMENT
The "right-to-carry" can serve as a significant deterrent to crime. An analysis of the nation's 30 "right-to-carry" states has revealed a significant reduction in crime in those states compared with the national average. For example, aggravated assaults are 19.4 percent lower in "right-to-carry" states; robbery is 38.4 percent lower; homicide is 37.9 percent lower; and handgun homicide is 41.1 percent lower. In California, where the "right-to-carry" is permitted in certain counties, a comparison of the crime rates in those counties with those which do not permit their residents to carry reveals lower crime rates in the "right-to-carry" counties. Similarly, Florida has experienced lower crime rates since enacting its "right-to-carry" statute. The homicide rate in Florida has dropped 22 percent; the handgun homicide rate is down 29 percent. Finally, even convicted robbers have indicated that if they suspected that a potential victim might be armed they would probably look for someone else to rob.
.
Maybe someone should show this to John Lott :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,432 Posts
Whoo! That'd make NJ a shall issue state. :righton:

I disagree with a training requirement, but these baby steps are huge!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,152 Posts
Why is this in "Off-topic Political" instead of "National Laws, Bills and Politics"?
 

·
GPDO Commonlaw Spouse
Joined
·
5,514 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Because I'm ign'ant and Malum hasn't been in yet. :shattered:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,809 Posts
NJ even remotely considering becoming a 'shall issue' state? Hell has truely frozen over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,395 Posts
There's another thread on this topic that shows the bill to be more of a huge step backward...

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=51592

45_fan posted this in that other thread yesterday
The bill in question:
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2010/Bills ... 264_I1.HTM

Fee now: $20 (plus fingerprinting?)
Fee with the bill: $500
License term now: 2 years
License term with the bill: 1 year
Qualification interval now: 2 years?
Qualification interval with the bill: 6 months

Oh, and it may be shall-issue, but could be heavily and irregularly encumbered:
Quote:
The court may at its discretion issue a limited-type permit which would restrict the applicant as to the types of handguns he may carry and where and for what purposes such handguns may be carried.
The above text is existing law and would not be modified by the bill.

I don't think it constitutes a shall-issue bill. I honestly wonder if somebody thinks there are too many permits issued in NJ at the moment. The cost increases 50 fold and the qualification interval 4 fold. Unless NJ has lots of millionaires with tons of free time running around, I predict an overall decrease in the number of permits.
 

·
GPDO Commonlaw Spouse
Joined
·
5,514 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Wow, that's ridiculous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,809 Posts
Charging more for providing less - that's the NJ 'progress' that I know....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,974 Posts
RedDawnTheMusical said:
NJ even remotely considering becoming a 'shall issue' state? Hell has truely frozen over.
Hell froze over when Heller was handed down.
 

·
My Name is Inigo Montoya
Joined
·
4,025 Posts
iirc i think the reason why they increased the cost was to raise money...i remember reading that a couple of other may issue states (i think IL was one, grant it they are no issue) was campaigning on making IL Right to carry but wasnt on a RKBA platform but as a Money Raising issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,432 Posts
rabbivj said:
iirc i think the reason why they increased the cost was to raise money...i remember reading that a couple of other may issue states (i think IL was one, grant it they are no issue) was campaigning on making IL Right to carry but wasnt on a RKBA platform but as a Money Raising issue.
If the intent were simply to raise money, they could have done that by converting to shall-issue, doubling or tripling the fees, and leaving everything else alone. Going to $500/year from today's $10/year is going to decrease the number of licenses in circulation, not increase them. Heck, if you have $500 a year to throw at the process of obtaining a license, may-issue is probably not much of an issue either.

NJ has ~8.7M people. If 3% of the people applied and obtained a license, that would be ~261k. If the fee were $100 for 2 years ($50/yr), that is $13M more income if they went that way. Contrast that with the ~1k permits in NJ today. If every one of those permits renewed on the new fee schedule, that would be $0.5M/yr in income.

I don't think they are doing it for the revenue...
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top