Ravenwood - 08/02/05 07:15 AM
Nearly a year ago sea captain Salvatore Atanasio was issued a gun permit in New Jersey. He pilots a tour boat, and used the threat of terrorism as justification for his permit and the court agreed. But now New Jersey's only concealed carry permit holder has had his permit revoked on appeal.
While it doesn't surprise me that the government of New Jersey would appeal something as inane as the issuance of a gun permit to a higher court, you have to laugh at the paranoia of the appellate court's ruling:
"If such were the test, then conceivably every airline flight attendant, every bus driver, every truck driver transporting hazardous materials, every person employed by or with access to potable water reservoirs or fuel storage facilities, would be legally entitled to carry concealed firearms," the appeals court wrote in its ruling.GASP! Oh the humanity. If New Jersey started issuing permits to anyone that wanted one (and wasn't specifically disqualified from having one), they'd be just like Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
Category: Cold Dead Hands
Comments (6) top link me
In other words, they'd be just like those Wild West states whose streets run red with blood.
Posted by: Brian J. at August 2, 2005 8:55 AMLooks to me like a good list of citizens that should be issued permits.
Fortunately I live in one of those states where the streets run red with blood and the guns walk the streets spraying bullets everywhere. But the good news, we also have a 10-20-life gun law where the criminals get to vacation in the state penetentiary. Violent crime has dropped in Florida by over 50% in 10 years, thanks to Ms. Marion Hammer.
Posted by: bill at August 2, 2005 10:14 AMSteve, you stay on top of the daily NJ lunacy! I was going to send this article in , but you beat me to it.
The ruling said that "A general sense of apprehension, shared by all those who work in, or otherwise interact with potential targets of terrorist attacks, is insufficient to satisfy the statutory requirements". This is lunacy right to the core: the people who MOST need to be armed are those who work in those potential targets, and that sense of apprehension is the PERFECT REASON to issue such a permit. But then, those citizens would then be tempted to "take the law into their own hands" ... I guess the only proper NJ solution is more government - a State Trooper on every bus, train, plain, truck, taxi, gas station, propane storage yard, chemical plant, TV station, train station, bridge, and toll booth in the state.
Today's NJ paper has an opinion piece urging tighter government control for all the little cow pasture airports in the state, because terrorists could use them, oh no!! I really have to move.
The sad fact is that, in Jersey, NOTHING satisfies the "good cause" reqirement for a permit to carry. Getting a pistol permit (good for ninety days, for one purchase) can, as a practical matter, be arbitrarily held up by a local chief of police. I know a guy who had to make a credible threat to sue the town because the Police Chief took absolutely no action on his permit application of months.
We need a firearms card to buy rifles, shotguns and ammunition. One problem is that you can't lawfully discharge a rifle in Jersey (maybe a 22 during woodchuck season) other than at a range, and many, if not most ranges, will not permit the firing of larger caliber rifles.
Of course, the bad guys have plenty of guns.
Posted by: Jim - PRS at August 2, 2005 9:41 PMNot to be picky.... but you left out Connecticut. I'm not absolutely sure, but I THOUGHT we were a "shall-issue" state, as my wife & I (both NRA Life members, BTW) had no problem obtaining concealed-carry permits....
:)
The source I pulled the data from listed Connecticut as a "may issue" state based on the way the law is written, but stated that they were effectively "shall issue" state based on the way the law is implemented.
I checked Packing.org, and they do indeed list Connecticut as a "shall issue" state. So, I updated the list. Sorry to exclude you.
Posted by: Ravenwood at August 3, 2005 6:17 AM(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2014
