Jump to content

NJ No right to own a gun for slamming doors


Tvandermyde

Recommended Posts

http://volokh.com/2010/07/19/no-guns-for-you-youve-slammed-doors-very-hard/

 

GA_googleFillSlot("VC_GEO_728");

« The Ninth Circuit Panel in Nordyke v. King Seems Open to Reconsidering Its Earlier Decision About the Second Amendment and Gun ShowsWas Senator Franken’s Election Due to Illegal Votes from Felons? »

 

No Guns for You — You’ve Slammed Doors Very Hard

Eugene Volokh • July 19, 2010 3:47 pm

 

In a few states — including New Jersey — people need a license to even get a firearm to keep at home, and the police may deny such a license if they think the person poses a danger to others. This isn’t limited to getting concealed carry licenses; it applies to having a gun in the first place. And it isn’t limited to people who have been convicted of a felony or a violent misdemeanor, or even to people who have been found by a preponderance of the evidence to have committed or threatened violent acts (that’s the standard usually used for domestic restraining orders).

 

 

 

In the Matter of Novello (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. July 15) offers a striking example of how this can be used: Novello was denied the ability to get any firearm (whether handgun or long gun) because his ex-wife says he “became angry at times, slammed doors with force and caused damage,” which made her fear him. (The wife also alleged that “Novello stated that his stomach was ‘turned’ by the idea of her having a boyfriend and he was going to get a gun,” but the trial judge expressly said “that it was difficult for him to determine whether Novello had actually threatened to kill Pissucci if she dated someone else,” so it sounds like he wasn’t relying on that.) Here’s what seems to me to be the heart of the appellate court’s analysis:

[Novello] acknowledged that he and Pissucci argued at times. He admitted that, on one occasion, he slammed a door and a piece of the door stop “snapped off.” ...

 

 

After hearing argument from counsel for the parties, the court rendered an opinion from the bench. The court noted that Pissucci’s behavior probably contributed “to the situation.” The court found that Novello’s relationship with Pissuci involved “a great deal of acrimony” and was “very argumentative[.]” The court stated that Novello and Pissucci

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I found most disturbing. The word choice of the court cannot be a coincidence.

 

The court stated that Novello and Pissucci

trigger each other into verbal arguments. They trigger each other into losing their temper. They trigger each other so that doors are slammed. They trigger each other so that doors are slammed and broken. They trigger each other so that the wife is now fearful [that] if he gets a gun ... she is going to be killed.

:frantics:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this mean we have to ban doors now too? :frantics:

 

Part 2 of the story by David B. Kopel in the ISRA's Illinois Shooter, states "It is worth remembering that until 1966, New Jersey had many fewer anti-gun laws than Montana has today."

 

Sounds about like Illinois' time frame. The difference we did not sink so low and started back up the cliff a few years ago. NJ I believe has hit bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this mean we have to ban doors now too? :frantics:

 

Part 2 of the story by David B. Kopel in the ISRA's Illinois Shooter, states "It is worth remembering that until 1966, New Jersey had many fewer anti-gun laws than Montana has today."

 

Sounds about like Illinois' time frame. The difference we did not sink so low and started back up the cliff a few years ago. NJ I believe has hit bottom.

I was reading some posts on the New Jersey forum at Opencarry.org. A fellow was moving there from Wisconsin and here is some advice he got. Other than advice given often to those proposing a move to Illinois, "Don't move here!"

 

One person advized- Don't bring up guns and the fact that you own or enjoy them with your neighbors or co-workers. I found this out long before I even owned a gun that civilian gun ownership is unacceptable in many circles -- you could be regarded as a psychopath, especiallyy if you live in suburban developments. Not everywhere is like this, but I'd tread lightly.

 

A guy who worked for my company got in trouble for talking about his hunting rifles because it made people uncomfortable (because, you can't trust a man with a rifle, he might KEEL YOU)

 

 

Someone said "I had a clean record and it to 13 months to get a permit to p;urchase a handgun. You have to have a permit to buy ammo. Possession of a pellet gun warrants a mandatory 3 year jail sentence.

