NJSA 54 Readopted with changes

[maintenanceguy 510]

The latest version of NJSA has been readopted with some of the changes they threatened to make.  http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/njcode/

 

CHAPTER SOURCE AND EFFECTIVE DATE:
 R.2015 d.094, effective May 12, 2015.
 See: 46 N.J.R. 2393(a), 47 N.J.R. 1328(a).
 CHAPTER EXPIRATION DATE:
 Chapter 54, Firearms and Weapons, expires on May 12, 2022.

 

So far,

 

They did not change the definition of "assault weapon" for shotguns.  The proposed law would have made any shotgun with a detachable magazine illegal.  That didn't happen.

 

Justifiable need is the same - thanks Christie!

 

FID cards are now void 30 days after you change your name, address, or sex.  If the PD's issued FIDs within the required 30 days this would not be a problem but since they don't, move and you're left without the FID's protection.

 

I haven't had a chance to look at the rest of the proposed changes.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

 

TITLE 13. LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY  

CHAPTER 54. FIREARMS AND WEAPONS  

SUBCHAPTER 1. FIREARMS PURCHASER IDENTIFICATION CARD AND PERMIT TO PURCHASE A HANDGUN

N.J.A.C. 13:54-1.7 (2015)

§ 13:54-1.7 Validity of a State of New Jersey firearms identification card and permit to purchase a handgun and form of register

 

   (a) A State of New Jersey firearms purchaser identification card shall be valid until such time as the holder becomes subject to any of the disabilities set forth by law and this subchapter pertaining to an applicant's eligibility. Upon becoming subject to any of the disabilities set forth in this subchapter, the card shall be void and shall be returned to the Superintendent within five days. A State of New Jersey firearms purchaser identification card shall not be valid for more than 30 days after the information contained therein is no longer reflective of the issued person, that is, current address, name change, and/or sex change.

 

(b) A permit to purchase a handgun and form of register shall be valid for a period of 90 days from the date of issuance and may be renewed by the issuing authority for good cause for an additional 90 days. In no event shall a permit to purchase a handgun be valid for more than 180 days from the date the permit was originally issued.

 

What a bunch of C*nts

[Kevin125 4,772]

What I think would be helpful... is to pick a town and sue them into bankruptcy over an issue related to firearms.    Make an example of them essentially.  I'm not sure how that could be done.  It would have to be funded by a lot of people.  The issues would have to flow non stop.  Just keep making them spend money on lawyers.

 

Then move onto the next town.

 

Making examples of people is what judges like to do.  Maybe bankrupting their jurisdiction and eliminating their benefactor would help them see that they can't be activist judges without some financial consequences.

[glockamole 0]

Great.... I just submitted my address change on 6/10. My references did get their letter and mailed them back out yesterday already so I might have a chance in the 30 days. Original was done in 28. This is stupid like every other feel-good nj gun law. Law abiding citizens have FID's not criminals so lets jam up the unsuspecting good guys in nj. Our system is FUBAR.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

 

 

[mipafox 438]

I know most of these commies probably abhor Christians, like most commies do. But they should pray each night I never lose my faith. My nature is quite human.

[1LtCAP 4,262]

What I think would be helpful... is to pick a town and sue them into bankruptcy over an issue related to firearms.    Make an example of them essentially.  I'm not sure how that could be done.  It would have to be funded by a lot of people.  The issues would have to flow non stop.  Just keep making them spend money on lawyers.

 

Then move onto the next town.

 

Making examples of people is what judges like to do.  Maybe bankrupting their jurisdiction and eliminating their benefactor would help them see that they can't be activist judges without some financial consequences.

like perhaps west berlin, considering the furor going on over this latest tragedy/?

[siderman 1,137]

IIRC this re-write also tried to include a provision that allowed the police depts to get away with the extra/redundant pprwork requirements obtaining apps that are supposed to be illegal but gets around that basically saying if its for the common good its ok. Which would be an interesting contradiction given the recently published (binding) E Brunswick ruling saying the cops cannot require any extra pprwork requirements.

[maintenanceguy 510]

IIRC this re-write also tried to include a provision that allowed the police depts to get away with the extra/redundant pprwork requirements obtaining apps that are supposed to be illegal but gets around that basically saying if its for the common good its ok. Which would be an interesting contradiction given the recently published (binding) E Brunswick ruling saying the cops cannot require any extra pprwork requirements.

