Yet another one gets 'Jammed Up In Jersey' . This time it is Brian Fletcher of NC.

[Midwest]

Yet another one gets 'Jammed Up In Jersey' this time it is Brian Fletcher of NC.

In a story that we have heard before all too well about good people getting 'Jammed Up In Jersey'. Well now it is Brian Fletcher from NC. He was sent to help New Jersey with disaster relief, but when a cop asked him for ID and found that he was carrying under his NC permit. He ended up getting booked on a class 2 felony instead. Managed to post a $25,000 bail after spending a night in jail. Will Governor Christie pardon him like he did for Shaneen Allen? We'll see


http://bearingarms.com/man-rushed-help-new-jersey-disaster-relief-now-faces-absurd-gun-charge/


"Brian Fletcher and his team went to the Armpit of the East Coast at their request, and is now facing felony charges for running afoul of New Jersey’s gun laws while attempting to abide by the laws and customs that he knew regarding lawful concealed carry."

Also

"Fletcher went from disaster relief to having his entire life and livelihood in jeopardy in a matter of seconds."

 

[deepdiver]

How is anyone unaware of the draconian gun laws in NY, NJ, MD, DC, CA, HI and IL in this day and age what with the easy availability of the internet? I have sympathy for the guy but come on, how can you not know or take the time to find out the laws in places to which you are traveling? This isn't like he just took a wrong turn and ended up in Jersey accidentally or lived nearby and assumed the laws were the same. He traveled hundreds of miles through several states and apparently was oblivious to the fact that not every state has the same CC laws as NC.

 

[twoskinsonemanns]

I suspect it was temporary confusion/delusion brought on by the sensory rush of all the flag waving, fireworks and general celebration of our nations hard fought victory over tyranny. Too much beer and patriotic pride and you might start thinking we really are the land of the free.

 

[countryclubjoe]

The state of NJ does not even acknowledge the 2nd amendment in their own state constitution...

Only criminals have guns in NJ oh yes and the cops too... That makes me feel safe.

CCJ

 

[Midwest]

The state of NJ does not even acknowledge the 2nd amendment in their own state constitution...

Only criminals have guns in NJ oh yes and the cops too... That makes me feel safe.

CCJ

Once source lays the blame at New Jersey's 1947 Constitutional Convention.

http://conservativenewjersey.com/handguns-banned-in-new-jersey


"the Second Amendment does not really apply to New Jersey. Delegates to the 1947 New Jersey Constitutional Convention believed that the right of the people to keep and bear arms was so obvious and universally accepted that they did not include it the wording in our state Constitution - a presumptive error of epic proportions."


Also the 1968 famous ruling of Burton vs. Sills

"Since the 1960’s, case law in New Jersey has determined that the right to keep and bear arms is a “collective” right belonging to the National Guard, and is not an “individual” right (Burton v. Sills , 53 N.J. 86 , 91 [1968])" http://www.titleii.com/bardwell/burton_v_sills.txt


The Burton Vs Sills yielded this ruling from NJ justices.

"Reasonable gun control legislation
is clearly within the police power of the State and must be
accepted by the individual though it may impose a restraint or
burden on him. On balance, the interests of the State are
manifestly paramount, and while New Jersey's comprehensive efforts
may not prove to be wholly successful until suitably joined by
other jurisdictions, they will undoubtedly have advanced the public
welfare by having led the way. "

"Public Welfare" (whatever that means) is more important in New Jersey than your Second Amendment Rights as a U.S. citizen according to this ruling it appears. It seems that the interests of the State (of New Jersey) are more important than your individual rights according to this ruling. The ruling also seems to say that imposing restrictions in individuals must be accepted under police powers of the state.

 

[FTG-05]

How is anyone unaware of the draconian gun laws in NY, NJ, MD, DC, CA, HI and IL in this day and age what with the easy availability of the internet? I have sympathy for the guy but come on, how can you not know or take the time to find out the laws in places to which you are traveling? This isn't like he just took a wrong turn and ended up in Jersey accidentally or lived nearby and assumed the laws were the same. He traveled hundreds of miles through several states and apparently was oblivious to the fact that not every state has the same CC laws as NC.

No offense, but I'm going to have to go with this. There's simply no excuse for not knowing the gun laws in NJ prior to him entering the state. He thought he could get away with it, wouldn't be caught, the laws wouldn't apply to him - whatever. Not a whole lot of sympathy.

 

[press1280]

No offense, but I'm going to have to go with this. There's simply no excuse for not knowing the gun laws in NJ prior to him entering the state. He thought he could get away with it, wouldn't be caught, the laws wouldn't apply to him - whatever. Not a whole lot of sympathy.

I can agree somewhat but I'd also add this is why you don't offer up any unnecessary info to cops, especially in Jersey.

He should be trying to get the PTI deal, which as I understand would restore his rights. They gave it to Ray Rice, who cold cocked his wife in public, so why shouldn't this guy get it?

 

[countryclubjoe]

Once source lays the blame at New Jersey's 1947 Constitutional Convention.

http://conservativenewjersey.com/handguns-banned-in-new-jersey


"the Second Amendment does not really apply to New Jersey. Delegates to the 1947 New Jersey Constitutional Convention believed that the right of the people to keep and bear arms was so obvious and universally accepted that they did not include it the wording in our state Constitution - a presumptive error of epic proportions."


Also the 1968 famous ruling of Burton vs. Sills

"Since the 1960’s, case law in New Jersey has determined that the right to keep and bear arms is a “collective” right belonging to the National Guard, and is not an “individual” right (Burton v. Sills , 53 N.J. 86 , 91 [1968])" http://www.titleii.com/bardwell/burton_v_sills.txt


The Burton Vs Sills yielded this ruling from NJ justices.

"Reasonable gun control legislation
is clearly within the police power of the State and must be
accepted by the individual though it may impose a restraint or
burden on him. On balance, the interests of the State are
manifestly paramount, and while New Jersey's comprehensive efforts
may not prove to be wholly successful until suitably joined by
other jurisdictions, they will undoubtedly have advanced the public
welfare by having led the way. "

"Public Welfare" (whatever that means) is more important in New Jersey than your Second Amendment Rights as a U.S. citizen according to this ruling it appears. It seems that the interests of the State (of New Jersey) are more important than your individual rights according to this ruling. The ruling also seems to say that imposing restrictions in individuals must be accepted under police powers of the state.

I wonder how the Supreme Court would have ruled on Burton v Sills? Amazing that the case never made it to supreme court... Clearly a constitutional 2nd Amendment issue and one that I believe would have won at the supreme court level, and therefore changing the draconian gun laws in NJ.

My .02

Thank you for the great post.

CCJ

 

[Citizen]

SNIP "Public Welfare" (whatever that means) is more important in New Jersey than your Second Amendment Rights as a U.S. citizen according to this ruling it appears. It seems that the interests of the State (of New Jersey) are more important than your individual rights according to this ruling. The ruling also seems to say that imposing restrictions in individuals must be accepted under police powers of the state.

The court is using a fool's argument: rights vs safety.

Actually, the real situation is a very good bit different: rights are safety.

I would argue that anytime government tries to weigh rights vs safety, it is getting ready to trick you into accepting the elimination or reduction of some right/safety.