The Glade 4.0
https://gladerebooted.net/

NJ's gun laws
https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5260
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Uncle Fester [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:09 am ]
Post subject:  NJ's gun laws

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01 ... eme-court/

Quote:
WASHINGTON -- Missed flights only inconvenience most people. A late flight landed Utah gun owner Greg Revell in jail for 10 days after he got stranded in New Jersey with an unloaded firearm he had legally checked with his luggage in Salt Lake City.

The Supreme Court could decide Tuesday whether to consider letting Revell sue Port Authority of New York and New Jersey police for arresting him on illegal possession of a firearm in New Jersey and for not returning his gun and ammunition to him for more than three years.

Lower courts have thrown out his lawsuit

Revell was flying from Salt Lake City to Allentown, Pa., on March 31, 2005, with connections in Minneapolis and Newark, N.J. He had checked his Utah-licensed gun and ammunition with his luggage in Salt Lake City and asked airport officials to deliver them both with his luggage in Allentown.

But the flight from Minneapolis to Newark was late, so Revell missed his connection to Allentown. The airline wanted to bus its passengers to Allentown, but Revell realized that his luggage had not made it onto the bus and got off. After finding his luggage had been given a final destination of Newark by mistake, Revell missed the bus. He collected his luggage, including his gun and ammunition, and decided to wait in a nearby hotel with his stuff until the next flight in the morning.

When Revell tried to check in for the morning flight, he again informed the airline officials about his gun and ammunition to have them checked through to Allentown. He was reported to the TSA, and then arrested by Port Authority police for having a gun in New Jersey without a New Jersey license.

He spent 10 days in several different jails before posting bail. Police dropped the charges a few months later. But his gun and ammunition were not returned to him until 2008.

Revell said he should not have been arrested because federal law allows licensed gun owners to take their weapons through any state as long as they are unloaded and not readily accessible to people. He said it was not his fault the airline stranded him in New Jersey by making him miss his flight and routing his luggage to the wrong destination.

Prosecutors said it doesn't matter whose fault it was: Revell was arrested in New Jersey with a readily accessible gun in his possession without a New Jersey license.

Lower courts have sympathized with Revell but refused to let him sue the police.

"We recognize that he had been placed in a difficult situation through no fault of his own," wrote Judge Kent A. Jordan of the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia. However, the law "clearly requires the traveler to part ways with his weapon and ammunition during travel; it does not address this type of interrupted journey or what the traveler is to do in this situation."

The case is Revell v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 10-236.

Author:  Rorinthas [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:41 am ]
Post subject:  NJ's gun laws

Hopefully SCOTUS will do more than let him sue and will find a way to fix the problem.

Author:  Rynar [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

Rorinthas wrote:
Hopefully SCOTUS will do more than let him sue and will find a way to fix the problem.


It isn't the judicial branch's job to do this...

Author:  Hopwin [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

Rynar wrote:
Rorinthas wrote:
Hopefully SCOTUS will do more than let him sue and will find a way to fix the problem.


It isn't the judicial branch's job to do this...

They could declare the law unconstitutional and then problem solved.

Author:  Rynar [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 9:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

Hopwin wrote:
Rynar wrote:
Rorinthas wrote:
Hopefully SCOTUS will do more than let him sue and will find a way to fix the problem.


It isn't the judicial branch's job to do this...

They could declare the law unconstitutional and then problem solved.


True, but that really doesn't reek of "finding a way to fix the problem".

If that's what Rori meant, then Mea Culpa, but it's not how I percieved it.

Author:  Arathain Kelvar [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:21 pm ]
Post subject: 

Delayed flight in Newark? NO FRIGGIN WAY

At least they dropped the charges. At least there's a piece of sanity in this mess.

Author:  Hopwin [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:40 pm ]
Post subject: 

I am really struggling to understand how this ruling doesn't violate the Full Faith and Credit clause...

Author:  Khross [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

The Second Amendment is very selective.

Author:  Hopwin [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

Khross wrote:
The Second Amendment is very selective.

I don't get it.

Author:  Khross [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

Hopwin:

Basically, when it comes to the Second Amendment and various state handled issues of gun ownership, the Full Faith and Credit Clause doesn't apply; just like the Federal Government passed a law that specifically said states didn't have to apply Full Faith and Credit to certain issues relating to homosexual relationship.

