Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > New Jersey gun laws - Guilty till proven you qualify for an exemption

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-24-2010, 04:03 PM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Swampbilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 96
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

I know people often must do what they need to do, and live where they can earn a living...but I don't know how an avid firearm owner and shooter can live in the New Jersey area. Especially, if you are also a staunch believer in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights and citizen's rights and liberties.

If I lived there, I think I woud be continually striving to get the heck out of there.


Regards,

SwampBilly

__________________
Swampbilly is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2010, 05:14 PM   #12
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Overkill0084's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Weber County, Utah
Posts: 4,078
Liked 2530 Times on 1268 Posts
Likes Given: 239

Default

I'm no lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but it's looks to me that the judge's behavior is just screaming out for an appeal.

__________________
Cheers,
Greg
USAF Retired
NRA Life Member

"If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand."
Milton Friedman
Overkill0084 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2010, 12:39 AM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Ruger44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 97
Default

You know, I heard about this case on the NRA News with Cam Edwards on Sirius radio a few weeks back. What really makes me mad is that, after sitting through the trial and hearing evidence presented by the defense attorney that an exemption exists and even though the judge's instructions to the jury did not mention the exemption, that there wasn't even one juror that who would vote no on conviction. That is the sad part about the whole thing. If I had been in the jury room, I would have asked for the statute and if the Judge would have refused my request, I would have voted not to convict because I was not given all the information to be able to make a competant decision.

__________________
Ruger44 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2010, 04:48 AM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Racine,WI
Posts: 38
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruger44 View Post
You know, I heard about this case on the NRA News with Cam Edwards on Sirius radio a few weeks back. What really makes me mad is that, after sitting through the trial and hearing evidence presented by the defense attorney that an exemption exists and even though the judge's instructions to the jury did not mention the exemption, that there wasn't even one juror that who would vote no on conviction. That is the sad part about the whole thing. If I had been in the jury room, I would have asked for the statute and if the Judge would have refused my request, I would have voted not to convict because I was not given all the information to be able to make a competant decision.
You and me both. Sadly, the prosecuter would have rejected both of us serving on said jury.


Jury nulification is something very few of the citizenry are familiar with. If the prosecutor/petitioners lawyer get even a hint that you may know what it is, you will be rejected.
__________________

Last edited by schwefel; 11-28-2010 at 04:29 PM.
schwefel is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2010, 01:36 PM   #15
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Stafford, Virginia,The state of insanity.
Posts: 14,043
Liked 33 Times on 28 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swampbilly View Post
I know people often must do what they need to do, and live where they can earn a living...but I don't know how an avid firearm owner and shooter can live in the New Jersey area. Especially, if you are also a staunch believer in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights and citizen's rights and liberties.

If I lived there, I think I woud be continually striving to get the heck out of there.


Regards,

SwampBilly
there in lies the problem. We need to not move out or away from but to the states like NY, NJ, CA. The more gun owners that live there the quicker we can change the laws. I have always proposed that we move everyone we can into the states with bad gun laws and then we could turn them over and get rid of them. Think about it we could over power the state and elect gun friendly people who would fight to get rid of these stupid gun laws.
__________________
cpttango30 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2010, 04:34 PM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Swampbilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 96
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cpttango30 View Post
there in lies the problem. We need to not move out or away from but to the states like NY, NJ, CA. The more gun owners that live there the quicker we can change the laws. I have always proposed that we move everyone we can into the states with bad gun laws and then we could turn them over and get rid of them. Think about it we could over power the state and elect gun friendly people who would fight to get rid of these stupid gun laws.

I can see your point, and it deserves merit. The bad thing are the "pioneers" who suffer under their police and nanny-state mentalities until things are changed.

Regards,

Swampbilly
__________________
Swampbilly is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 02:15 AM   #17
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Saint Louis,Missouri
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yunus View Post
Brian Aitken's Mistake - Reason Magazine



Should we write some letters to Gov Christie on behalf of this guy? He thought he was following the rules and even if he was not moving as the judge suggests he was still attempting to prevent firearms from being in a situation with people at a party who were drinking.
From my understanding, this entire thing was caused by the judge being a total ass and not allowing any testimony from the arresting officer that there was lots of proof that Aitken was moving (such as, y'know, all the clothes and other junk in his car, his mother and himself mentioning it, and, oh, wow, look at all those receipts for packing materials, and the fact that his lease started that exact same month, etc).

