Is this the perfect gun case defendant?

[BSA1]

Double Naught Spy,

In Kansas there has been a 180 degree turn around in the gun laws. We now have very pro-gun laws on the State and local level (which makes the Liberals on the local level angry since they can't pass gun bans).

Frankly I consider having to get a purchase permit from the State, having to registered your firearms with their serial numbers with the Government and having restrictions when you can even transport your gun like N.J. as unconstitutional. Why the citizens put up with it is beyond me.

As for the people you named what about them?

You sound like a stand up type of guy. You go to work, try raise your children right and trust the Government. You probably believe that despite all of the complaining and scandals the Government is there to help you and has your best interests at heart.

All I can tell you is you and most Americans have no clue how disfunctional Government is. I speak with some authority as I worked in Government for over two decades.

I make no secret that I distrust the Federal Government but I'm not alone in my belief. edited; just 13% of Americans believe the government can be trusted to do what is right always or most of the time, three-quarters say only some of the time and 1in 10 saying they never trust the government. I guess I'm not radical at all.


One only has to study Socialism to gain a understanding of how strict gun laws can (and probably will) be used against citizens.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Double Naught Spy,

In Kansas there has been a 180 degree turn around in the gun laws. We now have very pro-gun laws on the State and local level (which makes the Liberals on the local level angry since they can't pass gun bans).

This isn't about Kansas. Kansas law is not relevant to NJ law.

Frankly I consider having to get a purchase permit from the State, having to registered your firearms with their serial numbers with the Government and having restrictions when you can even transport your gun like N.J. as unconstitutional. Why the citizens put up with it is beyond me.

I believe it is beyond you.

As for the people you named what about them?

The laws are just as stupid for them, but very few folks are worried about their dispositions.

You sound like a stand up type of guy. You go to work, try raise your children right and trust the Government. You probably believe that despite all of the complaining and scandals the Government is there to help you and has your best interests at heart.

Compliments and your sentiments about my life are not relevant to the case.

All I can tell you is you and most Americans have no clue how disfunctional Government is. I speak with some authority as I worked in Government for over two decades.

How well the government functions isn't relevant to the case.

I make no secret that I distrust the Federal Government but I'm not alone in my belief. A poll that was just announced shows 30% of Americans do not trust the Government to solve our current problems.

Your trust in the government or any polls about the government are not relevant to the case.

One only has to study Socialism to gain a understanding of how strict gun laws can (and probably will) be used against citizens.

And now it comes to this, catastrophist theory.

 

[alsaqr]

Why the citizens put up with it is beyond me.

The majority of voting citizens in NJ prefer it that way.

i had job sites in NJ for years; it's the only state where i refused to take a gun: Even managed to get a concealed carry permit in MA. Any person caught carrying a handgun in NJ is in very serious trouble.

 

[NoVA Shooter]

The majority of voting citizens in NJ prefer it that way.

That's not necessarily true. Representatives don't always vote based on the majority view of their constituents. Especially when you take it to a micro level. Also, even if a majority of people voted for this law, that doesn't mean they understand the nuances, how it's applied, or even what the law does. They may have been sold on the 'cliffs notes' version of the law designed to garner the most support, and didn't realize the true scope until now. That's why this case will hopefully awaken the people of NJ to the true nature of these types of laws.

 

[alsaqr]

The results of a poll of registered NJ voters:

Three-quarters (76%) of registered voters in the Garden State favor greater restrictions on guns and ammunition.

The only proposal offered to reduce gun violence in society that garners more support is instituting more proactive mental illness measures (93%). Rounding out the list of measures with majority support is reducing the level of violence in movies and video games (61%).

