Listener Questions – Gun Lawyer Podcast

Page – 1 – of 18

Gun Lawyer Transcript – Episode 288

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Gun laws, ATF, DOJ, President Trump, Second Amendment, interstate firearm transport, FOPA, administrative code, private sales, bump stocks, youth handgun safety, NFA items, Miranda rights, Fish and Game, hunting violations.

SPEAKERS

Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 2, Louis Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:18

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:22

And also with us today is Louis Nappen. So, we have a very special show, and it’s going to be very interesting in terms of things that you need to know to protect yourself. And some very, very exciting news here out of the ATF, the DOJ, and of course, this is due to President Trump. President Trump, as you may recall, ordered a full review of gun laws. Things that could be done to improve and change the laws, and this includes what are known as final rules and proposed rules. The rules are the Administrative Code.

Evan Nappen 01:10

Under federal law, you have statutes that are passed by Congress and signed into law, and then you have what is the federal code. The code is done by administration. Those are the various agencies that propose rules that can and do, in fact, have the force of law, and they are used to interpret the law. These agency rules are very important in how courts and prosecutors will be guided, and the rules are extremely, can be extremely, helpful for individuals that face legal issues in being able to defend themselves. Now, of course, the Biden administration abused these, this rulemaking authority to create anti-Second Amendment gun rights oppression. Rules that he couldn’t get passed legislatively. Well, President Trump, through the DOJ and ATF, has put an amazing package together of 34 new and proposed rules, and I want to talk about a number of them and highlight ones that are particularly important.

Evan Nappen 02:43

So, President Trump, remember, signed that Executive Order. It was EO 14206, protecting Second Amendment rights. (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/02/12/2025-02636/protecting-second-amendment-rights) Now, this review went on for a year, and now we see the fruits of this very Page – 2 – of 18

intensive review. One of the key things that is going to be of major effect to just uncountable numbers of gun owners is the easing of interstate firearm transport. There will be no more “gun free zone” nightmares. That is something he set out to do. I’ve looked at many, many sources, and many different articles, primary sources, and I just want to say that I found a great, great article here called “DOJ and ATF Release Landmark 34-Rule Package Bolstering 2A Rights” by GunStuff TV Reporter. (https://gunstuff.tv/doj-and-atf-release-landmark-34-rule-package-bolstering-2a-rights-easier-interstate-transport-ffl-sales-and-nfa-processes/)

Evan Nappen 03:48

I found that this article did an excellent job. I just want to point out that, as this article states, the actual rule itself hasn’t been published, but information has gotten out. Get a load of what the new FOPA (Firearm Owners Protection Act), the new firearm interstate transport protections that are going to come. It’s going to absolutely make it explicit that FOPA, meaning the Firearm Owners Protection Act, protections for unloaded, locked firearms in vehicles, even with states with draconian assault weapon bans. Hint, hint. Like New Jersey, the DPRNJ, Democratic People’s Republic of New Jersey and other states. A new safe passage presumption for hunters, sport shooters, and travelers with valid permits from their home state. So, this is now laying groundwork here for administrative recognition of carry permits. A continuing step forward, honestly, for gaining full national reciprocity. This is a great step in that direction.

Evan Nappen 05:10

Also, streamlining documentation requirements. No more notary-stamped affidavits just to prove you’re not a criminal. Again, with recognition of these documents laying more groundwork for national reciprocity. Enforcing, expanding and clarifying the FOPA for interstate transport. Let me tell you, folks. It’s something that we deal with all the time in the practice. We have folks coming through New Jersey who are getting arrested, getting charged, and we have to fight and assert Title 18-926a. With these Administrative Code changes, just on that alone, it’ll be of tremendous help. There are many other things in this bill. Let me give you some highlights. Not bill, in this Administrative Code. Here are some great highlights. They were going to remove the pistol stabilizing brace, full rescission of that so-called factoring criteria rule, where they turned millions of brace pistols into unregistered SBRs. Even though courts have already put injunctions on it, this rule will make it crystal clear as a Federal Code regulation.

