Feel like my constitutional rights are being infringed.

[LiveLife]

"Feel like"?

No. I live in California and my gun rights HAVE BEEN infringed for every (Insert your favorite adjective here) one of 40 years I have lived here.

 

[SharpDog]

Hello, I think this is the first firearm forum I’ve ever joined....

I’ve spent a lot of time lurking as I research State firearm laws so figured I might as well join.

I know I’m likely preaching to the choir here but the way I’m feeling right now warranted a post. I retired from the Army a little while back and decided to take a nationwide “tour” of the US; basically see and experience the country I’ve spent my life defending. I am a Florida CCW holder and NRA member.

As I travel between states, I always have to research State gun laws to ensure compliance wherever I go. So the next state I’m exploring is New Jersey and while researching that state, I couldn’t help but feel very strongly that my 2nd Amendment rights are being infringed. Basically I had to unload and lock my CC weapon and separate the magazines, rendering it absolutely useless. Being I carry an FN FiveSeven, the 20rd magazines are illegal to even posses in the state of New Jersey. So from the way I read the law, I’m committing a crime just having them. Additionally, I train monthly with my firearm. Apparently I cannot train in N.J either....

How does this happen? Is New Jersey not a part of the United States? Does The Constitution not apply in a state like this? I’m a bit confused and the first feeling I had was that my rights are being infringed here. Rights I spent my life defending and putting my a$$ on the line for. I’m a highly trained and experienced law abiding citizen who takes my responsibilities as a CCW holder very seriously so this feels very foreign to me.

I’m not trying to rile people up but this just feels wrong.

At this point I’m considering just not visiting New Jersey because I’m fearful of what could happen if by chance I get a vehicle search or something. God forbid I get into an accident. I’d prefer not to end up in handcuffs.

Thoughts?

IMHO, I'm originally from the northeast and know some beautiful places in NW NJ. However, in the current political climate whether it's jobs, taxes or 2A or anything else, there's no reason to visit NJ.

 

[APSolo]

Well that settles it then. I’m on a nationwide road trip so “leaving it at home” isn’t an option because there is no home. Just cancelled my next hotel booking, cost me $80 and I’m heading to Ohio in the morning. At least I got to hike a bit today. So much for NJ. It would appear that I’ll just have to scratch the 13 or so States that don’t follow the Constitution off my travel list. So much for the fifty stars on our flag. Admittedly I’ve seen more police in the last 24 hours than I’ve seen in the last six months, combined with what I learned here; being paranoid takes the fun right out of it. Freedom......right.

Thanks everybody.

 

[<*(((><]

Well that settles it then. I’m on a nationwide road trip so “leaving it at home” isn’t an option because there is no home. Just cancelled my next hotel booking, cost me $80 and I’m heading to Ohio in the morning. At least I got to hike a bit today. So much for NJ. It would appear that I’ll just have to scratch the 13 or so States that don’t follow the Constitution off my travel list. So much for the fifty stars on our flag. Admittedly I’ve seen more police in the last 24 hours than I’ve seen in the last six months, combined with what I learned here; being paranoid takes the fun right out of it. Freedom......right.

Thanks everybody.

It feels better spending money in free states anyways. Enjoy your road trip! Be safe! And if trouble finds you you'll have your standard capacity magazines with 20 rounds to help see you through.

 

[rpenmanparker]

I get such a kick out of someone saying that so and so state doesn’t follow the Constitution when the single authority on the question, the SC, apparently feels otherwise. Why do gun enthusiasts believe they have a particularly cogent and correct understanding of the 2A, even more learned than that of the established authorities on the subject? Or is it just a way of speaking?

 

[<*(((><]

I get such a kick out of someone saying that so and so state doesn’t follow the Constitution when the single authority on the question, the SC, apparently feels otherwise. Why do gun enthusiasts believe they have a particularly cogent and correct understanding of the 2A, even more learned than that of the established authorities on the subject? Or is it just a way of speaking?

Shall not be infringed!

But the first amendment entitles you to your own opinion.

 

[APSolo]

You know it’s funny (not really), when I just discussed my new travel plans with some friends in Texas, the first response was “well can’t you just travel without your gun?”. My thoughts are this- In January i was staying at a seedy motel (I’m retired military so I’m not rich) and at 2am there was someone beating on my door. By the time i got up there was a fight in the parking lot between two what sounded like drug dealers (based on what they were saying)..apparently one of them beat on every door until he found the guy he wanted to fight. No police. I slept fully clothed with my FN in my lap that night and checked out the next day. So yes, I need to travel with my firearm. I felt and slept perfectly safe because I knew anyone coming through that door wouldn’t make it very far. I can’t even imagine how I would have felt without it.

Is what it is I suppose. I’m not a paranoid kind of guy, quite normal actually, it’s just by the very nature of what I’m doing right now it puts me outside of the comfort and safety of “home” and perhaps increases my risk for robbery, assault ect.