Read More: NJ's Residents Want Stiffer Gun Restrictions | http://nj1015.com/nj-voters-want-crackdown-on-gun-violence-pollaudio/?trackback=tsmclip

http://nj1015.com/nj-voters-want-crackdown-on-gun-violence-pollaudio/

 

[texasgun]

"usmarine0352_2005
Member


Join Date: October 21, 2005
Posts: 2,552
I hope the people that are hard on her are just as hard as the US Marine who accidently drove into Mexico and has been in a Mexican jail for months."

accidentally drove into Mexico with a AR15, shotgun and .45 pistol in his trunk and accidentally forgot to declare that at the border crossing and accidentally oversaw the numerous warnings "dont take guns with you" on the US side of the border..... yeah.... because that's the same

 

[BSA1]

Double Naught Spy,

Your comments are well taken. I am just somewhat amazed in the vast differences in attitudes and laws between Eastern States and the Midwest.

You are correct that some things are beyond me. Heck I'm just a dumb ole farm boy.

I hope you will tolerate my ignorance and point out my mistakes when I make them.

 

[MagnunJoe]

I wonder what Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton (2 gun haters) will say about this.

 

[Willie Sutton]

I hope the people that are hard on her are just as hard as the US Marine who accidently drove into Mexico and has been in a Mexican jail for months."



Facts are facts, and these are the facts: If a MEXICAN came into the USA with illegal firearms, and was caught, and jailed, *we* would tell the Mexicans to stuff it if they "demanded" his release.

Good for the goose, good for the gander... he's not an object of my sympathy.

And I'm sorry for the lady that was caught in NJ. I lived there, and I can see it happening. In the end I bet she gets PTI. But it'll be drawn out for a while first. Part of the "plan" in NJ is to terrify the poplulace. One way to do that is to throw someome like her under the bus now and then, or at least give the impression of doing so.

Willie

.

 

[200Apples]

.

And I'm sorry for the lady that was caught in NJ. I lived there, and I can see it happening. In the end I bet she gets PTI. But it'll be drawn out for a while first. Part of the "plan" in NJ is to terrify the poplulace. One way to do that is to throw someome like her under the bus now and then, or at least give the impression of doing so.

Again, Mr. Sutton is right on the money.

The latest from the NRA-ILA web page <--- link

 

[bushmaster1313]

She was in New Jersey on purpose.
She knew she had a loaded gun.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Her only hope in New Jersey is jury nullification or a pardon by Christie.

 

[long range shooter texas]

gun rights

I just hope nothing happens to her when she finally gets to come home,and in her home state she is well protected.

 

[geim druth]

Luckily, she has a great lawyer.
Please donate to her legal defense.
http://gogetfunding.com/project/shaneen-allen-legal-defense-fund

 

[BSA1]

The $31,000 raised so far is much to low as she is going to need money for appeal if she is convicted and to fight appeal from the State if they lose. Frankly the deck is stacked against her on the local level as the Judges are almost sure to be anti-gun Democrats.

Not sure if this is a Supreme Court case but it might reach the Federal Appeal Courts.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

In my opinion, the state ought to drop this case to keep it out of the court system. It has potential to reach the Supremes. In my heart and head, I hope they don't drop it because it does have potential to reach the Supremes. (I'd wager the Supremes have already formed opinions for if and when this reaches them.)

Woody

 

[Willie Sutton]

^^ Uhh.... no.

This is an open and closed case under NJ Statute. No constitutional aspect involved.

Only bad press will influence anyone in the offices there. PTI is about all she can hope for.

She does have an excellent lawyer.


Willie

.

 

[BBQJOE]

I feel bad for the woman.
I find it hard to believe she didn't know the law, but upon investigation, PA does not require any training nor a course to obtain a carry permit.
Many states recognize NJ, but NJ recognizes no one.

But I'm just dumbfounded that they don't require classes. Realistically, no one should have to have a permit to carry, this we all pretty much agree on, I think. But, I have to say that I learned so much about laws pertaining to carrying from the class I had to take, that I think it should be required for everyone, even just the simple things, such as when to fire and when to absolutely not fire etc.

If there had been a course in place, you can bet your bottom dollar that any good instructor would have pounded it home not to carry in Jersey.

So I'm on the fence whether she knew better or not.

 

[BSA1]

Another viewpoint to consider is many folks look to the Police to inform and educate them about the law without fear of being arrested.

(Well with incidents like this maybe not quite as many).

How does this build trust in talking to the Police if there is a possibility (probability) of being arrest if the issue you are inquiring about is illegal?