Teddy Nappen 06:28

Now the ATF won’t be trying to break down your door for them.

Evan Nappen 06:31

Right! And then the “engaged in business” definition, this was a really evil thing that Biden and company did, where they expanded what “engaged in business” meant. So that if you just happen to sell a gun in a lawful private sale, they would claim that you are a dealer. They were trying to just destroy any private sales. Now, of course, in New Jersey, private sales are prohibited by state law, but in real America, they are not. This federal attempt to turn every private seller into a dealer is being removed and taken away so that the statutory standard returns to the standard from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act deal. There’s also going to be, in machine guns, removal of bump stock Page – 3 – of 18

language to comply with Cargill, the Supreme Court case of Garland v. Cargill. They’re going to remove that language, get rid of it. So that it’s crystal clear about bump stocks, but New Jersey has their state ban. But still again, it’s great news.

Evan Nappen 07:49

Federally, they’re ending the ridiculous Youth Handgun Safety Act notices. You don’t have to, you won’t have to have those signs everywhere and giving out pamphlets. That’s always the first thing everybody throws away, right? Just think of how many trees are going to saved by getting rid of that. So, that’s part of it. They’re modernizing paperwork, folks. It’s really amazing. They’re going to do a comprehensive overhaul of the 4473. That’s the paper that you sign federally. And they’re going to make it so that when you have a NICS check, it’s valid for even a longer period of time. They’re going to incorporate electronic forms in the way you can do NFA now electronically, and that’ll be way faster auto population. You’ll be able to go online, auto populate, have it filed, even before you go to a dealer.

Evan Nappen 08:49

And even more interesting is that this is going to lay the groundwork for mail-order guns. That’s right, folks. Mail-order guns. How can that be? Well, I’ll tell you. Right now, you can, if you didn’t live in the DPRNJ, of course, you can buy a silencer, and it can be shipped directly to your door. Even when you buy, for example, from Silencer Central (https://www.silencercentral.com/), they have it all set. They have a network of dealers through the states where suppressors are legal. The paperwork is processed electronically, and the silencer gets delivered direct to your door through this network. With the changes happening here, you’ll be able to go online, find a gun that you like from who knows, one of the major distributors or companies that will be out there, online order what you want, and do your 4473 through an auto-fill interface. Making it even easier. The same way they do it now for suppressors. And that firearm will then be shipped to your door. You don’t even have to leave your home. So, that’s where this is going.

Evan Nappen 10:08

It’ll expand it and make it so it takes another good slice out of interstate handgun prohibition. You’ll be able to purchase on a countrywide basis, even though there’s a local dealer network that gets incorporated. It will follow, I’m sure, the silencer model that you see operating right now. Allowing for electronic record keeping, getting rid of the infinite record retention. Remember now, they tried to make it so that every 4473, all the records, the A and D have to be kept forever. Nope. That’s going to be limited either to 20 or 30 years instead, and then they get destroyed. Setting up Easy Check, even better for FFLs, and easing same state sales so that you can get over this non over the counter sales issue that requires, again, physical presence, going to the store. All that. This system is going to revolutionize and modernize our ability on purchase of firearms.

Evan Nappen 11:25

Of course, the interstate transport is major. Then, if you’re doing anything with NFA, because maybe you have dual residency or you live in a free state, as opposed to, let’s say New Jersey, and you have NFA items, well, some very interesting things here on the NFA side for the National Firearms Act. Right now, the way the law was, if you want to transport, let’s say, your full auto interstate from one gun legal state to another, you have to get permission in advance. They’re getting rid of that. As long as you’re Page – 4 – of 18

not going for more than a year, you won’t have to get advance approval for moving your NFA items. When you register to buy items through NFA, they’re going to allow joint spousal registration. So, you can just jointly own, let’s say a suppressor or full auto, or whatever you’re doing without the need to have a trust.

