Traveling to and around NY from NC?

[Aguila Blanca]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that Mr Revell wasn't "jacked up" until he claimed his guns from the airline. I am unsure if the airline told him he had to do this, or not, but I would not put it past some airline personnel to have instructed him to do it. (after all, its normal when they put you up in a hotel, because they couldn't get you on a plane, to take your luggage with you to the hotel, right?)

You're close.

Revell was booked on a transfer flight but, because of delays, he missed his transfer at Newark. The airline told him to retrieve his checked baggage, and they put him up in a hotel on the airport campus for the night.

His problem arose when he went to check in for his re-booked transfer flight the next morning. He followed procedure for declaring the firearm(s) to the check-in agent ... who called the cops, who arrested him. He wasn't arrested when he claimed his luggage, he was arrested the next day when he attempted to turn the luggage back over to the airline.

The case that went to trial wasn't the criminal charges. After the criminal charges were dropped, Revell sued the Port Authority Police for false arrest. He lost. I read the decision at the time, but I don't remember the logic (if there was any) behind it.

Getting back to the original question: Is anyone aware of anybody actually being arrested and charged for driving through New York or New Jersey with firearms being transported in accordance with FOPA requirements?

 

[heyjoe]

i live here and i have not heard of people being arrested who are passing through under FOPA requirements. The only people I have heard about are people who come from another state and attempt to check their gun at the 9/11 memorial or empire state building. Also a few at the airports who came from another state such as Pennsylvannia and used Newark Airport and tried to check their guns in luggage.
Of course this doesnt mean it hasnt happened, just that i have not heard about it. The local papers though do report gun law violations of tourists regularly.

 

[Don P]

Having to travel to NYC/ LI in a few weeks I WILL BE UNARMED.
Even leaving the Swiss Army pocket knife home which has a 2 1/2 blade. NJ states and thinks this is a weapon and illegal.

 

[rwilson452]

I might note Philadelphia has a no knives of any length law.

 

[44 AMP]

no knives of any length? How do they cut up the steak for those famous sandwiches? Sporks?????

 

[NJgunowner]

Lol, in NJ you aren't allowed to carry a knife unless you can prove that it is absolutely necessary in the course of your job to do so. Then again you can't have a sling shot with a wrist brace or a bb gun without a permit either... It's a silenced deadly weapon and all

The reason the one guy lost his false arrest case is that he'd have to prove beyond doubt that the arresting officers knew that he hadn't broken any laws and arrested him just to make his life miserable. As long as they thought they were in the right, cops have a lot of latitude and it's almost impossible to prove.

NJ isn't QUITE as bad as people think, but I'd definitely have a copy of the state polices guidelines on firearms transport along with the website address, and a copy of the federal guidelines for good measure... Or go around through PA

The closer you get to Newark or NYC, the worse it gets.

 

[stephen426]

NJgunowner,

Any idea how NJ law looks at multi-tools that have knives on them like Leatherman tools? Some of the better models can be opened with one hand and the blade locks open. If you open the serrated and non-serrated blades, it becomes a double-edged weapon.

I can't believe the laws are so crazy there. Ugh...

 

[2ndsojourn]

"in NJ you aren't allowed to carry a knife unless you can prove that it is absolutely necessary in the course of your job to do so."

Naw...c'mon now. You're allowed to carry a pocket knife as long as you're not using it for an illegal purpose. I see guys quite commonly with a clipped folder in their pocket, or a Leatherman type in their belt. I carry a Leatherman a lot too. I've carried a small Swiss Army knife / money clip for years. When I had to go through the metal detector at the courthouse the cop took it, but gave it back when I left.

But this is supposed to be firearms related, so just keep your gun at home if traveling to NY. If traveling through, keep it in the trunk or locked up in a separate case.

 

[NJgunowner]

The problem is that NJ allows the carrying of a knife for lawful purposes... key word being lawful. NJ doesn't recognize self defense as a lawful purpose. Carrying for hunting or fishing, job, etc is considered a perfectly legal reason to carry a knife as long as it's isn't one of the prohibited ones.

Depending on what part of the state you are in may cause different reactions by authorities in how they interpret the law (like our gun laws). In my town, the cops wouldn't look twice at me, in Newark or Camden I could be in for a lot of legal fees and headaches.

Unfortunately this is also how NJ GUN LAWS get enforced. Some areas follow the intent, some the letter of the law, and others use it beat you down.

