This is TTAG’s weekly roundup of legal and legislative news affecting guns, the gun business and gun owners’ rights. For a deeper dive into the topics discussed here, check out this week in gun rights at FPC.
Murphy Wants to Raise Permit Costs
New Jersey governor Phil Murphy is continuing his push to increase the cost of owning a firearm by raising a number of gun fees. So what does he have in mind?
Murphy wants to increase firearm owner identification fees from $5 to $100, purchase application fees from $2 to $50, and even worse, to add a 2.5% (9.125% total) tax on firearm purchases and a 10% (16.625%) tax on ammunition.
To give this some perspective, let’s do some quick math. Before tax, a New Jersey-compliant GLOCK 19 sells for slightly over $500 on average. So suppose a first time purchaser wants to acquire one. They’re paying about $46 more in taxes, $48 more for the purchase application, and $100 upfront for the owner identification card.
That’s $194 in additional fees, which is about 39% the cost of the firearm itself. The cost of living in New Jersey is already remarkably high, and one in ten residents live below the federal poverty line.
After looking at the numbers, it becomes clear that Governor Murphy wants to keep poor people from exercising their rights. Whether Murphy is tone deaf to the fact that his policy is inherently classist is uncertain, but what is certain is that by raising these costs, Murphy is ensuring that disadvantaged people in dangerous places like Paterson, Newark, Trenton, and Camden will be less likely to have sufficient means to protect themselves.
Biden Chooses Lame Furry to Push His Anti-Gun Agenda
Presidential hopeful Joe Biden has chosen America’s least favorite furry to “take care of” our gun “problem.” When accepting Beto’s endorsement, Biden seemingly declared his intention to appoint O’Rourke as his Gun Control Czar, which is confusing.
Why does he think that the executive branch can pass laws? Wasn’t Biden a constitutional law professor at one point? (He was.)
Local Police Arrest New Jersey Security Guard Who Didn’t Break the Law
One of the most troubling issues with the police is that, despite the fact that they are “law enforcement officers”, they frequently don’t know the law.
Last month, an armored car driver was stopped by local police in Roselle, New Jersey because they thought his window tint was excessive. Despite being in full compliance with all of the state’s firearms licensing requirements, he was charged with possession of “hollow nose” bullets.
Only one problem: he didn’t have hollow nose bullets. He had Hornady Critical Duty rounds, which are by definition, not hollow. Further, he was also improperly charged with unlawful possession of a firearm.
Illinois GOP Pushes to Change FOID Law Due to Massive Backlog
You know that massive delay in the Illinois’ Firearms Owner ID card process that was presumptively caused by a $30 million fund diversion by state politicians? Well, a group of Illinois Republicans have a plan for that.
They’ve sponsored House Bill 4447, which extends the validity of FOIDs for six months past their point of expiration to cover the state’s delay in renewal, and alternatively, House Bill 4448, which would require the state police to automatically renew FOIDs for individuals in good standing with the state.
Illinois Republicans have also sponsored House Bill 4450, which sets regulatory and compliance requirements to afford due process to applicants. It’s a shame they can’t do the right thing and simply eliminate the FOID requirement altogether.
Georgia Lawmakers Considering Bill Modifying Brandishing Restrictions
On Monday a state senate panel approved a bill which would modify the Peach State’s criminal law on brandishing, making it lawful to display a firearm during an altercation so long as the barrel isn’t pointed “offensively” at the other person. This bill would also permit individuals to carry in church unless specifically prohibited as well as in courthouses unless a hearing is underway.
These two provisions are beneficial for obvious reasons: 1) thieves love to break into cars and steal firearms; and 2) you can’t use a gun if you don’t have one. The bill also would eliminate a five-year suspension of ownership for misdemeanor drug possession.
The bill isn’t a sure thing. SB 244 passed the panel along party lines, but the completely rational drug possession provision might cause friction with hard-core social conservatives.
California Trying to Get the Lead Out
California Assemblyman Kevin Mullin is advancing AB 3071, which would make it unlawful to sell or use ammunition which isn’t “lead-free certified.” Assemblyman Mullin really wants the people of California to believe that he cares about their health and the environment, but this seems more like an attempt to backdoor-ban the most common, affordable types of ammunition.