Evan Nappen 12:28

They’re getting rid of, no more CLEO (Chief Law Enforcement Officer) notification. So, that is an important start. Way back, we had where whenever you wanted to buy anything NFA, and it’s the old days of paper, of course, with NFA, the Chief Law Enforcement Officer wherever you lived, had to approve your NFA acquisition. Whether it was a suppressor, full auto, DD, SBR, whatever it was, they had to do the CLEO sign off. And if the Chief Law Enforcement Officer just decided, hey, I don’t think anyone should have one of these, and I’m not signing it, even though there’s no reason against you personally, there was nothing you could do about it. Nothing. You were dead in the water and couldn’t make your NFA acquisition. Lo and behold, NFA trusts became the loophole. If you set up an NFA trust, they were not subjected to the CLEO notification. So that’s why most folks went with that, because you avoided it entirely. Hence, ATF ended up with 10,000 trusts that was specifically getting rid of this rule. It led to the loophole. Let’s say we’ll call it that. The loophole creating the freedom, because then ATF said, guess what? We’re not going to require the Chief Law Enforcement Officer to have to approve it anymore. Instead, we just give them notice. They just get notice. Well, now they’re not even going to get notice. They’re out of the picture. There’s no reason for it. What? The federal government can’t handle it themselves? Of course, they can. No more CLEO notification. It’ll speed things up. On the interstate transport issue, just so you know, normal travel stops are going to be specifically acknowledged for what we call in New Jersey, reasonable, reasonable deviation, and I’m sure even more expansive than that. Yeah, Teddy?

Teddy Nappen 14:50

Well, one of the things that, the big freak out that people seem to be having is with like, even The Trace. They were so freaking out of the proposal. (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/04/atf-gun-rule-changes-cekada/) They put out a whole article today, sorry, April 30, talking about like the they’re removing the modern gun reforms. They always like to play off like that every time. The thing they were pointing at the most is the attack on removing the predominantly earn a profit. The requirement for firearm sellers who predominantly earn a profit to get a license, which that was just a catch all weasel clause that they were going to heavily abuse if it had stayed. So, I just thought.

Evan Nappen 15:35

That’s true.

Teddy Nappen 15:35

I just thought and.

Evan Nappen 15:37

They did, in fact. That’s what led to that individual when they made, I don’t remember his name right off, but he ended up shot and killed. He was a decent, law-abiding guy, where they tried to claim he was Page – 5 – of 18

acting as a private deal under this definition, and he was essentially, you know, killed over that law itself.

Teddy Nappen 16:02

So, they’re aim is to close that.

Evan Nappen 16:04

Yeah. This is closely get rid of.

Teddy Nappen 16:07

The justification they always give is to close the gun show loophole, which is still a hoax. That’s a hoax. It’s already been disproven. I think it goes back to Obama, who said, like, I think it was the Arizona Gun Show for that to get to Illinois, which, that’s total crap. But, again, they never get tired of trotting out the whole false facts.

Evan Nappen 16:32

Nope, they don’t. And this is great because it was the gun rights suppressors that are funded by, you know, our billionaire Leftist groups that pushed all this. That infiltrated through the Biden administration. That got federal funding, even to those organizations who, through their think tanks, created all these new ways of oppression. Trump is surgical, not just surgically removing everything that they put in, but expanding into wins for us across the board. It’s very exciting, and it’s great to see. It’s going to help so many people, even many, many of those that have cases pending now.