From http://www.attorneys.com/traffic-tickets-violations/are-pocketknives-illegal-in-new-jersey/

Pocketknives, jackknives, Swiss Army knives - we all know them and many of us have carried them since we were teenagers. But will this one-time staple of boyhood soon be outlawed? Well, in New Jersey, maybe.

Section 2C:39-3 of the New Jersey Criminal Code makes it illegal to carry "any gravity knife, switchblade knife, dagger, dirk, stiletto . . . without any explainable lawful purpose." Furthermore, you are forbidden from possessing any other weapon "not manifestly appropriate for lawful use." Now the legislators had enough common sense to know that there are legal uses for knives and put in an exception. You are allowed to carry a knife in the woods if you are hunting or on the way to a hunting expedition. Can you carry your handy Swiss Army knife to file your nails or use as an emergency corkscrew, or for any of its other multiple uses? Is your knife "manifestly appropriate for lawful use"?

The problem with the law is that although it defines illegal knives, it does a rather poor job of defining what is legal. That means defining legal gets left to the policeman who sees your prize pocketknife dangling from your key chain and the local judge who hears your case if you are charged with a fourth-degree crime pursuant to the Criminal Code. Take, for example, the young man who made the mistake of carrying a pocketknife in a small town on the New Jersey shore. That mistake cost him an $800 fine. Even though you may be an upstanding citizen with no felonious intent, if you happen to wander into a town that likes receiving revenues from various municipal citations, you may be out of luck. Or a little bit poorer when you leave.

Here's an example of one case, it eventually went this guys way but he got spend a lot of time in court to get it cleared up...

The phrase “lawful purpose” was challenged in State v. Blaine, when Mr. Blaine was discovered carrying a folding knife with a 4 inch blade. The Court reasoned that because the knife carried by Mr. Blaine was not a gravity knife, switchblade knife, dagger, dirk or stiletto, those knives specifically mentioned by new Jersey statute as weapons, the defendant may escape a guilty finding, if the state cannot prove that he carried the knife for an unlawful purpose. As such, because there was no proof that Mr. Blaine did not carry the knife for a lawful purpose, he could not be found guilty of carrying an illegal weapon. The Blaine Court cited State v. Lee, in which the legislature’s intent, when enacting the law prohibiting the carrying of certain knives, was examined. In Lee, the Court described this intent as addressing:

…the situation in which someone who has not yet formed an intent to use an object as a weapon possesses it under circumstances in which it is likely to be so used. The obvious intent of the Legislature was to address a serious societal problem, the threat of harm to others from the possession of objects that can be used as weapons under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as those objects may have. Some objects that may be used as weapons also have more innocent purposes. For example, a machete can be a lethal weapon or a useful device for deep sea fishing.

 

[44 AMP]

have a copy of the state polices guidelines on firearms transport along with the website address, and a copy of the federal guidelines for good measure

This is a very good idea, but do not believe it is a "get out of jail free" card. THAT, depends on the officers involved.

I have a friend who has a 1940 Indian motorcycle. Its a really cool antique bike. REGISTERED antique. In our state, he is exempt from the helmet law, when he rides it.

He carries a copy of the law with him when he rides. He gets stopped "a lot". He says the copy of the law gets him out of the no helmet ticket about HALF the time. The other half the time, he gets the ticket anyway, cops say "if you're right, the judge will throw it out". And, to date, every judge has, because he IS within the law. But he still has to go to court....

An illegal gun charge is more serious (there's a GUN) involved!! Having a copy of the relevant state and local laws with you can't hurt, and MAY convince an arresting officer that you should not be arrested. On the other hand, the cop might not care what papers YOU have, unless they are the official ones from the state (permit, etc), and arrest you anyway. After all, the court will figure out if you are innocent, or not.....

Naw...c'mon now. You're allowed to carry a pocket knife as long as you're not using it for an illegal purpose.

Are you? Legally? Or is it just the common practice not to bother arresting people for what is actually a violation of the written law, despite everyone doing it??

I see this often, many places. Cops may ignore a minor thing, unless they feel they need to arrest you for something, and don't have anything else.

I knew a lady who got arrested for having a pointed stick. The kind you roast marshmellows or hot dogs with, over a campfire. Technically, under the letter of the law, it was a "weapon". In that case, her real "crime" was arguing with a cop (over something else), and the stick (weapon) was the only actual violation of law.

My point is that there are a LOT of things, buried inside the laws that generally the cops don't bother enforcing, until they do....

