Family members can apparently use other family members guns in Home Self defense

[irishpete 2]

The missus was very skeptical about being restricted from using one of my guns in home self defense so she did the following :-

 

"I verified with the State Police that you are allowed to use a gun legally owned by another family member in your home for self defense. While the laws of temporary transfer that allow me to use it at the range or in the woods for target practice under your supervision or a licensed instructor's supervision ( for a period of 8 hours maximum ) do not apply to our home , the NJ Castle Doctrine does allow me to use your legally owned gun or any family member's legally owned gun in our home for self defense in a stand down situation with no possibility of retreat provided I qualify to own a firearm. Temporary Transfer Of Ownership and NJ Castle Doctrine are independent of each other."

 

Debate !

[tj462nj 32]

according to the NJ2AS meeting where Evan Nappen was our speaker, it would be considered an illegal transfer if she used your gun in a home defense situation. Unless you have something in writing from who you spoke to at the state police, which I highly doubt they would give you something in writing, don't believe what they say.

[Malsua 1,422]

The NJ castle doctrine doesn't mention the instrument of deadly force nor does it give exemptions to the transfer laws.

[GRIZ 3,369]

according to the NJ2AS meeting where Evan Nappen was our speaker, it would be considered an illegal transfer if she used your gun in a home defense situation. Unless you have something in writing from who you spoke to at the state police, which I highly doubt they would give you something in writing, don't believe what they say.

 

I can understand why Nappen gave that answer. He is considered to be an expert and have all the answers. Giving the most conservative one is the safest course of action.

 

Does anyone have a verified incident where a family member legitamately used another family member's firearm in their home and was charged?

[bry@n 195]

I agree. This was very specific. I would tread lightly without something in writing.

[Malsua 1,422]

 

 

Does anyone have a verified incident where a family member legitamately used another family member's firearm in their home and was charged?

 

I seriously doubt it's ever been pursued or that it ever will be. My wife knows how to use my guns, if someone breaks in when I'm not there, woe unto them. I'll worry about an ahole prosecutor after she or anyone else in my home is safe.

 

That said if "ANY" gun can be used, can it be a stolen gun? How about one you transferred illegally? The reason I pose this question is because someone will certainly post the statute that says "May Carry _ANY_ gun" from the statute defining exemptions.

[Babaganoosh 192]

I am not saying Nappen is wrong but that he is erring on the side of caution. However I did see a copy of his book the other day at a store by me. On the back cover it does a quick scare tactic type comparison of the NJ firearms laws vs the Pa Firearm laws.

 

The one that caught my eye the quickest was where it said in big letters that hollowpoints are illegal in NJ.

 

I opened the book and found the page dealing with hollowpoints. At that point he does carve out the exceptions.

 

Just kinda annoyed me that he was sorta spreading incorrect info on the cover of a book just to sell more copies. That's just me though.

[Tactical Turtle 11]

Honestly, I would rather be judged by 12 then carried by 6, so that being said, if someone breaks into my house and my wife uses my weapon, and they want charge her with murder or manslaughter I would have to say still shoot. It's a catch 22, plus what prosecutor do you think would try and fight this case. Wife home alone when a male breaks into the house, he realizes she is hone, she calls 911, police in route, he comes after her and my 12 guage is in the guys gut held by her..... Hmmmm sounds like it was life or death so deadly force could be used. I can't see them prosecuting her

[Shane45 807]

I would say that the state police is NOT a reliable scource for legal advice. I have personally recieved incorrect advice from the state police on previous occasions calling in directly. Also IIRC the state AG's office has admonished the state police before stating that they are not qualified to give legal advice. I would say that Nappen is correct. Now if you want to hang your hat on what this gun hating state's court system may afford you in terms of consideration...good luck with that. I think it is probably also worthy of consideration the strength it may give a civil case against you. I would also add that I am sure we would ALL advise our significant others, do what you have to to save yourself and we will deal with the fallout later. I think the real point is to point out the rediculasness of the letter of the law in NJ.

[Handyman 5,682]

Since we can't trust the State Police to give accurate advice (no argument here!) where can we turn?

 

What happens if an inquiry gets sent to the attorney general's office? I would imagine that if I sent a questions, they would probably refer me to my attorney. But as far as I am concerned, the AG is my attorney. They are public servants, and we are all paying their salaries.

