TexasCHLforum.com

srothstein wrote:C-dub. The problem is that the FOPA specifies while in transit and legal at both ends. When he drove to the hotel (or took a cab) he had an intermediate destination (not his plan) where the firearm was illegal. When he left the hotel again in the morning, he was beginning a new trip (in the eyes of the court) and FOPA did not apply because it was not legal in the jurisdiction at the start of the trip. When he checked the gun in, he effectively confessed to TSA that he was in violation of local law with no federal protection overriding it.

A smart lawyer might be able to have gotten the confession excluded since it was taken under duress. He was forced, against his will and by threat of federal law - including knowing a search was about to occur, to tell the airline and TSA about the weapon. This makes it duress and everything after it the fruit of the poisoned tree.

But his lawyer tried to argue the sensible thing instead. Lawyers should know better. Argue the weird applications of the law because the law does not allow for common sense.

Sorry it took me so long to get back here.
Isn't there the ability to transport a weapon in the state of New Jersey? That's the part that is confusing me. Don't people have the right to transport a weapon from their home, or in this case a hotel, where it is legal to possess, to another point where it is legal to possess? Even if the court decided his return to the airport the next morning was a separate trip I still don't understand what was illegal about what he did.

Is it illegal for me to drive through the state of New Jersey with my Glock unloaded and secured in a locked container in the trunk of my car? That's the part that get's me. FOPA or not, one should be able to perform this task legally. However, if I'm reading this correctly, I might be able to drive through New Jersey, but I could not stop at a hotel for the night, right? What about a gas station for gas or snacks?

This is just blowing me away.

jimlongley wrote: ...This is only one example of many arrests that have taken place in similar circumstances and that is not likely to change unless and until someone is able to get their case all the way up to SCOTUS. ...

There is a case, concerning two different incidents, heading for the SCOTUS via the Second Circuit Court of Appeals with respect to this situation. Above I linked to another thread where I discussed them. Here's a link directly to the NRA's brief on the matter: http://www.nraila.org/pdfs/torracovpany.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

C-dub wrote: Isn't there the ability to transport a weapon in the state of New Jersey? ... This is just blowing me away.

NJ requires you to have a permit to have a handgun, and I seriously doubt they make exceptions for out-of-state travellers. They certainly didn't for Revell. Also, hollowpoint bullets are illegal for non-LEO in NJ. Revell was arrested for having a handgun w/o a permit and for having hollowpoint ammunition. All the charges were dropped, but the cops kept his gun, ammo, and hard case for the next three years. That is just plain official thuggery.

There are free states. And then there are NY, NJ, IL, and CA.


Also -- Dave Hardy at Arms and the Law comments on this case, pointing to Volokh's post. Hardy says he helped draft the FOPA years ago.
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2010/ ... ection.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks, ELB, for the correction. By background, I tend to focus on the criminal side of things and completely missed that it was a civil case. I am glad to see the criminal side worked the way it was supposed to, with the DA overruling the cops and using common sense.

I have major problems with any governmental agency keeping a person's property one minute further than necessary for the evidential value. The day the charges are dropped, the cops should be required to return the property to the owner by the most expeditious means possible, including shipping it if he lives out of state (with them paying any FFL fees necessary). To do less is theft, much as everyone here agrees.

That is enough grounds for the lawsuit to proceed, in my opinion. The actual arrest may not be enough to justify since the law appears to have supported the arrest, at least in one potential interpretation. SCOTUS has long held that cops get to make mistakes on cases where the law is not clear yet. I won't argue with their logic either. We need to make sure the law is clear.

But even if the arrest was acceptable the keeping of the property is never justifiable.

srothstein wrote:Thanks, ELB, for the correction. By background, I tend to focus on the criminal side of things and completely missed that it was a civil case. ...

Volokh's post was not clearly written to show this -- and the outrageousness of NY/NJ's treatment of the FOPA (for that matter, the need for a FOPA) grabs every gunny's attention, law enforcement background or not. I didn't realize it until I read the actual Circuit Court decision linked from Volokh. I have seen Volokh's post referenced on other boards, and everyone pretty much assumes it is about Revell's defense in criminal court, rather than his suit againt the Port Authority.