Mullin has little to no experience with firearms, he also doesn’t understand how well-ventilated indoor training facilities are, so there’s minimal exposure for shooters.
The most common types of projectiles are lead and steel-core. Indoor ranges tend not to allow steel core ammunition, as it’s a bit sparky and can ignite unburned powder. This means people seeking to practice shooting at indoor ranges will be driven to much more expensive alternatives, making it even harder to become a safe, skilled, gun owner.
Moms Demand Action “Volunteers” Visit South Carolina Statehouse
Bloomberg-backed political action volunteers visited the South Carolina statehouse and were greeted with open arms and favorable press coverage.
The visitors were there to oppose legislation which would make it lawful to open carry in public. Current law only allows for permit-based concealed carry.
The arguments made by these advocates are unsurprisingly weak. For example, there seems to be a prevailing idea that by permitting law-abiding people to carry firearms in the open people will, for some reason or another, begin having shootouts in the streets.
Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf’s Anti-Gun Initiatives
Tom Wolf is back to his old hoplophobic tricks again. This time he’s lobbying the Pennsylvania Legislature, pushing for them to approve a $6 million investment in “Community Gun Violence Prevention and Reduction” grants. Sounds a bit loaded, doesn’t it?
The plan is to fund “community programs that focus on evidence-based strategies or promising practices.” This includes studying things which have only been shown to have a negative impact on normal Americans, like red flag and storage laws, both of which violate constitutionally protected rights while jeopardizing the safety of gun owners.
Minnesota Proposes Law Disincentivizing Gun-Free Zones
Rep. Jim Munson has sponsored a bill in the Minnesota Legislature which would allow shooting victims to sue business owners who declare their establishments gun-free zones. This is interesting, as business owners have to take responsibility for hazards they expose the public to.
Gun-free zones create opportunities for deliberate targeting of people when they’re least aware of a threat. They also imply, on a base level, that the customers using the property are safe, and thus the business is claiming some kind of responsibility for the safety of visitors.
It makes some sense to make relying on that order, and that implied promise of safety, actionable. There are still some legal concepts, like proximate cause, that give me pause here.
ED: This post has been updated to remove a segment on an apparently false report regarding Nancy Pelosi’s security team pointing a rifle at protestors. See here.
I consider this woman To be a threat to national security. Just like Clinton.
Out of all of that, I kinda like the Minnesota proposal ,
I agree with the notion of being able to sue the business if they disarm you & you get assaulted.
The article notes the “proximate cause” issue. What this means is that it is difficult to prove that a “no guns” sign impelled the BG to act there. Further, the BG is acting intentionally in a harmful manner, while the store owner is at best negligent. This, in general, means that the percentage of fault of the store owner will be very small compared to the BG. In some states, the comparative fault of a negligent actor will not offset the the fault of the actor acting willfully wrongful.
All well and good, but the thing to note is that most stores run on razor-thin profit margins. Unless they are big-box retail, they can ill-afford a lawsuit, so the disincentive is there regardless of how it might play out in court.
You know how people who don’t know any better claim that we’re a bunch of small-junked nose-picking morons with our confederate flags who drive our pickup trucks with fake balls on the hitch on our way to the after-church pig scramble?
And you know how some of that is absolutely true about some people, but that it doesn’t actually define who we are as a “Pro-second amendment” group?
Well, that’s why you need to lay off the “furry” stuff, too. It’s clear you don’t know anything about fans of anthropomorphics, least of which is that by and large we’re mostly gun nuts.
Murphy wants to increase firearm owner identification fees from $5 to $100, purchase application fees from $2 to $50, and even worse, to add a 2.5% (9.125% total) tax on firearm purchases and a 10% (16.625%) tax on ammunition.
And yet he would be one of the first to point out the racism of a southern state wanting a “voter ID” because “black people can’t afford a five dollar state issued photo ID”…. VOTER SUPPRESSION? How about Constitutionally protected HUMAN RIGHTS?