 

Then I guess there is also the issue of not wating to ask because it will allow some ranting liberal pencil neck the opportunity to come up with the most asinine, restrictive regulation they can think up...

[GRIZ 3,369]

I seriously doubt it's ever been pursued or that it ever will be. My wife knows how to use my guns, if someone breaks in when I'm not there, woe unto them. I'll worry about an ahole prosecutor after she or anyone else in my home is safe.

 

That said if "ANY" gun can be used, can it be a stolen gun? How about one you transferred illegally? The reason I pose this question is because someone will certainly post the statute that says "May Carry _ANY_ gun" from the statute defining exemptions.

 

I don't think a prosecutor would pursue a transfer issue if a family member used another family member's gun to defend themselves. It would be stupid to do so.

 

If the gun was stolen or otherwise "illegal", they may not be charged with the shooting but could be charged with possession of stolen property, etc, etc.

[Gorilla800lbs 12]

Would this scenario work?

 

1. Have your wife apply for her own FID

2. Two of your complete a COE, transferring your shotgun to her, and locking it really tight somewhere

3. If she has to use your shotgun, she'll be able to produce that COE on the spot, and will be in the clear. Otherwise, the COE remains stashed away forever.

 

Variation: she can also obtain a P2P and you do the same thing with your handgun.

[Handyman 5,682]

Would this scenario work?

 

1. Have your wife apply for her own FID...

 

 

 

Whew, that's a lot of work. I think it would just be easier to turn to a life of crime...

[M4BGRINGO 139]

So, if my wife wants to shoot a perp with a 686 it better be HER 686? There are two of them side by side, guess she better check the serial numbers first. Same goes for the shotguns. She better grab HER 870, not one of mine.......... Rediculous,

 

What if she had no FID card? Heck, what if she wasn't allowed to get an FID card? Am I allowed to have guns in the house then? I could use a gun to protect her, but she wouldn't be allowed to use one of my guns to protect me?

 

This state is full of liberals which tend to become lawyers and lawyers become politicians which leads to more and more dumb-azzzzz laws...........

[Spartiati 63]

according to the NJ2AS meeting where Evan Nappen was our speaker, it would be considered an illegal transfer if she used your gun in a home defense situation. Unless you have something in writing from who you spoke to at the state police, which I highly doubt they would give you something in writing, don't believe what they say.

 

Particularly when they didn't even get the Castle Doctrine correct i.e. " the NJ Castle Doctrine does allow me to use your legally owned gun or any family member's legally owned gun in our home for self defense in a stand down situation with no possibility of retreat"

[Soju 153]

Where is that thread on this discussion specifically, where there was quite a debate on the temporary transfer vs. nothing to prevent from carry any gun in your home thing. I'd post, but my opinion was clear in that thread. Let me dig it up...

 

Found it.

 

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/28889-spouse-hold-gun-in-house/

[vladtepes 1,060]

The law clearly says nothing will prevent carrying ANY gun... Having possession of a stolen/illegal gun would be addressed by other laws than simple possession.. Law says NOTHING prevent ANY gun... That is the law as it is written why over think it... Why else would the law state ANY gun... If it meant only guns you owned it would say "any legally owned gun" or it would say nothing at all since obviously you can have YOUR gun in YOUR home... The only reason to state "any" is so it is understood that you may possess "any" gun in your home... Now if you possess and carry MY handgun in your home then I might be in trouble because your home is not somewhere I could legally be with my handgun... But since the law states you can carry any gun in your home... How much more clear could it be spelled out..

[vladtepes 1,060]

If you stop an intruder and take his illegal stolen handgun till the police arrive is that an illegal transfer? NO because you can carry ANY firearm in your home... ANY firearm...

[Sandy 44]

Well , now I had to join another forum . Parenting , dogs , photography , ...and now guns .

 

I did call a good friend who is a veteran in the State Police , and he triple checked with an NJ attorney. My husband left out a few pertinent details of our conversation ( it is a guy thing) .