 

 

Since it's not possible to directly link to the final document, I cut and pasted the response to the public comments here:  http://themaintenanceguy.com/gfimages/Response-to-public-comments-readoption-njac-54.txt

 

Over a thousand people submitted comments.  They only responded in general terms to the comments that prompted them to make amendments to the proposed amendments.   The extra paperwork one is one of the ones that they re-wrote the re-write.  They said:

 

N.J.A.C. 13:54-1.17

COMMENT: This proposed new rule by the Superintendent is a blatant attempt to subvert the statutory law and the Courts, which have ruled contrary to the Superintendent's new rule to allow issuing agencies to create their own additional forms or request additional information. N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3.f says "There shall be no conditions or requirements added to the form or content of the application, required by the licensing authority for the issuance of a permit or identification card, other than those that are specifically set forth in this chapter." Thus, this new rule is not only unauthorized by statute, but it is directly prohibited by statute. It is therefore ultra vires and unlawful.

 

RESPONSE: The Division is not proposing in this new rule to allow new forms to be created or make additions to existing forms. The proposed new rule clearly states that all applications and/or forms "shall be promulgated by the Superintendent." The added language allowing the issuing agencies to request additional information was intended to allow for a thorough investigation to determine if the applicant is subjected to any disabilities established in N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3.c. The Division is [page=1299] proposing a substantive change to add language to the new rule to clarify that "additional information" is strictly limited to information contained on the forms and applications promulgated by the Superintendent, and the issuing agency may only ask follow-up questions to clarify and or verify information contained on the forms.

[ChrisA2 3]

Pardon my ignorance but can someone clarify this for me,

FID cards are now void 30 days after you change your name, address, or sex. If the PD's issued FIDs within the required 30 days this would not be a problem but since they don't, move and you're left without the FID's protection.

 

 

So if I moved, I have 30 days to have an address change for my FID. I'm assuming the process for address change is a lot easier than getting the initial FID/P2P. But since NJ takes 30 days+ to process paperwork of any sort, it would mean that even if you applied for address change, it would exceed 30 days making you have to re-apply for the FID?

[maintenanceguy 510]

This was the basis for one of my submitted comments.  Until the local PD's and NJSP comply with the 30 day statutory FID processing time, it leaves citizens with a period of time when they can't exercise their constitutionally enumerated right to bear (transport) arms.

[Vlad G 345]

Well at least it creates ground for a new lawsuit now.

[siderman 1,137]

Since it's not possible to directly link to the final document, I cut and pasted the response to the public comments here:  http://themaintenanceguy.com/gfimages/Response-to-public-comments-readoption-njac-54.txt

 

Over a thousand people submitted comments.  They only responded in general terms to the comments that prompted them to make amendments to the proposed amendments.   The extra paperwork one is one of the ones that they re-wrote the re-write.  They said:

 

N.J.A.C. 13:54-1.17

COMMENT: This proposed new rule by the Superintendent is a blatant attempt to subvert the statutory law and the Courts, which have ruled contrary to the Superintendent's new rule to allow issuing agencies to create their own additional forms or request additional information. N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3.f says "There shall be no conditions or requirements added to the form or content of the application, required by the licensing authority for the issuance of a permit or identification card, other than those that are specifically set forth in this chapter." Thus, this new rule is not only unauthorized by statute, but it is directly prohibited by statute. It is therefore ultra vires and unlawful.

 

RESPONSE: The Division is not proposing in this new rule to allow new forms to be created or make additions to existing forms. The proposed new rule clearly states that all applications and/or forms "shall be promulgated by the Superintendent." The added language allowing the issuing agencies to request additional information was intended to allow for a thorough investigation to determine if the applicant is subjected to any disabilities established in N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3.c. The Division is [page=1299] proposing a substantive change to add language to the new rule to clarify that "additional information" is strictly limited to information contained on the forms and applications promulgated by the Superintendent, and the issuing agency may only ask follow-up questions to clarify and or verify information contained on the forms.

Mguy- thanx for your post. Their response is still a bit shady. They say that THEY(the state) will not create new forms/pprwork but the last sentence is too ambiguous for me. If they wanted to bust balls they could require "additional information" or "follow-up info" from us about any question on the existing forms which would make US provide the add'l pprwork.

[ogfarmer 138]

wonder why all these changes haven't been published on njsp link for nj gun laws