Jump to content
PD2K

Arcane NJ law prevents retired cops from carrying concealed weapon

Recommended Posts

At the risk of getting flamed - screw them.  There should be not special treatment based on their former job.  Let them show justifiable need just like any other screwed citizen in New Jermany.  Maybe then they would help fight against justifiable need BS.  If them then why not retired military who actually get trained on using guns.  While there are many in law enforcement that are excellent marksmen, many suck beyond belief and should not be able to carry a gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of getting flamed - screw them.  There should be not special treatment based on their former job.  Let them show justifiable need just like any other screwed citizen in New Jermany.  Maybe then they would help fight against justifiable need BS.  If them then why not retired military who actually get trained on using guns.  While there are many in law enforcement that are excellent marksmen, many suck beyond belief and should not be able to carry a gun.

100% agree. Nor should they be allowed to carry off duty they should have the exact same rules as an armed guard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I'm very supportive of the police aren't they just tregular folks after retirement? If they feel their life as crime fighters exposes them in retirement they'll be able to demonstrate justifiable need, thus getting a permit. Beyond that why would they be more entitled than me or you or anyone else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree. I think that at least if someone made his career being a public servant and risking his life to keep me safe, that he should be able to conceal carry. Add to that the fact that there are people that want to harm them for keeping our state safe by taking them off the streets. This is not to say that they have any more of a constitutional right than you or I, just that I want them to be able to carry for their service. And of course I want my constitutional right to be recognized and I want theirs to be recognized too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree. I think that at least if someone made his career being a public servant and risking his life to keep me safe, that he should be able to conceal carry. Add to that the fact that there are people that want to harm them for keeping our state safe by taking them off the streets. This is not to say that they have any more of a constitutional right than you or I, just that I want them to be able to carry for their service. And of course I want my constitutional right to be recognized and I want theirs to be recognized too.

im not sure about you, but I've made a career of keeping myself and my family safe. Made friends and enemies thus far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never understand this blanket love of law enforcement in NJ when it come to them having a different set of laws carved out "just for them" . The vast majority of the police I know are fine with the gun laws in NJ. When was the last time you saw the police officers society of NJ having a pro gun rally?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me its simple, the states position is someone in LE is far more likely to be at greater risk of retribution do to the excessive exposure to the criminal element. CO's come to mind specifically as an example. This is, in the states mind, justifiable need. It is irrelevant that we all agree that justifiable need is wrong. We should all have the ability to protect ourselves. But this does not diminish the greater exposure some LE face. I absolutely agree they should have the right to carry post retirement. I hold no ill will towards former LE that want that right. Us civilians being denied that right is an issue with our government, not LE. The only thing I will say, is that some LE I have had decades of RTKBA discussions with, had their eyes opened wide about the civilian plight on the topic when they retired and started having to jump through some hoops. Particularly ones in NY!!! They tell me now they understand what I have been talking about all these years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ps. I think many here do not understand just how many LE are on our side. I have seen it first hand in action in all the right places that help our affliction here in NJ. That's not to say we don't all run across some LE that have drank the coolaid admin has fed them about cops and mil being the only ones suitable to own firearms, but beyond those few, I have personally found a TON that truy understand and are on our side and some of them are in position to aid and assist our plight. So be cautious of blanket statements. We need all the allies we can get......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really doesn't matter.....if you research NJ Gun Case Law back to 2013....Mr. Christie has always agreed with the NJ Courts, after all he's a NJ Lawyer...and "Justifiable Need"...IMO this will only be settled by the US Supreme Court....not here in NJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Retired LEO should be able to carry just as We should be able to carry... with that said, they should also be held to the same lawful standard as the rest of us...

 

If he needs to carry after retirement... he can show justifiable need like the rest of us. This two part system is bullshit and should end, if a cop can't get behind that then he is no friend of ours. PBA cards and shields should also be illegal and seen as the bribery chips that they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • olight.jpg

    Use Promo Code "NJGF10" for 10% Off Regular Items

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Similar Content

    • By Frank Thomas
      Does anyone know if I can now apply for concealed carry in NJ?  Very confusing.  The form, "State of NJ - APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CARRY A HANDGUN..." appears to not have been updated.  As an illustrative example, there's no mention about weapons training.  And the form is dated "03/15."  So how do I apply to carry a weapon post-Supreme Court ruling?  And has anyone in NJ applied and been approved under the new Supreme Court ruling?  Thanks
    • By Ramup422
      In light of the poor ruling against the 2nd Amendment today by the 9th Circuit court, the Almeida / Tumminelli v. NJ case moves forward and will be filed at the Federal Courts in Newark on Friday, June 10th 2016 by the law firms hired to move the case forward. The 3 law firms involved are out of Pennsylvania, Mississippi and California. The details of the complaint, law firms involved and updates will all be made public for your viewing after the approval on the release of such is obtained by the lead attorney.  This case is being funded 100% by us, the laypeople (we, the people) and their supporters.  To learn more, visit the Party of Six on their FB page or at www.partyofsix.org
       
      Thank you, 
       
      Albert Almeida
       
      no quarters given
    • By Michael1776
      Michael J. Cino is the Chairman of the Constitutional Carry Coalition - we believe that "justifiable need" should be trashed - Please CALL TEN PEOPLE you know in the 5th Congressional District and ASK THEM TO VOTE FOR MICHAEL J. CINO IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY JUNE 7 AgainstTheEstablishment.com
      Then ask them to CALL TEN PEOPLE THEMSELVES

      and then ask those TEN to call TEN PEOPLE to Vote for Michael J. Cino in the 5th Congressional District on June 7 - it's the only way we are going to get rid of "justifiable need" and change the gun laws in New Jersey AgainstTheEstablishment.com
    • By NJGF
      Violent Home Invasion
      Case Illustrates Threat Posed by Gangs
       
      https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2016/april/violent-home-invasion/violent-home-invasion?utm_campaign=email-Immediate&utm_medium=email&utm_source=fbi-top-stories&utm_content=537558
       
      "Violent gangs pose a significant threat to communities throughout the United States. You don’t have to live in South Central Los Angeles or Chicago’s inner city to feel the impact of gang violence, as a recent case from Washington state illustrates."
       
      "Around 9:30 p.m., a 66-year-old Lakewood man answered a knock at his door and was confronted by the three youths, who forced their way into the home. The gang members had picked the wrong house, but that didn’t matter to them. What happened next was 20 minutes of terror for an innocent couple"
       
      "...they kicked down the locked bedroom door where the couple had barricaded themselves behind their bed. Confronted again by the attackers, the man fired two shots, hitting 19-year-old Taijon Vorhees both times.
       
      At that point, all three robbers fled and drove away"
    • By Midwest
      MO lawmaker wants gun owners to consider retreat over firing
       
      http://www.kctv5.com/story/24856794/mo-lawmaker-wants-gun-owners-to-consider-retreat-over-firing
       
      Missouri lawmaker wants gun owners to retreat instead of shooting to defend. Rep Randy Dunn proposed HB 1940 http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills141/billpdf/intro/HB1940I.PDF  The bill would require a person to retreat when facing danger.
       
       
      Attorney Kevin Jamison strongly opposes the bill.
      "I'm appalled. This is showing more regard for home invaders than home owners," he said. "This is an absurd piece of legislation. It should be given the contempt it deserves."
  • Posts

×
×
  • Create New...