 

It has nothing to do with temporary transfer , because the scenario I was asking about pertained to when he is not home , or ..God forbid , he has been incapacitated in a home invasion situation. You can't offer temporary transfer if you are A) miles away at work or 2) dead or unconscious

 

In a situation where I am home alone and my life is threatened by an intruder I was told by an attorney and my state police friend that by law I can use ANY gun in my home. It is a gray area , meaning exceptions and specific outline of the law are not available and what IS there is subject to subjective interpretation ( as evidenced by lengthy debate here) .

 

But , the closest written legislation that anyone can come up with in a situation where I am alone and can't retreat and my life is threatened , is that I may have access to any gun in MY home.

 

The area becomes less gray because I have no exceptions according to law that precludes me from owning a firearm. It gets even closer to black and white when I also have an FID card.Which I applied for ( cue cheesy game show music as I wait months for it to "come in" )

 

Temporary transfer comes an issue if there is a break in and my husband tosses me his gun to make decisions with while Pete calls 911 . I think we all know it won't go down that way . I will be dialing while he holds them off how ever he has to.

 

Of course using your husband's gun would also be an issue if you shot him with it in your home. Who owns the gun is the least of yer issues there.

[M4BGRINGO 139]

Welcome Irishpete'swife. I would still like to know, what if YOU were NOT allowed to get an FID card for some reason. Could YOU still use one of your HUSBANDS guns to defend yourself if your husband was not there? Or would YOU go to jail for illegally posessing a handgun and your husband lose ALL his guns due to the illegal transfer???????

 

This state is so crewed-up with laws and crap, no one knows what they can or can not do without contacting an attorney who is not handing-out info for free. So we should all live like sheep and do nothing so we can't get in trouble...............

[Sandy 44]

I honestly don't know since I did not ask ,as it does not apply to me since I have no conditions that would keep me from owning a firearm . It would definitely be something to ask an attorney about if someone falls into that category ( priors , a stay in a mental facility , or something..by definition in NJ even Arlo Guthrie would not be allowed to purchase a gun. ) .

[Murphy4570 15]

If it ever comes down to your wife needing to use one of your firearms, don't waste your time worrying about the crappy law. You'd rather she live vs some scumbag criminal, right? There's your answer. The "law" be damned.

[irishpete 2]

Just to bring things back in focus, in a life or death situaton where survival is the top priority then no one is going to start legal ruminations in the midst of the chaos.

 

My point was not "what would you do ?" but that according to NJ Castle doctrine, you have legal legs to stand on when you grab anothers gun and defend yourself in your home. You are not legally bound to verify its your gun that you picked up.

 

This is totally separate from questions like "would the AG prosecute you" or "would the police lead you away in handcuffs on some technicality". Yes you might end up in court and even yes, a activist judgement might rule against you but eventually the Law should protect you.

 

Legally, you have legs - Practicality well thats another thing

[LorenzoS 100]

For crap's sake people, does anyone seriously beleive that in a life and death situation where someone legitimately has to use force to defend themselves an their home, that they would actually be charged with an illegal transfer? For fucks sake there are enough real issues to consider without making up boogeyman fairytales.

 

If your home defense plan in any way involves stopping to check the legalities of whose gun is whose, then you are way way off base.

 

And here's some more news for you. Unless you are paying him a retainer, Evan Nappen is not your lawyer. He is selling books.

[rdsmith3 19]

If it ever comes down to your wife needing to use one of your firearms, don't waste your time worrying about the crappy law. You'd rather she live vs some scumbag criminal, right? There's your answer. The "law" be damned.

 

Whoa -- too much common sense in that statement, at least for NJ.

 

I'd even go beyond that. In my Chuck Norris fantasy, suppose armed bad guy #1 breaks through my front door with a stolen, banned "assault" weapon. I leap from the stairs, delivering a flying kick to his head that knocks him out. I then grab his weapon to shoot armed bad guy #2 who is coming through the door. I will shoot him, with a stolen, illegal gun that I do not own (assuming I can figure out how to operate it). I will do what it takes to protect my family, even if it may technically be illegal under the confusing and controlling laws of our state.

[mikeyboyeee 66]

I challange anyone here to find ANY instance in NJ where someone was prosecuted for using a spouse or relative's gun (who also lives in the home) for self defernse purposes during a home invasion. My guess is you ain't finding any, so why are you worrying about it?

