GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-19-2012, 04:24   #1
igor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: near Annapolis Maryland
Posts: 583
new jersey question

i was speaking to another retired officer who is going to see family in nj. he is under the impression that the hollow point issue is still a problem in nj even with the passage of the new leosa bill in 2011.
anyone from jersey have any knowledge on this?
i gave him enpough hornady critical defense to fill a couple of mags just in case.
i wqas under impression that federal law trumpted state law on this issue
what say you all
__________________
igor
igor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 05:12   #2
4949shooter
Senior Member
 
4949shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Jersey Republik
Posts: 13,241


The NJSP website still says its retired officers may not carry hollowpoints:

http://www.njsp.org/about/fire_ret.html

I would err on the side of caution. Also, the Hornady Critical defense mostly likely would be illegal to carry as well, under the NJ definitions of hollowpoint, and expanding "dum dum" bullets as listed in the statute.

Maybe some of the other Jersey guys will chime in as well.
__________________
"...the men under your command deserve your leadership."-OXCOPS
4949shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 07:05   #3
Steve in PA
Senior Member
 
Steve in PA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 7,386
And the 2010 update to the FEDERAL LAW allows the carrying, by both actve AND retired law enforcement officers, ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the NFA laws.

In other words, hollow points are 100% legal for carry by active and retired officers in NJ. Its a FEDERAL LAW!
__________________
"The Marines I have seen around the world have, the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds, the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps. Eleanor Roosevelt, 1945"
Steve in PA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 07:08   #4
Steve in PA
Senior Member
 
Steve in PA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 7,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor View Post
i was speaking to another retired officer who is going to see family in nj. he is under the impression that the hollow point issue is still a problem in nj even with the passage of the new leosa bill in 2011.
anyone from jersey have any knowledge on this?
i gave him enpough hornady critical defense to fill a couple of mags just in case.
i wqas under impression that federal law trumpted state law on this issue
what say you all
LEOSA does trump the state law. Hope NJ has lots of money, because I would sue them for every penny if they ever tried to prosecute someone covered under LEOSA.
__________________
"The Marines I have seen around the world have, the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds, the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps. Eleanor Roosevelt, 1945"
Steve in PA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 08:32   #5
Ducowti
Senior Member
 
Ducowti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve in PA View Post
...In other words, hollow points are 100% legal for carry by active and retired officers in NJ. Its a FEDERAL LAW!
This. While 4949's point of caution is well-made, and while there's always a possibility you could encounter someone ignorant/irreverent of the law retired guys carrying HPs are doing so within the LEOSA.
Ducowti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 11:10   #6
igor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: near Annapolis Maryland
Posts: 583
i have carried critical defense and federal expanding full metel jacket several times in nj woth no problems but no one even knew i was armed. driving a reasonable speed , which is lower trhan most jersey drivers seemed to work for me.
but federal law is and does trump nj state lsaw and i would really like to be the one to sue,but since i go there so rarely i dont think that will happen
__________________
igor
igor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 11:18   #7
Stuntman22
Retired
 
Stuntman22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor View Post
i was speaking to another retired officer who is going to see family in nj. he is under the impression that the hollow point issue is still a problem in nj even with the passage of the new leosa bill in 2011.
anyone from jersey have any knowledge on this?
i gave him enpough hornady critical defense to fill a couple of mags just in case.
i wqas under impression that federal law trumpted state law on this issue
what say you all
I was told by the NJSP Firearms unit that Hollowpoints are arrestable but you would not get convicted. What ever that means I dont know. Who wants to deal with that crap?
I carry the Hornaday Critical Defense. They are hollow points that are filled with someting?
I cant see how this would effect an out of state officer? If you carry what you qualify with?
We carried Winchester Hollowpoints while active.
Gun laws in NJ are Hyrogliphics that the NJSP cant even figure them out.
Tell you freind to have his family move....


Watch this an tell me what you think?

Common sense (which is not too comon) is a good guide. While active I've stopped many cops and it was always questions on thier Depts salary and benifits and how they like where they work, etc... It always ended with an exchange of phone numbers and a handshake. I dont think you will have a problem unless you are holding up a liquor store or something. The last thing on a cops mind is if you are carrying more than 15 rounds or hollowpoints. We, just like all other cops like "Good" guns.