 

[ATN082268]

The reason the one guy lost his false arrest case is that he'd have to prove beyond doubt that the arresting officers knew that he hadn't broken any laws and arrested him just to make his life miserable. As long as they thought they were in the right, cops have a lot of latitude and it's almost impossible to prove.

There is a significant distinction between letting the courts determine guilt (or not) and knowledge of the law. If a 4 inch knife, for example, is illegal in state "x," then a Police Officer should not arrest someone for a two inch knife and let the courts sort it out. At a bear minimum, that is laziness and ignorance on part of that Police Officer and a waste of resources for the person being arrested as well as the judicial system.

Short of something like a confession, I don't see how you could ever prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone knew about law "z." I'm not sure how or why thinking you were in the right is an adequate defense for a Police Officer.

 

[44 AMP]

I'm not sure how or why thinking you were in the right is an adequate defense for a Police Officer.

Against the charge of false arrest, it would be. Remember how it is defined in the law. False arrest means the officer KNEW there was no crime, and arrested anyway. Very difficult to prove.

What is often called "false arrest" is actually a "mistaken arrest", meaning the officer believed a crime had been committed, and arrested, but was wrong.

False arrest is criminal behavior, and the officer is accountable. Mistaken arrest is not criminal behavior, so the officer is not criminally liable. They would be subject to what ever disciplinary action their bosses give them, but not criminal penalties.

 

[ATN082268]

Against the charge of false arrest, it would be. Remember how it is defined in the law. False arrest means the officer KNEW there was no crime, and arrested anyway. Very difficult to prove.

If a Police Officer has training regarding firearms violations, FOPA, etc, then might that be sufficient for false arrest? After all, you knew the rules but cracked them anyway. I don't know what type of training the New York Police Officers receive but hopefully it includes the Federal FOPA.

 

[mikejonestkd]

As I understand it, in NYS and especially in NYC, FOPA is a valid defense argument to use when you are in court. It is not a get out of jail free card to avoid arrest in the first place.
There have been many people arrested and had their firearms confiscated by NYS and NYC police for unlawful possession. Charges are dropped once they get to court, but its still a major hassle for the defendant.

 

[Tom Servo]

As I understand it, in NYS and especially in NYC, FOPA is a valid defense argument to use when you are in court. It is not a get out of jail free card to avoid arrest in the first place.

I've heard New York treats FOPA as an affirmative defense, which is the doctrine you're describing. I've heard of specific cases in Maryland and Massachusetts as well.

 

[ATN082268]

As I understand it, in NYS and especially in NYC, FOPA is a valid defense argument to use when you are in court. It is not a get out of jail free card to avoid arrest in the first place.
There have been many people arrested and had their firearms confiscated by NYS and NYC police for unlawful possession. Charges are dropped once they get to court, but its still a major hassle for the defendant.

I am not doubting what you and others have said about this issue. My objection is being arresting for something that is known to be legal (FOPA) and doesn't have a chance of conviction; I'm sure the courts see it differently but that, in my mind anyway, is false arrest. If the Police enforce the law, they should at least know what it is. In a case like the man going through the New Jersey airport, it can't be any more obvious the person was passing through the state.

 

[Tom Servo]

My objection is being arresting for something that is known to be legal (FOPA) and doesn't have a chance of conviction

In 1st Amendment terms, it's called a chilling effect. In this case, the idea is to discourage the exercise of a right by creating the impression it might lead to great inconvenience and trouble.

 

[NJgunowner]

We understand where you're coming from ATN and don't like it any more than you do. But until something major happens in these states to change peoples thinking, it's the way it is.

 

[44 AMP]

If the Police enforce the law, they should at least know what it is.

They DO know the law, and YOU are breaking it!!! You +GUN -correct local paperwork = crime! Arrest mode on!

What's that??? You say there is a Federal law that covers this? Well, if you are right, the judge will know that!....

In today's climate of excessive fear, where grandmas get stripsearched for having a nail file, how do you NOT expect the police to over react when you have a GUN!!!!! Right now, it seems the only advantage to actually following the law and having your gun in a locked case is to reduce the odds of you getting shot during the arrest.

(yes, this is a bit sarcastic)

 

[Tibult]

With there being 34 states that recognize my Florida Resident CCW permit I see no good reason to visit states that do not recognize my CCW. Even with FOPA all the horror stories I hear about NJ and NY in particular. I will not pass through any state that is openly hostile to the 2nd Amendment.