Author:  Hopwin [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 3:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

Khross wrote:
Hopwin:

Basically, when it comes to the Second Amendment and various state handled issues of gun ownership, the Full Faith and Credit Clause doesn't apply; just like the Federal Government passed a law that specifically said states didn't have to apply Full Faith and Credit to certain issues relating to homosexual relationship.

That seems more than slightly crappy.

Author:  Rorinthas [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 5:47 pm ]
Post subject: 

Rynar
Basically i meant the court saying gun owners have the "full faith" of their issuing state in such circumstances. I'm not up all the little idiosyncrises (sp.) of the gun control dynamic.

The whole not infringe but infringe thing confuses me, but theoretically the SCOTUS could rule on the 2nd amendment as written I guess. *shrugs*

Author:  zxczxcf [ Tue Jan 18, 2011 11:10 pm ]
Post subject: 

Whats the purpse for traveling wih a gun anyways? It seems like a pretty bizarre thing to do. I'm actually kind of glad that you can randomly get in trouble for these things because it makes it harder for criminals as well. Ideally nobody should be carrying a firearm.

Author:  Rorinthas [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:19 am ]
Post subject:  NJ's gun laws

Ideally yes, but this age is far from ideal. There are people out there who want deprive their fellow man of life and property. Resultantly, some folks wish to take their security into their own hands and carry as the law allows.

Author:  Hannibal [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:07 am ]
Post subject: 

How about I'm going hunting in Montana? Attending the SHOT show in Vegas? Target shooting competition in PA? Its not just firearms being used for self defense. Remember, NJ's law covers every firearm. The federal law is supposed to cover these cases, but its not like NJ hasn't done this dance before.

Author:  Khross [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

Illinois, Wisconsin, and New Jersey ...

If you are flying with a firearm or traveling with a firearm for whatever purpose, those are the 3 states you absolutely do not want to set foot in.

Author:  Kaffis Mark V [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:38 am ]
Post subject: 

Heh. And Illinois and New Jersey are huge connecting hubs.

Author:  zxczxcf [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

Rorinthas wrote:
Ideally yes, but this age is far from ideal. There are people out there who want deprive their fellow man of life and property. Resultantly, some folks wish to take their security into their own hands and carry as the law allows.


Eventuallt I don't want people to have anything thar can be potentially harmful near other people. Driver-controlled cars included. I think people getting randomly harassed for gun possession is a good deterrant.

Author:  Elmarnieh [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 9:00 am ]
Post subject: 

Including themselves, their germs?

Author:  zxczxcf [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 9:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

Elmarnieh wrote:
Including themselves, their germs?


I hope that germ issues will eventually be solved with tech. I think people should also be protected from themselves eventually, but currently there isn't a good way to do this without pissing people off too much, in addition to many other reasons.

Author:  Rorinthas [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

zxczxcf wrote:
Rorinthas wrote:
Ideally yes, but this age is far from ideal. There are people out there who want deprive their fellow man of life and property. Resultantly, some folks wish to take their security into their own hands and carry as the law allows.


Eventuallt I don't want people to have anything thar can be potentially harmful near other people. Driver-controlled cars included. I think people getting randomly harassed for gun possession is a good deterrant.


Good Luck. A man with proper training can snap your neck all by himself. then there's all kind of necessary household implements like scissors and steak knives. If I were really really determined I could strangle you with my ear buds. I think if you did the math you'd find out more people are murdered with objects of convenience and good old muscle power. Gonna get rid of those too? You can get rid of guns but you can't get rid of the fact that humans have a sinful nature that means they are willing to harm others to please themselves.

Author:  zxczxcf [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:34 pm ]
Post subject: 

Obviously. But guns additionally cause a bunch of unintended harm. They can misfire, and there are stray bullets. This is what separates them from what you mentioned. Also they are more effective for intentional harm.

Author:  Khross [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 2:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

zxczxcf wrote:
...there are stray bullets...
Lex, just to give you an idea of how rare death's by stray bullets happen to be ...

Do you know the combined deaths from stray bullets for Antietam and Gettysburg?

Author:  Aizle [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 2:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

Khross wrote:
Illinois, Wisconsin, and New Jersey ...

If you are flying with a firearm or traveling with a firearm for whatever purpose, those are the 3 states you absolutely do not want to set foot in.


What's the issue with Wisconsin? I don't recall them having super bad gun laws.

Author:  Khross [ Wed Jan 19, 2011 3:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: NJ's gun laws

Aizle wrote:
What's the issue with Wisconsin? I don't recall them having super bad gun laws.
Wisconsin honors no type of carry or transport permit issued by another state.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/