Last edited by Stuntman22; 01-19-2012 at 11:31.. Reason: added stuff
Stuntman22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 11:37   #8
Geek0902
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 32
I live in NJ. Until the Federal Government insists on the supremacy of Federal Law, the 2nd Amendment does not apply within the state.

When going to NJ you should conduct yourself as though you are going to a very corrupt foreign country. (Also true for NY and a few other places.) If you are serious about becoming a test case, just walk into the NJ State Police, pull out a carry permit from another state, as well as a concealed weapon, and announce your intentions. I am sure the state would be happy to oblige.
Geek0902 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 14:59   #9
igor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: near Annapolis Maryland
Posts: 583
iwatched the video, what a novel concept, it is too easy for the political class to understand
__________________
igor
igor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 15:01   #10
igor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: near Annapolis Maryland
Posts: 583
and yu are correct i when i stopped another police wel we always spoke of pensions salaries , the real important stuff. usually i wqas abl;e to give them ideas on where to eat or get good seafood, like i said the important stuff
__________________
igor
igor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 15:04   #11
Stuntman22
Retired
 
Stuntman22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geek0902 View Post
I live in NJ. Until the Federal Government insists on the supremacy of Federal Law, the 2nd Amendment does not apply within the state.

When going to NJ you should conduct yourself as though you are going to a very corrupt foreign country. (Also true for NY and a few other places.) If you are serious about becoming a test case, just walk into the NJ State Police, pull out a carry permit from another state, as well as a concealed weapon, and announce your intentions. I am sure the state would be happy to oblige.

I think he was talking about an LEO under HR218 carying hollowpoints. Not Joe Citizen with a CCW.
But then again, I could be wrong
Stuntman22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 15:58   #12
blueiron
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 13,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geek0902 View Post
I live in NJ. Until the Federal Government insists on the supremacy of Federal Law, the 2nd Amendment does not apply within the state.

When going to NJ you should conduct yourself as though you are going to a very corrupt foreign country. (Also true for NY and a few other places.) If you are serious about becoming a test case, just walk into the NJ State Police, pull out a carry permit from another state, as well as a concealed weapon, and announce your intentions. I am sure the state would be happy to oblige.

Please...
blueiron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 16:00   #13
Steve in PA
Senior Member
 
Steve in PA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 7,386
The talk of hollowpoints in NJ is in reference to active and retired LEO's who are carrying under the provisions of LEOSA.

LEOSA is a Federal Law that NJ must accept. They have no option in this case. Hollowpoints are a provision of LEOSA and again, NJ must accept this. They have no choice. NJ does NOT get to pick and choose what provisions of LEOSA they will accept.
__________________
"The Marines I have seen around the world have, the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds, the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps. Eleanor Roosevelt, 1945"
Steve in PA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 16:16   #14
Geek0902
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 32
Qwerty

Last edited by Geek0902; 01-19-2012 at 16:26.. Reason: please delete. Fat. fingered post.
Geek0902 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 16:24   #15
Geek0902
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 32
As I said, if you want to be a test case and fight this up to SCOTUS, I am sure the state will oblige and you'll be proven correct.

Last edited by Geek0902; 01-19-2012 at 16:27.. Reason: typo
Geek0902 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 20:28   #16
Officer X
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: The Garden State
Posts: 1,323
The ammo an LEO has in his gun would not be something I would care about.

The only time I could see this coming into play is if you had to use your gun and an overzealous prosecutor wanted to push it.
Officer X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 20:34   #17
4949shooter
Senior Member
 
4949shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Jersey Republik
Posts: 13,241


Quote:
Originally Posted by Officer X View Post

The only time I could see this coming into play is if you had to use your gun and an overzealous prosecutor wanted to push it.
Exactly.
__________________
"...the men under your command deserve your leadership."-OXCOPS
4949shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 21:17   #18
Bodyarmorguy
Senior Member
 
Bodyarmorguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 1,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve in PA View Post
LEOSA is a Federal Law that NJ must accept. They have no option in this case. Hollowpoints are a provision of LEOSA and again, NJ must accept this. They have no choice. NJ does NOT get to pick and choose what provisions of LEOSA they will accept.
Not looking to argue, just thinking out loud.....