“What’s concerning is that there was no known reason for taking this action.”
What are you talking about? It’s because we’re better than you! Obviously you’re too stupid to understand that. Even after my good friend Mike Bloomberg spelled it out for you at the Fox News Townhall the other day, you still don’t get it? Good thing people like me are here to tell you what to do my friend.
“Illinois GOP Pushes to Change FOID Law Due to Massive Backlog”.
Wasn’t (John Boch) he the one shown & listed on the Post Office bulletin board???
Looks awful familiar.
Anybody drop a “red flag” on her skanky ass yet?
Unless the photographer / original poster of the overwatch image fabricated the whole thing (possible, I guess), I find the local PD’s statement untenable. That ain’t no spotting scope in the posted image. If the sniper was using a spotting scope, he’d have it on a tripod, not hold it like a rifle.
“Minnesota Proposes Law Disincentivizing Gun-Free Zones
Rep. Jim Munson has sponsored a bill in the Minnesota Legislature which would allow shooting victims to sue business owners who declare their establishments gun-free zones. This is interesting, as business owners have to take responsibility for hazards they expose the public to.”
Seems like a great opening to conduct lawfare on businesses that prohibit firearm carry. These moralistic, anti-civil rights idiots always think they are immue to the tactics they use.
Maybe but you have to be careful how it can backfires. I have noticed some anti 2A idiots often have a lot of spare time and resources. I simply do my best to not give business to those gun free zones.
If the business is obligated to allow concealed or open carry on its premises, wouldn’t there be a reciprocal obligation for gun owners to intervene in the event of a shooter? I can definitely see some slick lawyer trying to make this argument.
“Local Police Arrest New Jersey Security Guard Who Didn’t Break the Law”
From things I read, police are exempt from “ignorance is not excuse” for not knowing applicable law. As in, police cannot be sued for a form of false arrest.
As I see it, police are the “boots on the ground” agents for the people who elected representatives to write laws in the name of the voters. It is settled law that an agent cannot do what the principal cannot do legally. Thus, the police are operating outside agency (their authority) when they violate a citizens rights under the guise of ignorance of the law. In such case, the agents (police) are subject to personal liability law suits.
Police can be sued for civil rights violation, actually they can even be “double” sued depending on the case (criminal and civil rights). A false arrest is a 4th amendment violation, it’s up to the person who had his/her civil rights violated to do the smart thing, just putting it on YouTube or bringing it to the medias isn’t the best thing to do imo.
Let me add it’s obviously a case by case situation. If a person who matched the description of a suspect is detained by the cops and later released when a witness/victim says it’s not the right person, just happened to be wrong place wrong time, this is not going anywhere unless cops used excessive amount of force to apprehend this person, etc
Uderstand. Thanx.
Why would you want to reside in that hellhole of a state anyway? It’s not the Garden State, more like garbage state
Yep that’s Boch Made. I’m sure as he!! not holding my breath! ILL sux…
I moved from NJ to PA 6 years ago and now I’m the proud owner of several scary black rifles and a suppressor.
I feel bad for NJ gun owners though. Not everyone can up and move. There are some real pro 2a people there fighting hard. They are just outnumbered 99 to 1.
it is amusing that states like California want to ban lead bullets. Really, these morons are worried about how lead bullets will affect the environment? Yet every vehicle driving down the road has lead balance weights affixed to the wheel rim. Tons of lead flung off of wheels into ditches, roadways. But their concern is lead bullets. Just another example of how liberals let emotions dictate their lives, rather than facts.
Not. The lead wheel weights are now steel, and tire installers hate them.
“Why does he think that the executive branch can pass laws?”
Surely you haven’t been paying attention to the last two decades?
Let me just go get my bump stock to demonstrate.
Yeah that is one of those things that is particularly bizarre. Obama can enact “laws” by executive order, but Trump cannot reverse that “law” by executive order? Makes no sense to me.