Not sure how I really feel about all this but suffice to say I’m not happy about it. I’m learning new things on this road trip so I guess I can add all this to “things I’ve learned”......

 

[ATLDave]

Shall not be infringed!

But the first amendment entitles you to your own opinion.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions about what the constitution means. When you are standing in front of the judge wearing an orange jumpsuit, the only one that matters is his/hers... and their opinion will be largely based on what those other people wearing black robes got 5 votes for.

 

[<*(((><]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions about what the constitution means. When you are standing in front of the judge wearing an orange jumpsuit, the only one that matters is his/hers... and their opinion will be largely based on what those other people wearing black robes got 5 votes for.

Totally agree, but doesn't make their interpretation/opinion of the Constitution correct. They are just humans, like you and me; prone to error. But the bailiff does seem to give the judge's orders more credence than those standing/sitting on the other side of the bench.

Anyways, hope the OP the best in his travels, this still is a great nation.

 

[TheOmordha]

AP,

Good luck with your trip. The Second Amendment of the Constitution guarantees your right to possess arms. That is what you and I fought for. The Constitution also grants States their rights. Some states like Hawaii & New Jersey do not want to have guns in the hands of its citizens. Just do not go there. Deprive those states of your presence and capital. Do not buy things from those states even on the Internet. Actively encourage people to boycott those states and to be active in speaking out about those states. Use this forum and others to provide up to the minute and accurate summaries by state which prohibit your chosen travel guns.

 

[APSolo]

“
I get such a kick out of someone saying that so and so state doesn’t follow the Constitution when the single authority on the question, the SC, apparently feels otherwise. Why do gun enthusiasts believe they have a particularly cogent and correct understanding of the 2A, even more learned than that of the established authorities on the subject? Or is it just a way of speaking?”

It’s pretty cut and dried.

The problem with the “established authorities” is that they’ve been politicized- both ways.

I wasn’t upset that I can’t CC in NJ. What bothers me is that even properly secured, basically within two locked containers, separated from everything- magazines, ammo ect..that I’m basically committing a felony just being here. I understood my CCP was not reciprocated here. What I DIDN’T know was that I can’t even own that stuff (20rd mag) and have it secured in a locked container while visiting. I’m not a NJ resident and it’s totally harmless locked up where it is. If I was staying here then yes, I’d have to get rid of it. But transient???? That bothers me.....A lot. Basically I’m banned from entering New Jersey, which the last time I checked was part of the union. However there are much bigger issues that have resulted in all of this. My undergrad was Poly Sci so I’d be happy to civilly discuss it with you.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Shall not be infringed!

But the first amendment entitles you to your own opinion.

So what is infringed? In other words what is substantially undermined? If it were truly that simple, if the words were not open to interpretation, why would there be a SC?

 

[ATLDave]

Totally agree, but doesn't make their interpretation/opinion of the Constitution correct. They are just humans, like you and me; prone to error. But the bailiff does seem to give the judge's orders more credence than those standing/sitting on the other side of the bench.

Robert Jackson has become one of the most underrated Supreme Court Justices of the last 150 years. In speaking of the Supreme Court's position as the final arbiter of great constitutional and federal legal questions, "We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final."

Most, if not all, supreme court justices would absolutely agree with the notion that they may be mistaken from time to time. I know quite a few judges (including some state supreme court justices, though none of the ones on the U.S. Sup Ct), and not one of them would profess to be beyond error or fault.

But someone has to have the final word.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Robert Jackson has become one of the most underrated Supreme Court Justices of the last 150 years. In speaking of the Supreme Court's position as the final arbiter of great constitutional and federal legal questions, "We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final."

Most, if not all, supreme court justices would absolutely agree with the notion that they may be mistaken from time to time. I know quite a few judges (including some state supreme court justices, though none of the ones on the U.S. Sup Ct), and not one of them would profess to be beyond error or fault.

But someone has to have the final word.

There is no right or wrong. To even mention the concept of right or wrong is meaningless. There is only the authorized decision of the court. It is so simple. Why must it be made out to be hard?

 

[APSolo]

Imagine if the 1st A was as restricted and “interpreted” as much as the 2nd. Oh wait, hate speech! Lmao. Never mind.

 

[rpenmanparker]

“
I get such a kick out of someone saying that so and so state doesn’t follow the Constitution when the single authority on the question, the SC, apparently feels otherwise. Why do gun enthusiasts believe they have a particularly cogent and correct understanding of the 2A, even more learned than that of the established authorities on the subject? Or is it just a way of speaking?”

It’s pretty cut and dried.

The problem with the “established authorities” is that they’ve been politicized- both ways.