I cannot find a copy of HR218 that specifically says anything about ammunition, on either side of the argument. It does address machine guns, silencers and other destructive devices.

http://www.nps.gov/uspp/hr218final2.pdf

http://www.policelawblog.com/blog/20...nd-hr-218.html

The FOP and the General Counsel for the NY PBA have both written opinions or statements that the LEOSA includes amendments that permit the carrying of any ammunition not prohibited by federal law, though I cannot locate thos amendments.

http://www.fop.net/legislative/issue...8/hr218faq.pdf

http://www.nycpba.org/gc/hr218.html

An interesting test case for sure
__________________
"If you are ALWAYS ready....you never have to GET ready....."
Bodyarmorguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2012, 17:55   #19
Sheepdog689
NRA Life Member
 
Sheepdog689's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 317
Here you go: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-...44-sec926B.pdf

§ 926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).

(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that—
(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or
(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.

(c) As used in this section, the term ‘‘qualified law enforcement officer’’ means an employee of a governmental agency who—
(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest;
(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;
(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency which could result in suspension or loss of police powers;
(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;
(5) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and
(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.

(d) The identification required by this subsection is the photographic identification issued by the governmental agency for which the individual is employed as a law enforcement officer.

(e) As used in this section, the term ‘‘firearm’’—
(1) except as provided in this subsection, has the same meaning as in section 921 of this title;
(2) includes ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act; and
(3) does not include—
(A) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act);
(B) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and
(C) any destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title).
(f) For the purposes of this section, a law enforcement
officer of the Amtrak Police Department, a law enforcement officer of the Federal Reserve, or a law enforcement or police officer of the executive branch of the Federal Government qualifies as an employee of a governmental agency who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and
has statutory powers of arrest.
(Added Pub. L. 108–277, § 2(a), July 22, 2004, 118
Stat. 865; amended Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(a), (b),
Oct. 12, 2010, 124 Stat. 2855.)
REFERENCES IN TEXT
The National Firearms Act, referred to in subsec. (e),
is classified generally to chapter 53 (§ 5801 et seq.) of
Title 26, Internal Revenue Code. See section 5849 of
Title 26. Section 5845 of the Act is classified to section
5845 of Title 26.
AMENDMENTS
2010—Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(a)(1), inserted
‘‘which could result in suspension or loss of police powers’’
after ‘‘agency’’.
Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(b), added subsec. (e)
and struck out former subsec. (e) which read as follows:
‘‘As used in this section, the term ‘firearm’ does not include—
‘‘(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of
the National Firearms Act);
‘‘(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921
of this title); and
‘‘(3) any destructive device (as defined in section 921
of this title).’’
Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(a)(2), added subsec. (f).

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-...44-sec926C.pdf

§ 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified retired law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).

(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that—
(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or
(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.
(c) As used in this section, the term ‘‘qualified retired law enforcement officer’’ means an individual who—
(1) separated from service in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer;
(2) before such separation, was authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and had statutory powers of arrest;
(3)(A) before such separation, served as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 10 years or more; or
(B) separated from service with such agency, after completing any applicable probationary period of such service, due to a service-connected disability, as determined by such agency;
(4) during the most recent 12-month period, has met, at the expense of the individual, the standards for qualification in firearms training for active law enforcement officers, as determined by the former agency of the individual, the State in which the individual resides or, if the State has not established such standards, either a law enforcement agency within the State in which the individual resides or the standards used by a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State;
(5)(A) has not been officially found by a qualified medical professional employed by the agency to be unqualified for reasons relating to mental health and as a result of this finding will not be issued the photographic identification as described in subsection (d)(1); or
(B) has not entered into an agreement with the agency from which the individual is separating from service in which that individual acknowledges he or she is not qualified under this section for reasons relating to mental health and for those reasons will not receive or accept the photographic identification as described in subsection (d)(1);
(6) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and
(7) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.
(d) The identification required by this subsection is—
(1) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual separated from service as a law enforcement officer that indicates that the individual has, not less recently than one year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the agency to meet the active duty standards for qualification in firearms training as established by the agency to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; or
(2)(A) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual separated from service as a law enforcement officer; and
(B) a certification issued by the State in which the individual resides or by a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State that indicates that the individual has, not less than 1 year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the State or a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State to have met—
(I) the active duty standards for qualification in firearms training, as established by the State, to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; or
(II) if the State has not established such standards, standards set by any law enforcement agency within that State to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm.
(e) As used in this section—
(1) the term ‘‘firearm’’—