 

Someone mentioned an interview with Governor Christy where he was asked his stand on 2A rights he said he supports the right of citizens to bear arms for protection and sporting purposes, but said the existing laws are going to stay in effect and he proposes no changes and he will prosecute firearm misuse to he fullest extent. That is surprising seeing the recent sentance for a gun owner who was arrested for taking firearms into NJ when he moved.

 

The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a suit in US District Court against several NJ officials for deprivation of civil rights under color of law. SAF is joined in the lawsuit b the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, and 6 private citizens whose applications for permits to carry have been denied, generally on the grounds they have not shown "sufficient need". One of the plaintiffs is a kidnap victim, another a part-time sheriff's deputy, a third carrys large amounts of cash in his private business, and another is a civilian employee of the FBI who is fearful of an attack from a radical Islamic fundementalist group.

 

Does Governor Christy know about the suit? Right there is some evidence that the laws need to be changed. 3 judges are named in the suit, in New Jersey a judge has a say in your getting a LTC, those it is issued by the state police. More evidence on why Illinois needs shall issue when we get LTC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://volokh.com/2010/07/19/no-guns-for-you-youve-slammed-doors-very-hard/

 

GA_googleFillSlot("VC_GEO_728");

« The Ninth Circuit Panel in Nordyke v. King Seems Open to Reconsidering Its Earlier Decision About the Second Amendment and Gun ShowsWas Senator Franken’s Election Due to Illegal Votes from Felons? »

 

No Guns for You — You’ve Slammed Doors Very Hard

Eugene Volokh • July 19, 2010 3:47 pm

 

In a few states — including New Jersey — people need a license to even get a firearm to keep at home, and the police may deny such a license if they think the person poses a danger to others. This isn’t limited to getting concealed carry licenses; it applies to having a gun in the first place. And it isn’t limited to people who have been convicted of a felony or a violent misdemeanor, or even to people who have been found by a preponderance of the evidence to have committed or threatened violent acts (that’s the standard usually used for domestic restraining orders).

 

 

 

In the Matter of Novello (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. July 15) offers a striking example of how this can be used: Novello was denied the ability to get any firearm (whether handgun or long gun) because his ex-wife says he “became angry at times, slammed doors with force and caused damage,” which made her fear him. (The wife also alleged that “Novello stated that his stomach was ‘turned’ by the idea of her having a boyfriend and he was going to get a gun,” but the trial judge expressly said “that it was difficult for him to determine whether Novello had actually threatened to kill Pissucci if she dated someone else,” so it sounds like he wasn’t relying on that.) Here’s what seems to me to be the heart of the appellate court’s analysis:

[Novello] acknowledged that he and Pissucci argued at times. He admitted that, on one occasion, he slammed a door and a piece of the door stop “snapped off.” ...

 

 

After hearing argument from counsel for the parties, the court rendered an opinion from the bench. The court noted that Pissucci’s behavior probably contributed “to the situation.” The court found that Novello’s relationship with Pissuci involved “a great deal of acrimony” and was “very argumentative[.]” The court stated that Novello and Pissucci

 

 

 

When I read stories like this, it makes my heart feel good.

 

signed:

 

Confirmed bachelor, single and loving it............. :frantics:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone mentioned an interview with Governor Christy where he was asked his stand on 2A rights he said he supports the right of citizens to bear arms for protection and sporting purposes, but said the existing laws are going to stay in effect and he proposes no changes and he will prosecute firearm misuse to he fullest extent. That is surprising seeing the recent sentance for a gun owner who was arrested for taking firearms into NJ when he moved.

 

Maybe we could talk Mayor Emanuel into moving his city to New Jersey. That way Chicago would have tougher gun laws and Illinois would get rid of it's Hemorrihoid!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...