ELB wrote:NJ requires you to have a permit to have a handgun, and I seriously doubt they make exceptions for out-of-state travellers. They certainly didn't for Revell. Also, hollowpoint bullets are illegal for non-LEO in NJ. Revell was arrested for having a handgun w/o a permit and for having hollowpoint ammunition. All the charges were dropped, but the cops kept his gun, ammo, and hard case for the next three years. That is just plain official thuggery.

Actually, New Jersey does not require you have a permit to OWN a handgun, only to purchase one. One way you can legally end up with a firearm in New Jersey for which you have never gotten purchase permit, is by moving there. It's also not illegal in New Jersey to own hollow point ammunition, only to USE it for self defense. So you can have it and shoot it at the range, but don't shoot anybody with it.

Thanks guys. This muddies the waters a bit and makes even harder to understand how he lost his suit. Or maybe I'm just being hard headed about it. I guess he just had either a lousy lawyer or the judge was doing some of that legislating from the bench.

ScottDLS wrote:

ELB wrote:NJ requires you to have a permit to have a handgun, and I seriously doubt they make exceptions for out-of-state travellers. They certainly didn't for Revell. Also, hollowpoint bullets are illegal for non-LEO in NJ. Revell was arrested for having a handgun w/o a permit and for having hollowpoint ammunition. All the charges were dropped, but the cops kept his gun, ammo, and hard case for the next three years. That is just plain official thuggery.

Actually, New Jersey does not require you have a permit to OWN a handgun, only to purchase one. One way you can legally end up with a firearm in New Jersey for which you have never gotten purchase permit, is by moving there. It's also not illegal in New Jersey to own hollow point ammunition, only to USE it for self defense. So you can have it and shoot it at the range, but don't shoot anybody with it.

As a general rule, NJ law makes mere possession of a handgun, even an antique one, illegal unless you have a carry (not purchase) permit. The permit statute contains some exceptions to having a carry permit -- four or five of them deal with cops and military, the rest make exemptions for having one in your own dwelling, place of business, shooting range, hunting/fishing, or travel between those places. (I found a blog for a NJ lawyer who specializes in purchase permit appeals. He says he has one, maybe two successful carry permit applications per year.)

Out-of-state travelers can only come through with firearms if they are in locked containers and kept in a compartment of the vehicles not directly accessible from the passenger compartment. Effectively this means if you stop at a NJ motel for the night and take your gun case to your room with you, you are in violation of NJ law (and their interpretation of the FOPA). This is what snagged Revell. NJSP's take on this (including what they say they tell their officers is probable cause for arrest) is here: http://www.state.nj.us/njsp/about/fire_trans.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, I should have said hollowpoints are illegal for self-defense for non-LEOs. NJ law essentially allows hollowpoints for only for hunting and target practice. The NJSP website makes it pretty clear that if you are found carrying hollowpoints, you better be on a fairly direct line between home and the target range, or going hunting -- and if you say you are hunting, you better have a hunting license. And if you are going hunting in another state, you better have a hunting license from that state already in your possession.

Revell's civil suit might be addressed by SCOTUS soon - at least as to whether it should be allowed to proceed in a lower court:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01 ... latestnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Everbody knows that New Jersey is just the sixth burough of New York City.

Apparently SCOTUS turned him down. That stinks.

http://www.kwch.com/sns-ap-supremecourt ... 8272.story" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Disappointing. But the apeal was whether he could sue the police, not for a conviction. All the charges were dropped so the courts say he wasn't harmed (except for 10 days in jail, many months facing charges, three years to get his gun and ammo back, many thousands in lawyer fees).

Courts really don't want to change "qualified immunity". Dunno why, standard is crazy highright now.

I heard about this on NRANEWS.com just after it happened and they have followed it thru the courts. I don't go there and won't!