Actually many of Trumps executive orders have been issued to rescind Obama executive orders, that is the main problem with executive orders any future president can, at any time, rescind any executive order from any previous president… Hannibal can’t seem to wrap his brain around the fact that the bump stock issue is a REGULATION issued by BATFE and NOT an executive order signed by Trump….. Regulations are different in that they can only be replaced/removed by the issuing agency (regardless of who is in charge)… So, while “technically” the regulation was passed by a DEPARTMENT of the Executive Branch, it was NOT done by an executive order issued by POTUS……
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
27 CFR Parts 447, 478, and 479
[Docket No. 2018R–22F; AG Order No. 4367–2018]
RIN 1140–AA52
Bump-Stock-Type Devices AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives;
Department of Justice.
BATFE concluded that bump stock devices fit the definition of machinegun….
The final rule clarifies that the definition of “machinegun” in the Gun Control Act (GCA) and National Firearms Act (NFA) includes bump-stock-type devices, i.e., devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.
What I was referring to were Trump’s orders re DACA that the federal courts find to be constitutionally infirm.
As to the bump stock ban, you are correct. The issue will be whether the ATF&E had the statutory authority to issue the ban in the first place, since a regulation cannot exceed the scope of the authorizing statute, at least in theory.
“Obama can enact “laws” by executive order, but Trump cannot reverse that “law” by executive order? Makes no sense to me.”
Oh, but it makes perfect sense. Trump can use an EO/EA to reverse Obama…..if Trump does so for the “right” reasons. Obama had pure motives, Trump is always motivated by nefarious intentions, beliefs, thoughts. See how that works?
Those “before” fees in NJ are a lie to start with. That $5 and $2 doesn’t include the MANDATORY fingerprinting fee which if I remember correctly costs $60 and had to be schedule months in advance. I think there was also a $30 background check fee but I could be misremembering. I moved to PA about 6 years ago. I highly recommend.
Fingerprinting can of course be done electronically now. In California they call it LiveScan, and there are any number of business that do the scan and electronically transmit it to the state. Not surprised that the State Police, local chief, etc. hasn’t given up the power to control the issuance of licenses, since we know that they have a history of ignoring the 30 day issuance requirement.
It was done electronically through a private company. The state picked the company and you had to use them and had to pay their exorbitant fee and do it on their schedule.
“Pelosi’s Security Team Points a Rifle at Peaceful Protestors [VIDEO]”
Where was this?
Increase in fees? You mean taxes. Anytime you give the government money it’s a tax. And a Democrat never met a tax he didn’t like. Especially if it was a tax on something he didn’t like.
There are reasons why what people call conservative states or, “the bible belt”, have gun rights. Or it’s called flyover country. And in other, Liberal states, civil rights are going away.
I’m not saying you have to believe in the Bible far from it. I just notice that it’s the Believers who are the ones protecting civil rights.
They stopped the armed guard because of window tint being too dark. This is a common tactic for cops to stop black and brown people. I have seen it way too many times.
Cops think black and brown people don’t know their rights and they don’t have the money to fight it in court. So they will stop any dark skin people when they see window tint if they feel like getting an arrest. They like to do it on overcast days or near night because they can claim the tint looked darker than what is allowed by law. They will use that as their reason for stop, but they will not make that the priority, they will ask about illegal stuff in the car and if they can search. Then the typical routine plays out.
Black and brown people are starting to realize this when they get stopped for tint. Some say don’t ever get tint on your car if you are not white because it only increases your risk the cops will pull you over. Luckily for them they don’t have to hide from the sun like white people do.
How do you know the arresting officers were white?
Who do you think I learned it from?
Chief Censor says
They stopped the armed guard because of window tint being too dark. This is a common tactic for cops to stop black and brown people.
Fuck that, I’m 100% Western European and I was stopped in the middle of Ohio 20 years ago, driving a black dually p/u with tinted glass, the cop got out his brand new window tint checker, tested my tint and informed me that my tint was $135.00 too dark. He could see I was white when drove by, It’s not always about skin color like you race baiters want “black and brown” people to believe… Sometimes it’s just about the color of money….
Chief Censor says
” Luckily for them they don’t have to hide from the sun like white people do.”
Really? Racist much? Black and brown people sunburn too…
I state facts yet you get mad. Living up to your name.