For example marijuana grows wild around where I live. It is very common to see it growing in roadside ditches and the County does not even brother to control (spray) it. So not being very knowledgeable I cut some, show it to a LEO and ask them what it is. Well I'm in possession of a illegal substance and as bushmaster1313 says "ignorance of the law is no excuse."

Is this the America you want to live in?

 

[Sam1911]

I find it hard to believe she didn't know the law, but upon investigation, PA does not require any training nor a course to obtain a carry permit.

1st off, she knew or she didn't know -- doesn't really matter to anyone. The courts don't care. "I didn't know" doesn't help her case.

But I'm just dumbfounded that they don't require classes. Realistically, no one should have to have a permit to carry, this we all pretty much agree on, I think.

So, does your home state of AZ require classes before they issue...

...Now wait just one cotton-pickin' minute! I'm dumbfounded that AZ doesn't even require a permit at all! How would you know not to carry in NJ?

But, I have to say that I learned so much about laws pertaining to carrying from the class I had to take,

What class did you have to take? AZ hasn't required a permit to carry since 2010. Must have been before that.

...that I think it should be required for everyone, even just the simple things, such as when to fire and when to absolutely not fire etc.

You think a CCW class can teach when to fire and when to absolutely not fire? How? That's about the most complicated and potentially disastrous question they could try to provide an solid answer to.

They could teach a little bit about the law and how it does work, but I can't imagine a class being able to definitively specify when you can (or must) shoot and when you can't (or must not) except in the broadest terms. Most classes I'm familiar with go into statutory details like which places are prohibited and the easy stuff like that, but will shy away from trying to tell someone when they CAN shoot someone else. A good course might have a few hypothetical situations at the kindergarten level, but the final decision to pull the trigger, or not to, no one else can really make but the shooter.

If there had been a course in place, you can bet your bottom dollar that any good instructor would have pounded it home not to carry in Jersey.

The only state-dictated course I've had to take was Utah's, and I don't recall a single minute (of about 8 hours) spent going over any other state's laws.

 

[BBQJOE]

Sam, with all due respect, I did take AZ's CCW class quite a few years ago. Back then it was 16 hours over two days. There was a written exam as well as a firearm proficiency test.
I believe I had a stellar instructor. Mostly discussed was law, and many what if scenario's. We also discussed the reciprocity of other states concerning our permits.
Many people taking the course were astounded that you can't shoot a guy in the back going out the door with your TV. Common sense stuff that isn't so common to others. Things like this are a good thing to know, and I believe a course teaching these things is a good thing.
Let me reiterate, they didn't say, ok in this scenario go ahead and shoot, and in this one don't. You can't teach that, but you can have a better understanding of how the law might or might not work in certain situations if they're presented and talked through.


The fact that she didn't know, as you said, doesn't matter to the courts, but again I offer if there was a mandatory course in place, she may have known better. Her life may just be ruined for committing an unconstitutional victim-less crime.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

^^ Uhh.... no.

This is an open and closed case under NJ Statute. No constitutional aspect involved.

Only bad press will influence anyone in the offices there. PTI is about all she can hope for.

She does have an excellent lawyer.


Willie

.

Of course there is a constitutional issue involved: The infringement upon her Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Woody

 

[Willie Sutton]

^^

Uhh....No.

Nothing in this particular case has anything to do with any constitutional questions.

1: The rights of each state to regulate the carriage of firearms within its own jurisdiction is not under debate. Can't challenge that.

2: NJ "Does" provide a mechanism to apply for a permit to carry a handgun. This woman did not so apply. No case there.

3: NJ does not recognize other states permits, and has no obligation to do so. No case there.


So... nope. No case for SCOTUS to consider.

Bottom line: In regards to other than reciting the tried and true feel-good knee-jerk phrase "It violates her rights", well... <sigh> ... it doesn't violate her rights.


Now:

The *manner* in which NJ issues (or denies) applications for handgun permits might be subject to challenge *by persons who have standing to litigate it*, but this woman did not apply for a NJ permit, and thus has no standing in any such challenge.