(A) except as provided in this paragraph, has the same meaning as in section 921 of this title;
(B) includes ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act; and
(C) does not include—
(i) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act);
(ii) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and
(iii) any destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title); and
(2) the term ‘‘service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer’’ includes service as a law enforcement officer of the Amtrak Police Department, service as a law enforcement officer of the Federal Reserve, or service as a law enforcement or police officer of the executive branch of the Federal Government.
(Added Pub. L. 108–277, § 3(a), July 22, 2004, 118
Stat. 866; amended Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(c), Oct. 12,
2010, 124 Stat. 2855.)

REFERENCES IN TEXT
The National Firearms Act, referred to in subsec.
(e)(1)(B), (C)(i), is classified generally to chapter 53
(§ 5801 et seq.) of Title 26, Internal Revenue Code. See
section 5849 of Title 26. Section 5845 of such Act is classified
to section 5845 of Title 26.
AMENDMENTS
2010—Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(c)(1)(A), substituted
‘‘separated from service’’ for ‘‘retired’’ and
struck out ‘‘, other than for reasons of mental instability’’
after ‘‘officer’’.
Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(c)(1)(B), substituted
‘‘separation’’ for ‘‘retirement’’.
Subsec. (c)(3)(A). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(c)(1)(C)(i), substituted ‘‘separation, served as a law enforcement officer
for an aggregate of 10 years or more’’ for ‘‘retirement, was regularly employed as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 15 years or more’’.
Subsec. (c)(4). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(c)(1)(D), added par.
(4) and struck out former par. (4) which read as follows:
‘‘has a nonforfeitable right to benefits under the retirement
plan of the agency;’’.
Subsec. (c)(5). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(c)(1)(E), added par.
(5) and struck out former par. (5) which read as follows:
‘‘during the most recent 12-month period, has met, at
the expense of the individual, the State’s standards for
training and qualification for active law enforcement
officers to carry firearms;’’.
Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(c)(2)(A), substituted
‘‘separated’’ for ‘‘retired’’ and ‘‘to meet the active duty
standards for qualification in firearms training as established
by the agency to carry a firearm of the same
type as the concealed firearm’’ for ‘‘to meet the standards
established by the agency for training and qualification
for active law enforcement officers to carry a
firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm’’.
Subsec. (d)(2)(A). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(c)(2)(B)(i), substituted
‘‘separated’’ for ‘‘retired’’.
Subsec. (d)(2)(B). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(c)(2)(B)(ii), substituted
‘‘or by a certified firearms instructor that is
qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for
active duty officers within that State that indicates
that the individual has, not less than 1 year before the
date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm,
been tested or otherwise found by the State or a certified
firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a
firearms qualification test for active duty officers
within that State to have met—’’ for ‘‘that indicates
that the individual has, not less recently than one year
before the date the individual is carrying the concealed
firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the State to
meet the standards established by the State for training
and qualification for active law enforcement officers
to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed
firearm.’’ and added cls. (I) and (II).
Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 111–272, § 2(c)(3), added subsec. (e)
and struck out former subsec. (e) which read as follows:
‘‘As used in this section, the term ‘firearm’ does not include—
‘‘(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of
the National Firearms Act);
‘‘(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and
‘‘(3) a destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title).’’

Last edited by Sheepdog689; 03-31-2012 at 18:03..
Sheepdog689 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2012, 20:31   #20
Hack
Gold Membership
Crazy CO
 
Hack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kansas, near the bison.
Posts: 22,974
Send a message via AIM to Hack Send a message via Yahoo to Hack
If I had to carry under the rules of combat, (no hollow points, full metal jacket), I would carry a 45ACP minimum.

Then of course for good measure a 10 mm that is subject to the UN conventions concerning WMD ...
__________________
Arming with truth defeats ignorance. Jesus said, "I Am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father but by me." John 14:6
"Opinions expressed in this article are those of the author
and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Federal
Bureau of Prisons or the Department of Justice."
In God we trust, all others we monitor.
Hack is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:08.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 896
258 Members
638 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31