Evan Nappen 17:27

Hey, let me tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is a range in Lakewood, New Jersey. They have a phenomenal range there. It’s where Teddy and I and Lou, we all shoot there. We all got our certifications there. They have a great pro shop, a great range, and great training. You need to check out WeShoot in Lakewood. You can go to their website, which is, of course, weshootusa.com. They have just wonderful folks. We love it there. I want to mention that on May 21 they’ll be having the Diversity Shoot at WeShoot. That’s with our friend Tony Simon. He’s back at WeShoot. And this is just a great night, an unforgettable night. It’ll be Thursday, May 21 ,and it’s only $20. Seriously, just 20 bucks. And there is free pizza. I think you can probably get your 20 bucks in pizza and drinks alone. So, go there. You’ll be able to talk with Tony. Have a real conversations about your rights and all the good stuff that we all care about. You’ll have hands-on experience, and you’ll get to try some really cool gear. Check out the great handguns and rifles. You’ll be able to shoot and get some training and learning. There’s range time, targets, you name it. It’s all covered, even rental. Everything’s covered. It’s great. They have prizes. This is an awesome event. Put it on your calendar, folks, for me, May 21st at WeShoot. Just check it out right online at weshootusa.com.

Evan Nappen 19:38

Let me also mention my book. I will shamelessly promote my book at all times. Go to EvanNappen.com and order your copy today. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all in a question and answer format that makes it easy for you to deal with the insane matrix of gun laws that exist in the DPRNJ. Speaking of Page – 6 – of 18

which, we have here today, my brother and ace attorney of the firm, Louis, who is going to be talking to us today about the very important. Wait, wait. Before we what? What, Teddy?

Teddy Nappen 20:27

I just wanted to point out something. Again, I wanted it for the article regarding the whole ATF changes. I love how The Trace try to paint this as they’re adding new rules. Part of the package would make it easier for dealers to travel across state lines and stop for hotels, gas stations or food, even in stricter gun laws states.

Evan Nappen 20:53

Oh my G-d!

Teddy Nappen 20:55

I know. Yeah.

Evan Nappen 20:57

It’s almost like freedom or something weird like that.

Teddy Nappen 21:02

And almost like there isn’t the federal protection where you’re going from one place to another place, right?

Evan Nappen 21:06

Oh, my goodness, The Trace. The Trace should make their logo like somebody just clutching pearls. They’re just pearl clutching all the time. Oh, please spare me. So, normally, you know, at the end of our show, we do the GOFU. But today, with Brother Lou here, we have a very important GOFU, and we’re going to expand and learn about this very serious GOFU that affects our sportsmen, our hunters, and firsthand, I want you to get a more in depth understanding. As you know, GOFUs are Gun Owner Fuck Ups, where gun owners make mistakes. This is a mistake that we’ve seen, and I don’t want you to make. Lou.

Louis Nappen 21:57

I’d like to say hello to my brother. You said, I’m your brother. You’re also my brother.

Evan Nappen 22:03

No way! When did that happen?

Louis Nappen 22:05

Okay. So, what this one is, actually, you could call it a GOFAG GOFU because it’s Fish And Game. It’s a Gun Owner Fish And Game GOFU. Anyway, moving on. This is about.

Evan Nappen 22:21

Yes. Please, quickly. Page – 7 – of 18

Louis Nappen 22:22

Ha, ha, ha. This is this about.

Teddy Nappen 22:25

We’re talking about cigarettes.

Evan Nappen 22:27

Okay, that’s right, and bundles of twigs.

Louis Nappen 22:32

The situation here that I actually brought to Evan’s attention, because I currently have there was a big fishing game. When I say Fish and Game, you might know it as fish and wildlife or conservation officers. There was a whole slew that we got hit with to represent on, a whole bunch this year is a nice crop. I have three in particular that I’d like to discuss, and I saw the same pattern of GOFU in three different cases. So, three different hunters did these exact same, not the exact same thing, but they screwed up the same way. And I don’t want other hunters doing this. I want them to learn from others mistakes here. So, first off, in Fish and Game, it’s not about the fines. The fines, if you get charged, some people just mail it in. You know, it’s $50 because of some minor offense. They think that’s all. That it’s like an ordinance, but it’s not. These are civil matters that cannot be expunged, and that’s important. Why is that important? Because if you get a second Fish and Game violation conviction within five years, you lose your hunting privileges in New Jersey. This is New Jersey, how New Jersey operates. Not sure about, and I don’t want to talk about other states, because I’m not an attorney in other states, other than Vermont. But they cannot be expunged. And because of that, if you get another one, there is a chance after that, within five years, you can permanently lose your hunting privileges in New Jersey. That is a serious consequence of not doing something that we should all be doing, which I’m going to get to in a second.

