“In New Jersey, residents who want to transport firearms legally must request a permit from a local law enforcement office and produce a letter stating why it is necessary for them to carry a gun. In other words, New Jerseyans have to prove need before exercising what many Americans consider a constitutional right.”
I would think the Interstate Transportation of Firearms act would take precedence here on equal protection grounds:
“U.S. Code
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 44 > § 926A
§ 926A. Interstate transportation of firearms
Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console. “
Hopefully he’ll sue.
That’s interesting. I’m not a lawyer, but hopefully Aitken’s can and will sue.
The first line in the article is not accurate. One does not need a permit to transport a gun that is unloaded and locked in the trunk (as described in the article linked below) under certain exemptions which included traveling to and from a range, and moving from one residence to another.
Actually Brian Aitken should have been covered by the ‘moving’ exemption which is one of the exemptions listed in TITLE 2C - THE NEW JERSEY CODE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 2C:39-6 Exemptions. 2C:36-6e addresses “between one place of business or residence and another when moving”.
He was in the process of moving from out of state to NJ to be closer to his son.
More details here:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/11/15/brian-aitkens-mistake
My guess is the prosecutor decided that since Aiken stopped in his mothers driveway while traveling from out of state to his new residence in NJ, he wasn’t covered by the moving exemption.
His original trial attorney is listed as Richard Gilbert; his appeal attorney is Evan Nappen, an extremely astute expert in gun law, who works with the NJ NRA.