TexasCHLforum.com

http://concealednation.org/2015/07/hone ... -our-help/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not a felon yet, but it just shows how draconian NJ's laws are.

Hopefully this puts some heat on NJ's gun laws, but I'm not holding my breath.

I'm torn on this one.

He sounds like a good dude, but its pretty much common knowledge that NJ/NY is a no gun zone.

It's common knowledge on this forum and a few others, but to the population, in general, it is not.

WWCCD?

Title of the post says it all. New Jersey is a pathetic State.

Pawpaw wrote:It's common knowledge on this forum and a few others, but to the population, in general, it is not.

Perhaps. If the subject of the article had done the slightest bit of research at any point in his concealed carry process, he may have come across one of those forums.

I don't want to run the guy down, but it was preventable

Taypo wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:It's common knowledge on this forum and a few others, but to the population, in general, it is not.

Perhaps. If the subject of the article had done the slightest bit of research at any point in his concealed carry process, he may have come across one of those forums.

I don't want to run the guy down, but it was preventable

You might have missed it if you didn't read the whole article, but the gent does not have a concealed carry permit. Yeah, he SHOULD have thought about it, but responding to head thousands of miles away for a disaster response job on one hour's notice, I'll grant him that bit of Oops. Now, if NJ was just as benevolent...

What I don't get is how Christie can proclaim himself a Republican, much less a conservative Republican, with his complicity in his state's Draconian gun laws.

n5wd wrote:

Taypo wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:It's common knowledge on this forum and a few others, but to the population, in general, it is not.

Perhaps. If the subject of the article had done the slightest bit of research at any point in his concealed carry process, he may have come across one of those forums.

I don't want to run the guy down, but it was preventable

You might have missed it if you didn't read the whole article, but the gent does not have a concealed carry permit. Yeah, he SHOULD have thought about it, but responding to head thousands of miles away for a disaster response job on one hour's notice, I'll grant him that bit of Oops. Now, if NJ was just as benevolent...

What I don't get is how Christie can proclaim himself a Republican, much less a conservative Republican, with his complicity in his state's Draconian gun laws.

You're right, I interpreted the "legally obtained pistol" completely wrong.

So how often has this guy carried elsewhere without a license? No longer torn.

Back a long time ago New York Telephone Company sent a convoy of "disaster relief" trucks to one of the southern states for disaster relief. One of our guys ran off the road and flipped his bucket truck. That was when they found out that although whichever state it was recognized commercial driver's licenses for tractor trailer and that type of drivers, the requirements for operating a bucket truck were different in that state, and our lineman spent a weekend in jail before being bailed out. No one at NYTel knew there was such a requirement, much less the individual workers.

I am not surprised, a lot of friends and acquaintances were confused when Texas passed open carry, they thought we already had it.

Taypo wrote:You're right, I interpreted the "legally obtained pistol" completely wrong.

So how often has this guy carried elsewhere without a license? No longer torn.

He was not required to have a license to have a loaded gun in his vehicle back home any more than you are required to have license to have a handgun in a motor vehicle right here in Texas.

In fact, the article says:

And in almost all the states in the Southeast, he would have been perfectly fine bringing his firearm with him.

There is no indication he did anything illegal except for NJ's garbage laws.

Jumping Frog wrote:

Taypo wrote:You're right, I interpreted the "legally obtained pistol" completely wrong.

So how often has this guy carried elsewhere without a license? No longer torn.

He was not required to have a license to have a loaded gun in his vehicle back home any more than you are required to have license to have a handgun in a motor vehicle right here in Texas.

In fact, the article says:

And in almost all the states in the Southeast, he would have been perfectly fine bringing his firearm with him.

There is no indication he did anything illegal except for NJ's garbage laws.

In essence, he travelled to New Jersey to try to help people in need and got arrested for it.

jimlongley wrote:I am not surprised, a lot of friends and acquaintances were confused when Texas passed open carry, they thought we already had it.

There is the old saying that ignorance of the law is no defense, but I have also found that most people do not know the law when it concerns firearms.

Sometimes we, on the forum, forget that the majority of citizens don't know very much about the laws concerning firearms and self defense.

In my conversations with people, I have corrected many misconceptions that they have concerning Texas laws such as MPA, 30.06, 51% signs, etc.

WildBill wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:

Taypo wrote:You're right, I interpreted the "legally obtained pistol" completely wrong.

So how often has this guy carried elsewhere without a license? No longer torn.

He was not required to have a license to have a loaded gun in his vehicle back home any more than you are required to have license to have a handgun in a motor vehicle right here in Texas.

In fact, the article says:

And in almost all the states in the Southeast, he would have been perfectly fine bringing his firearm with him.

There is no indication he did anything illegal except for NJ's garbage laws.

In essence, he travelled to New Jersey to try to help people in need and got arrested for it.

No, he got arrested for having a weapon where it was illegal. I'm not going to defend NJ gun laws, but they are what they are. When he took a gun out of his home state he was responsible for obeying the laws where he was going. Ignorance is NOT a defense.

There are dozens of threads on this forum alone where people are asking about the laws in different states. He chose not to seek guidance and made an assumption that got him locked up.

WildBill wrote:

jimlongley wrote:I am not surprised, a lot of friends and acquaintances were confused when Texas passed open carry, they thought we already had it.

There is the old saying that ignorance of the law is no defense, but I have also found that most people do not know the law when it concerns firearms.

Sometimes we, on the forum, forget that the majority of citizens don't know very much about the laws concerning firearms and self defense.

In my conversations with people, I have corrected many misconceptions that they have concerning Texas laws such as MPA, 30.06, 51% signs, etc.

I don't disagree with you, but this is another case of someone who refuses to take responsibility for a mistake. Personally, I'm firmly of the belief that anyone carrying a gun is responsible for knowing things like legal signage and where you can and can't carry.

Taypo wrote:Ignorance is NOT a defense.

Unless you are a police officer, according to our wonderful SCOTUS.