Evan Nappen 24:18

And there’s even more consequences.

Louis Nappen 24:20

Yes.

Evan Nappen 24:21

And that has to do with what? Your Second Amendment rights themselves. Why don’t you tell us?

Louis Nappen 24:27

Well, I’d like to, if this is what you’re getting at, the Fish and Game violations when you have that, even the accusation to a point, they can be used in permit hearings, if you apply, because those are summary hearings.

Evan Nappen 24:43

That’s right! Page – 8 – of 18

Louis Nappen 24:44

And so, they can say you’re not safe with a firearm. We’re not going to let you have a firearm.

Evan Nappen 24:49

Exactly!

Louis Nappen 24:50

Or if you get a weapon forfeiture, say you get a restraining order. Even if the restraining order is dismissed, they can then raise anything, anything. It’s summary in nature. It’s a kangaroo court. They can say, look at these Fish and Game violations you have. You don’t get firearms because it’s the same qualifications they’re looking at.

Evan Nappen 24:52

More than that. We need the listeners to know that Fish and Game charges can lead to criminal charges as well. We’ve seen that happen.

Louis Nappen 25:18

Yes!

Evan Nappen 25:18

Keep going. I just wanted to have that.

Louis Nappen 25:20

So, keep that in mind. Now, if a fish a Conservation Officer walks up to you. I can use these terms interchangeably. It’s how we talk about them. Sometimes derogatively, they’re called Fish Cops. I’ve heard that, too. But nonetheless, if you’re stopped by one of these, you think they’ll either come out of the tree, or what have you, you do have to show your hunting qualifications, that you are hunting properly. That you have the hunting license. So, you hand them that. It’s very much like being stopped in your car, and you need to show license, registration, and insurance. But that’s basically where that should stop, on your end, of cooperation. Similarly, in a car, of course, you know you should, at least in New Jersey with DUIs, you should also do the blow because you don’t want to have an automatic refusal. So, there’s only a few things under the law where you have to really do something, and this is one of those in that sense.

Louis Nappen 26:20

But once you hand them your license and they say these look in order, or something like that, you ask, or you want to, you explain you want to go back to hunting. Am I free to leave? Is the term. And this is true out in the street. If you get stopped by a police officer, am I free to leave? Because that kicks in in your head, or it should. They don’t want me to leave. They’re looking for something else. They want more from me. These often.

Evan Nappen 26:50

And if you’re not free to leave, you’re in custody. Page – 9 – of 18

Louis Nappen 26:53

You’re in custody at that point because you’re not free to leave. So, the bottom line is that should click in your head. That your Fourth and Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights kick in.

Evan Nappen 27:06

That’s right. When you look at the those rights in the Constitution, they don’t say, you know, the right against self-incrimination, unless it’s a fish cop talking to you. No. There is no exemption for that.

Louis Nappen 27:22

Exactly. They are law enforcement officers. I have to tell you, Evan, that all three officers in these different cases, there’s more than three because many, some of them had more than one there. They are very friendly. They would be very friendly, you know. But they are not hall monitors and crossing guards. That’s not what they are. They are there to enforce the law, and they will get you to talk by being friendly and chatty. You don’t want to fall for that. If they say you are not free to leave, they’re pushing for more than that. The bottom line is that at some point it’s less of an investigate. It’s not just merely investigatory. It’s actually an interrogation designed to elicit self-incrimination out of you. And that is when your Miranda rights should kick in. When they are questioning you, to get you to admit to anything that could be used against you.