It’s racist to state people capable of producing melanin in their skin don’t have to hide from the sun like Europeans? I guess all the brown people I know who make that joke are all racist against themselves? Oh, wait. You are going to say they are melanin supremacists and anti white racists.
Go hang around the urban areas and watch the cops. You will notice a pattern. It becomes very predictable. By the way, not all the cops that use this tactic will be white, but the people they target will be consistent. It’s not only a matter of skin tone, whites could be stopped too if they appear poor.
https://gogetfunding.com/roosevelt-twyne-legal-defense-fund/
I’m sure you can find videos of people getting pulled over for tint as probable cause then cops trying to find something else, which was their intention before they could make up a reason to stop. You can continue to be blissfully ignorant all you want and defend people like Michael Bloomberg.
Guess we can’t ALL live in those highly sophisticated areas, some of us actually worked with our hands and the black folks I’ve worked with were just as concerned about sunburn and skin cancer as any whites I’ve ever known.. So if your black and brown associates are of a different skin type than mine and don’t have to worry about shit like that good for them… As far as me being mad.. I just asked a couple of questions or did you not notice the punctuation marks following my queries…. The rest was relating an experience which you appear to infer happened because I was poor… 1999 Chevy Dually 4×4 extended cab pick up with a 7.4 liter big block was NOT a poor mans truck in 2000 (not even including the 47 Knuckle and the 95 BadBoy in the back… However I will defer to your vast knowledge of ALL cops psyche and go on my way….. And, oh by the way, where the fuck have you seen ME defend Mini-Mike (quotes please!!!)
“It’s racist to state people capable of producing melanin in their skin don’t have to hide from the sun like Europeans? I guess all the brown people I know who make that joke are all racist against themselves? Oh, wait. You are going to say they are melanin supremacists and anti white racists.”
I’m guessing you missed the memo (and all the updates) on being rasis. A person cannot, regardless of prejudice, anger, hatred, bigotry, be a rasis unless such person has the power to enforce rasisism on another person. Unable to impose rasisism on others, anger, hatred, bigotry are justified.
You gotta read the memos, and keep up.
Well there it is, the dumbest shit I’ve see all week.
Tell that to the (white) cops.
I’ve been ridiculed so many times for saying that cops don’t “enforce” any laws, that they’re merely liaisons between the person they’ve arrested and the courts, who DO “enforce” the laws. New Jersey cops proved me right.
This is a link to the NRA-ILA web page for the NJ story. The driver, Roosevelt Sykes, was indeed black, and he was suspended from his job after his arrest. Apparently, the NJ Firearm FACS website specifically lists Hornady Critical Defense as NOT being a hollow point, and the article also states that he had a valid permit to carry. With those facts, it is hard to deny that this was an illegal arrest.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20200309/licensed-security-guard-arrested-under-new-jersey-s-self-defense-ammunition-band?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ila_alert
Personally, I never stopped anyone for window tint. Ever. Seldom wrote a traffic citation. 25 citations per book. One would last me a year+. Wondering though. If the tint was that dark; how can you tell the race of the driver?
If the tint was that dark; how can you tell the race of the driver?
You don’t add tint to the bottom 80% of the windshield, easy to see who and or what is driving….
Madd, not at night.
What, no street lights in N.J.? Bitch was ALWAYS lit up at night when I ran into Bergen to pick up a load…. What kind of cop were you?
I use those copper .44 mags for deer. Very effective but expensive. However it’s my choice to do so and I wouldn’t want these rounds to be one of only a few choices. The price would rise greatly,
“…I wouldn’t want these rounds to be one of only a few choices. The price would rise greatly,”
As intended.
For all intents and purposes New Jersey is not a state, it’s a communist country.
It’s such an offensive policy, especially when you consider his stance on income inequality. They do this in NYC too. I pay $160 a year in NYC (it’s $340 for the pistol license and $140 for the rifle/shotgun license every three years). I’m sure the overall cost (both in money and time) keeps a lot of working folks away from owning firearms and I’m 100% sure the system is designed that way.