I wasn’t upset that I can’t CC in NJ. What bothers me is that even properly secured, basically within two locked containers, separated from everything- magazines, ammo ect..that I’m basically committing a felony just being here. I understood my CCP was not reciprocated here. What I DIDN’T know was that I can’t even own that stuff (20rd mag) and have it secured in a locked container while visiting. I’m not a NJ resident and it’s totally harmless locked up where it is. If I was staying here then yes, I’d have to get rid of it. But transient???? That bothers me.....A lot. Basically I’m banned from entering New Jersey, which the last time I checked was part of the union. However there are much bigger issues that have resulted in all of this. My undergrad was Poly Sci so I’d be happy to civilly discuss it with you.

Do you realize what you are doing? You are arguing with a law. Could there be a more absurd activity?

 

[APSolo]

You are correct. However I’m not arguing with the law. I’m saying it’s wrong. And I’m leaving NJ because of it. Settled.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Man you guys have me paranoid now. More than I was. I’m doing like 56 in 55 zones. I came up with the a simple solution, the most likely area I’d run into the police is on the road. What I do is get a hotel, then hike the local areas. So I’ll just secure everything in it’s locked steel box in a locked suitcase in my room. That way when I’m driving around to parks, the most likely area to have an issue, I’ll be fine. The Ranger that got in trouble left his loaded gun in his hotel room when he checked out......it happens...I’ll ensure i don’t make that mistake and it’ll stay in my suitcase, unloaded. Perfect? Of course not but nothing ever is. I think it’s the best solution. Whenever it is actually In the car, again, locked and separated, I’ll actually “be” in transit and if punch comes to shove they can escort me right out of the state to ensure compliance lol.

If you really want to find fault with NJ laws, pick one that really matters like not being allowed to pump your own gas. Now THAT is truly terrible.

 

[ATLDave]

There is no right or wrong. To even mention the concept of right or wrong is meaningless. There is only the authorized decision of the court.

That goes quite a bit further than most judges would be willing to go. Certainly advocates who are arguing to a court urge their preferred interpretation/analysis/outcome as "right" or "correct," and critique the other side's alternative as "wrong" or "incorrect." From time to time, a court (including the Supreme Court) will reverse or abrogate an older decision, and will often call it "wrongly decided."

To say that there is no truth... well, one need not go that far down the deconstructionist/realist rabbit hole to recognize that, aside from some philosophical correctness, predicting judicial outcomes is less about what a criminal defendant or his internet buddies this is correct than what the judge will think is correct. And prior judicial decisions are generally the best basis for making that prediction.

 

[APSolo]

This could very easily go into a Federal Law vs State Law discussion. At what point does the Constitution not apply? But then again, you brought the interpretation of the Constitution into it. And you’re correct. The very faults of our own perspectives come into play too. A bigger issue could be presented as “The Constitution, being a written document that all states agreed to, should be respected across the land”. It does not say, you have the right to keep and bear arms, except in New Jersey.....

 

[ATLDave]

If you really want to find fault with NJ laws, pick one that really matters like not being allowed to pump your own gas. Now THAT is truly terrible.

It won't be long before our societal choice is between those kind of make-work laws, universal basic income/welfare, and complete dystopian collapse!

 

[APSolo]

Anyway, my input at this point is academic. Interesting discussion. I’m leaving NJ and not coming back anytime soon. I was upset for a moment but I’m over it. Lots of other places to go.

 

[ATLDave]

This could very easily go into a Federal Law vs State Law discussion. At what point does the Constitution not apply? But then again, you brought the interpretation of the Constitution into it. And you’re correct. The very faults of our own perspectives come into play too. A bigger issue could be presented as “The Constitution, being a written document that all states agreed to, should be respected across the land”. It does not say, you have the right to keep and bear arms, except in New Jersey.....

The question of whether an individual constitutional right applies against state laws is the question of whether that right was "incorporated" within the due process clause of the 14th amendment. McDonald found that the 2nd amendment does apply against the states.

But there is no recognition in the federal case law that you have a constitutional right vis-a-vis the federal government to own a 20 round magazine or to take firearms with you when you travel.

So, no, this is not primarily a question of federal-vs-state. It's the question of whether the 2nd amendment covers your preferred gear and travel arrangements.

 

[APSolo]

Apply that train of thought to the 1st A. You can say “boy, man, girl and lasagna” in Maryland but if you travel to Pennsylvania, it’s a felony to say man.....

 

[ATLDave]

Apply that train of thought to the 1st A. You can say “boy, man, girl and lasagna” in Maryland but if you travel to Pennsylvania, it’s a felony to say man.....

Oh, I personally agree. The idea of banning specific items that are most often used in compliance with the law because they are sometimes used in a violation of the law is pretty silly. We don't have much confusion about whether the 1st amendment would permit us to outright ban the word "robbery" just because someone might use it in a sentence "this is a robbery" and thereby obtain money through threat of force. But many, many people don't think there's anything questionable about taking the same approach with regard to guns.

But my opinion matters very little. I think we're "right," and someday courts might agree. But probably not yet. All the rightness in the world is cold comfort in a jail cell.