Louis Nappen 28:27

Now, let’s think about that in terms of what they are. You’ve heard it on every TV show, but what are your rights? Think about what they’re telling you in your Miranda rights. Now, they’re supposed to do that. But they can get more out of you, because they can claim at some in some aspects, that it’s investigatory and it was just a friendly conversation. Some judges buy that. Remember, this is Municipal Court judges. They don’t do a lot of Fish and Game cases, and they don’t think of it in these terms. They will tell you that you have a right to remain silent. Well, if you’re being told that you have a right to remain silent, remain silent! You have that right regardless of whether they read you these Miranda rights.

Teddy Nappen 29:06

Out of curiosity, though, when you’re dealing with a Fish and Game officer, is there any other disclosures that you have to make? Or is it just the same standard, like a normal cop?

Louis Nappen 29:18

Okay. The same as are you free to leave. It goes with that. They will ask sometimes to please hand over your firearm so they can safely put it to the side. If they take your firearm, you know you’re not free to leave because they have your firearm. You can’t hunt at that point.

Evan Nappen 29:33

Also, keep in mind, if you’re lawfully carrying, you still have the Duty to Disclose.

Louis Nappen 29:40

Good point. Page – 10 – of 18

Evan Nappen 29:41

Because you’re being detained.

Louis Nappen 29:44

Yeah. Although, in New Jersey, typically.

Louis Nappen 29:45

You need to immediately say I am carrying. As soon as you are stopped or detained, you have that obligation to tell the officer if you’re carrying, too.

Louis Nappen 30:00

So, think about this, though, the next part of that famous paragraph. Anything you say, can and will be used against you in a court of law. Does it say, anything you say will be exculpatory so we won’t convict you?

Evan Nappen 30:16

No. They’re not.

Louis Nappen 30:17

They’re not saying that. They’re saying it can and it will. I don’t know of anybody who’s ever talked themselves out of a ticket or out of a citation. At best, it’s neutral. But almost always it’s you’re talking. You don’t even know what you’re saying. You’re saying things that may be used because you don’t know what they’re investigating. And that will be used against you. So, keep that in mind. You don’t want to talk. The next one is you have the right to an attorney. Well, as soon as you.

Evan Nappen 30:45

Wait. Let me just. I need to say one other thing on that. You have a right to say nothing except, arguably, pedigree information. You know, who you are. You know, identify yourself.

Louis Nappen 30:57

Yeah, you do have to identify yourself.

Evan Nappen 30:58

But, short of that, you don’t have to say anything else. You need to keep in mind that police and law enforcement have a license to lie. They’re allowed to lie. You’re not allowed to lie. They are. So, anything they say, you cannot take to the bank because they have a license to lie. And I know of an actual Fish and Game case, not handled by us, where they accused a person of shooting a deer during bow season. Yet, when he checked it in, you know, it had an arrow, but they felt that it was shot. The person who checked it in wasn’t so smart, and the officers went and took a metal detector. They claimed that the metal detector picked up traces of metal, you know, lead or the bullet, even though it would not even have done that, and they convinced the person by gaming them in this way. And that’s perfectly fine. So, you can’t believe it. Page – 11 – of 18

Louis Nappen 32:00

Yeah. You have the right to an attorney. So, one of the things you could say, in addition to, you know, may I leave? Then, of course, what some people do is stick around. No. If they say, you have a right to leave, leave! Go back to doing something. Go to your car. Get the heck out of there.

Evan Nappen 32:15

Right! This is like right out of with Clint Eastwood when Tuco, the guy goes in, you know, he starts talking, and Tuco shoots him from the tub. He goes, he goes, if you’re gonna shoot, shoot, don’t talk. Well, the same idea. If you’re gonna leave, leave.

Louis Nappen 32:16

Right, right. Like Ron White’s joke. I had the right to remain silent, but I didn’t have the ability.

Evan Nappen 32:45

Yeah! Ha, ha.