[Shane45 807]

"does anyone seriously beleive that in a life and death situation where someone legitimately has to use force to defend themselves an their home, that they would actually be charged"

 

Yes I do!

 

LI, NJ, not much diff. This was the case that came to mind.

 

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2010/09/07/long-island-man-arrested-for-defending-home-with-ak-47/

[Shane45 807]

Another, Im sure I can find these all day. My opinion is NJ hates you and your guns and will find any way they can to seperate you from them no matter the circumstance:

 

POINT PLEASANT — Police charged a Johnson Avenue man with weapons offenses after he used a handgun unlawfully against people who had come to his house to confront his 17-year-old brother, Lt. Richard Larsen said

Michael S. Capanna, 23, of Johnson Avenue was the legal owner of the registered weapon, but had used the gun in an unlawful manner about 10:25 p.m. Friday, Larsen said.

 

Capanna had been in his bedroom when he heard arguing outside the house, Larsen said. Capanna's 17-year-old brother was being confronted by a man and a woman, police said.

 

Brandin O'Shea, 25 and Amelia Alexander, 18, both of Point Pleasant Beach, were at the house to confront Capanna's brother about an alleged theft at the O'Shea home, Larsen said.

 

At Capanna's home, the confrontation became physical, Larsen said. Capanna took the weapon from its safe inside his room and came outside with it, Larsen said. Capanna did not point the .40-caliber gun at anyone, Larsen said. The couple fled, but returned after police arrived, Larsen said.

 

By the time Patrolman Robert Wells arrived with Lt. James Jensen, Capanna had already returned the loaded weapon to its safe, police said.

 

The gun was legally owned, but at the time Capanna went outside with it, he was using it in a manner that was against the law, Larsen said. The bullets in the gun are the prohibited hollow-point type, Larsen said.

 

Capanna is charged with a second-degree possession of a firearm for an unlawful purpose and possession of prohibited weapons and devices. His bail was set at $100,000. Capanna was placed in the Ocean County Jail, but is listed under the name "Campanna."

 

O'Shea was charged with simple assault, Larsen said.

[mikeyboyeee 66]

Another, Im sure I can find these all day. My opinion is NJ hates you and your guns and will find any way they can to seperate you from them no matter the circumstance:

 

POINT PLEASANT — Police charged a Johnson Avenue man with weapons offenses after he used a handgun unlawfully against people who had come to his house to confront his 17-year-old brother, Lt. Richard Larsen said

Michael S. Capanna, 23, of Johnson Avenue was the legal owner of the registered weapon, but had used the gun in an unlawful manner about 10:25 p.m. Friday, Larsen said.

 

Capanna had been in his bedroom when he heard arguing outside the house, Larsen said. Capanna's 17-year-old brother was being confronted by a man and a woman, police said.

 

Brandin O'Shea, 25 and Amelia Alexander, 18, both of Point Pleasant Beach, were at the house to confront Capanna's brother about an alleged theft at the O'Shea home, Larsen said.

 

At Capanna's home, the confrontation became physical, Larsen said. Capanna took the weapon from its safe inside his room and came outside with it, Larsen said. Capanna did not point the .40-caliber gun at anyone, Larsen said. The couple fled, but returned after police arrived, Larsen said.

 

By the time Patrolman Robert Wells arrived with Lt. James Jensen, Capanna had already returned the loaded weapon to its safe, police said.

 

The gun was legally owned, but at the time Capanna went outside with it, he was using it in a manner that was against the law, Larsen said. The bullets in the gun are the prohibited hollow-point type, Larsen said.

 

Capanna is charged with a second-degree possession of a firearm for an unlawful purpose and possession of prohibited weapons and devices. His bail was set at $100,000. Capanna was placed in the Ocean County Jail, but is listed under the name "Campanna."

 

O'Shea was charged with simple assault, Larsen said.

Al;thjo I agree with you 100% about NJ, neither incident you pointed out has ANY relevance to the discusion at hand.

 

Neither of these was a home invasion where a spouse or other relative grabbed a legally owned firearm for a legal self defense inside the home scenario.

 

Keep trying

[BlueLineFish 615]

I see the main problem in regards to the law is that both individuals left the house and the legal system construes that as one looking for trouble. Now if the individuals enter the home at any point then in is completely different. Just stating some info no opinion on this topic for now