Bottom line: She simply violated a NJ law that's stood up to scrutiny for many many decades.



Sad but true. It's pretty open and shut really.



Willie

.

 

[Midwest]

Three-quarters (76%) of registered voters in the Garden State favor greater restrictions on guns and ammunition.

That sounds about right. New Jersey has VERY low gun ownership. You CANNOT just go to Walmart or wherever in New Jersey and pay for the rifle and pass a 5 minute NICS like in free America without the "card".

This is due to the requirement of the Firearms ID card which has to be first obtained from the Police Department. You cannot buy a rifle without that card.

So why don't more people in NJ have that card? Well, they have to apply for it at the police department and there is an $18 fee for that. They have to supply two to three references (including one from your employer in some towns).

Some towns require notarized references, then you have to get fingerprinted and there is a $65 fee for that, then there is the mental health release from the county, then there is the state background check and then the local police chief has the final say and then there is an another fee for the card. Six weeks to six months later you get the card.

Find a rifle you like? Great make sure you have the card on you, then you give the clerk your card, checks your drivers license and they call state NICS. Oh yes there is a $15 fee for state NICS and they charge tax on top of that for the NICS fee.

Want a handgun? You have to fill out another form and provide 2 to 3 references (see above), go through another mental health check, another state background check with approval from your local police chief...then six weeks to six months you might be able to buy your handgun. But remember you are only allowed to buy one handgun a month in New Jersey. And don't forget about the $15 State NICS fee and the tax for the NICS fee.

Oh Yes NJ State NICS is closed on Sundays, State and Federal Holidays (plus whenever it snows and the state govt. shuts down). Did I mention that NJ State NICS has also has limited hours compared to the federal NICS? They are only open 9am to 8pm Monday through Friday and Saturday only from 10 am to 5 pm.

http://www.shoreshotpistolrange.com/pdf/NICS.pdf

Now we know why NJ has such low gun ownership and that 76% figure is probably correct because it is a good bet that non of those 76% own any guns.
.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

The only state-dictated course I've had to take was Utah's, and I don't recall a single minute (of about 8 hours) spent going over any other state's laws.

Interesting, my instructors have stressed that you do learn the laws of other states where you might carry...in regard to reciprocity laws and that our laws are not the same as other states, but no discussion of specific other state laws. In short, the emphasis was that you need to know the law of the land where you will be or risk having problems.

But as you said, that doesn't matter. The law does not require that you have knowledge of it for it to be applicable to you.

 

[Sam1911]

Sam, with all due respect, I did take AZ's CCW class quite a few years ago. Back then it was 16 hours over two days. There was a written exam as well as a firearm proficiency test.

Fair enough. Still, the people of your state have decided that a mandatory test, or even any sort of state oversight/licensing of gun totin' folks was not worth it in the balance.

Almost all of us say that training in law, in firearms skills, and in street smarts/situational awareness, is crucial. But we will NOT say the word "mandatory," as there should be no requirements levied for exercise of a right.

I believe I had a stellar instructor.

Sounds like it. Your course was far more extensive than most . Of course, that means more expensive (for you, or for the taxpayers) and more exclusive.

Many people taking the course were astounded that you can't shoot a guy in the back going out the door with your TV. Common sense stuff that isn't so common to others. Things like this are a good thing to know, and I believe a course teaching these things is a good thing.

Oh, and we here all would bash folks right over the head with the idea that such an education is supremely important if you're going to carry a lethal weapon.

But mandatory? That's problematic for many reasons.

You can't teach that, but you can have a better understanding of how the law might or might not work in certain situations if they're presented and talked through.

Absolutely agreed!

The fact that she didn't know, as you said, doesn't matter to the courts, but again I offer if there was a mandatory course in place, she may have known better.

The sad truth is, if she REALLY didn't know and cared about the law, she could have learned THIS from one line on a mimeographed handout. Didn't even need a mandatory training course. Seems like walking a mile just to get around the corner, so to speak.

Her life may just be ruined for committing an unconstitutional victim-less crime.

Surely. Many people find themselves in that situation every day, with guns or otherwise.