Teddy Nappen 32:48

Uncle Lou, I just had a question regarding the actual bit of when you’re in the court, what is the setting? Is it more like a hearing when you’re dealing with Fish and Game violations?

Louis Nappen 32:59

I’m gonna get to that in a little bit. Let me just finish with the Miranda here. So, you have the right to an attorney. So, what you can say is, am I free to leave? If they say, no, you say that I want an attorney. Questioning should stop as soon as you say, I want my attorney. If you can’t afford an attorney, one will be provided to you. That’s a joke, because you’re going to get a public defender who handles, if lucky, one Fish and Game matter a year. They are just going to want to settle something, maybe mitigate down to one or two, you know, whatever it is. You get what you pay for. And if you get a free attorney, you’re getting what you pay for. And then they ask you, do you understand these rights I’ve read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me? So, they’re telling you all of this. And then I’ll tell you, show you one person and one of these three cases, they were read their rights. They make you sign a form that you understand these rights. And then they went and spoke and showed them everything that they did. Why?

Teddy Nappen 33:56

Because it’s the training. It comes back to law and order. Anything you show it’s the training of like, Oh, if I’m not a bad person, I’m not gonna lie.

Louis Nappen 34:05

No, no. Of course, you’re going to be honest and put yourself honestly into a plea of guilt or finding of guilt. Okay. They don’t show you in the procedurals on TV. Every time they bring the defendant in, he talks. It’s ridiculous, but that’s beside the point. So, or it is the point. They are law enforcement officers, if I’m going to cut to the chase, and you do the minimum amount of interaction with them. If they approach you, then you have to do these things. But bear in mind your rights. Don’t give them away. Page – 12 – of 18

You’re going to do yourself a favor by not giving them away, not speaking, and you’re going to do your attorney a favor by not speaking. You won’t even get charged, most likely, if you don’t speak.

Evan Nappen 34:57

Think of all the great men and women who sacrificed for those rights, and you’re just going to waive them? You’re just going to give them up? We have these rights, and we treasure our Second Amendment rights. Treasure all the rights. We have a right against self-incrimination, and you have a right to counsel. You want to take advantage of those rights.

Louis Nappen 35:17

That’s right. Now, when you go to court, Teddy was just sort of indicating, I just want you to know one thing. In most municipal courts, you know, it’s the prosecutor who kind of runs the show and who you deal with. But that prosecutor, over the last 20 years that I’ve been an attorney, it’s become more and more and more. What I’m about to tell you. The prosecutor will only, pretty much in New Jersey, I’ve only seen one prosecutor try to stand up to it and got shot down because he had to speak to the upper echelon of Fish and Game personnel. You know, if it’s just a town cop, the prosecutor will sometimes override the town cop and say, look, you really want to push this? They’ll try to convince them to give something different or better and so that they can negotiate. Fish and Game runs the show, even though it’s a front that the prosecutor runs the show. When it comes to what they are allowed to negotiate, they will not. I haven’t seen it at all, much at all. It’s been at least 5 or 10 years since I’ve been able to do, for instance, get an ordinance instead of a fish and game violation.

Evan Nappen 36:28

And there’s a reason for that. The money on a Fish and Game violation goes to Fish and Game. So, they’re there with their hand out, and they don’t want that money going anywhere else. They need the records that show convictions to keep notches, to keep promoting their budget and funding. Look what a great job we’re doing enforcing all these minuscule and often contradictory regulations.

Louis Nappen 36:59

Yeah, so it’s about the notches on the belt.

Teddy Nappen 37:01

For me, personally, I always just from all the stories and horror stories that I was told. I remember, Dad, you’re famous, the famous one. What was it? It’s a moose, get over it. It had to do with the Fish and Game.