My understanding is that the judge is being disrobed (is that the proper term for having a judge removed) and that the case was either going to appeals or being thrown out entirely.
__________________

There are two types of idiocy: Believing everything one is told without question, and never listening to what others have to say.

corrinavatan is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 02:23 AM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Saint Louis,Missouri
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruger44 View Post
You know, I heard about this case on the NRA News with Cam Edwards on Sirius radio a few weeks back. What really makes me mad is that, after sitting through the trial and hearing evidence presented by the defense attorney that an exemption exists and even though the judge's instructions to the jury did not mention the exemption, that there wasn't even one juror that who would vote no on conviction. That is the sad part about the whole thing. If I had been in the jury room, I would have asked for the statute and if the Judge would have refused my request, I would have voted not to convict because I was not given all the information to be able to make a competant decision.

Except, how do you know that you don't know all the information you need to make a conviction.

You have a point. Even in the article, it mentions that the jury asked if there were ways to not convict Aitken, but the judge refused to tell them/allow them to be told.

When you serve on a jury, you're told "If you do X, Y, and Z, you're guilty of crime X. Your job is to determine if, beyond a reasonable doubt, person A did X, Y, and Z, and, by extension, is guilty of this crime. If you believe he did X, Y, and Z, you must vote guilty."

The jurors weren't comfortable with the decision, because they didn't know that the law actually was "unless you're doing K, in which case it doesn't matter that you were doing X, Y, Z." They were told that there were no exemptions to the gun law, and anyone in violations of the gun law were guilty.

Imagine, if you will, that you're a juror who has no knowledge of the fact that you can kill a person in self defense and it doesn't count as murder. You're told that if a person A kills person B, he is guilty of murder, and are presented with OVERWHELMING evidence that person A did, in fact, kill person B. If you were never told (or even aware) that the law has an exemption of "unless that person tries to kill you first, in which case it is okay to kill him back faster," the oath you took as a juror means that you'd have to find him guilty.

The problem was entirely the judge and his .... complete disregard for the law. A judge is supposed to present the law to the FULL extent for the jurors. I could even forgive if he didn't tell them off the bat. But REFUSING to let them know about the exemption was total B.S.
__________________

There are two types of idiocy: Believing everything one is told without question, and never listening to what others have to say.

corrinavatan is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 03:05 AM   #19
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Yunus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: |,Maryland
Posts: 4,669
Liked 993 Times on 584 Posts
Likes Given: 311

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corrinavatan View Post
From my understanding, this entire thing was caused by the judge being a total ass and not allowing any testimony from the arresting officer that there was lots of proof that Aitken was moving (such as, y'know, all the clothes and other junk in his car, his mother and himself mentioning it, and, oh, wow, look at all those receipts for packing materials, and the fact that his lease started that exact same month, etc).

My understanding is that the judge is being disrobed (is that the proper term for having a judge removed) and that the case was either going to appeals or being thrown out entirely.
I was unaware the judge was being removed because of this case. Do you have a link to a news site or anything?

I never heard anything even a canned response from the governor's office after I sent my email.
__________________

"Good people drink good beer."
Hunter S. Thompson

Yunus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 04:40 AM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Saint Louis,Missouri
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yunus View Post
I was unaware the judge was being removed because of this case. Do you have a link to a news site or anything?

I never heard anything even a canned response from the governor's office after I sent my email.
From the article

"In a telephone interview, Morley (who lost his job when Gov. Christie declined to reappoint him in June because of rulings in unrelated cases) says he didn't allow the jury to consider the moving "

I might have mis-remembered it. I was under the impression that he was fired directly because of this case, but the article says that it was due to him having issues with other cases. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the idiot judge had similar rulings where he decided that "evidence wasn't relevant."

Honestly, just from this article, this guy should get a pardon. That is total bull.
__________________

There are two types of idiocy: Believing everything one is told without question, and never listening to what others have to say.


Last edited by corrinavatan; 11-30-2010 at 04:46 AM.
corrinavatan is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Not guilty!!!!!! canebrake Legal and Activism 14 05-10-2010 06:03 PM
Wii proven to be a hazard.... slowryde45 The Club House 7 10-24-2009 02:25 AM
Give till it Hurts! (Joke) BigByrd47119 The Club House 3 08-27-2009 02:55 PM
I'm Guilty!! TXnorton Politics, Religion and Controversy 5 08-15-2009 12:01 AM
So? Mr. Man, Are You Guilty of These?? Dillinger The Club House 22 05-07-2009 06:00 PM