Evan Nappen 37:13

Yeah. After winning at trial, the Fish and Game officer was crying, literally crying. How do you live with yourself? To me, because I won. Well, I don’t know. How do you live with yourself, enforcing this kind of insanity. Page – 13 – of 18

Teddy Nappen 37:28

It’s the level of the, it’s the guy from The Untouchables. Let’s do some good. It’s that mentality of Fish and Game. It’s still, and there’s such abuse, like, Uncle, have you experienced? What’s your experience?

Evan Nappen 37:43

Unfortunately, we see these.

Teddy Nappen 37:44

What is your experience, Uncle Lou?

Louis Nappen 37:48

First off, I just want to say I don’t even recommend hunting in New Jersey. That’s how bad it is. Because when are you not within 450 feet of a building? I mean, it could be any building.

Evan Nappen 38:09

They particularly look for the ones that you can’t see.

Louis Nappen 38:13

A word to the wise. I’ve had that case.

Evan Nappen 38:15

Walk into that trap.

Louis Nappen 38:17

I had a guy who shot for ducks, and there was a bit of a berm, so to say. And he didn’t know that over that berm was a house. He couldn’t see it. There is none. He didn’t. It was not in his line of sight. When he shot, it was fine. It was gonna go in the dirt if he missed the bird. It doesn’t matter. He was within 450 feet, as the crow flies. So, let me just. Now I just want to quickly kind of give with these. Some of these are ongoing cases. Of course, I will not reveal names or anything, but just to show you how this played out in action regarding three individuals within the last year.

Louis Nappen 38:55

One person was hunting with his father, and they’re at their truck now. They’re not even still hunting. They were away from their hunting blinds or the places where they were hunting, and a State Police officer comes up and asked, were you hunting recently from this field? Yes, I was. Did you shoot? Yes, I did. That’s like, that’s questionable. Is it investigatory, or they tried to get you to self incriminate on something? It’s hard to tell the difference, isn’t it? And then she calls, I think it was a female officer, Fish and Game. They show up in more than one, and they mirandize these people. At that point, they’re not letting you go. They are telling you your Miranda rights. So, what should you do? You shut up. You don’t tell them anything.

Evan Nappen 39:53

No, no no. You shut the f up. Page – 14 – of 18

Louis Nappen 39:53

Yeah, I know. Okay. You don’t. I’m trying it and you’re trying you. Because at that point, they obviously want to get you to admit to doing some things that they already sort of got you to tell a little bit to the first cop. But now these Fish and Game officers, they did what they should. I can’t blame them. They did what they should. Mirandize these people. They didn’t. Listen to everything I just read to you. You have a right to remain silent. They’re signing off on a sheet that states every one of these rights.

Evan Nappen 40:20

If you are ever read Miranda, it’s like last gas for 500 miles. Don’t ignore it. Follow what it said. Yeah. Invoke immediately. There is no exception to violating Miranda. That’s it. You’re done. You only talk to your attorney after that, and you do what your attorney says. You make no statements.

Louis Nappen 40:52

That’s right.

Evan Nappen 40:52

I mean, come on.

Louis Nappen 40:53

And if at that point they’re going to send you a citation, they’re going to send it to you because they already have your information from your hunting licenses. So, what happens after that? They proceed to show them where they were hunting, what direction they were pointing when they hunted, all the both, where both blinds were that they were in, what kind of rounds they were using, all the all of this.

Teddy Nappen 41:15

This is starting to remind me of Alice’s Restaurant, when the guy litters and they take out all this stuff and equipment.

Louis Nappen 41:22

Well, they did measurements and everything else, because you showed them where you stood when you shot. If you don’t show them where you stood when you shot, where you shot, and all that, how they gonna know if they weren’t there?

Evan Nappen 41:38

Right!

Louis Nappen 41:38

I have nothing to show you. Because, don’t forget, communication is part of that silence. It’s not just talking. If you’re walking them to a place or doing some motion or something, showing them how you held your gun in what direction, up high or low. This is all communication that you don’t have to provide. So there’s that. Page – 15 – of 18

Evan Nappen 41:59

Always abide by the Fifth Amendment.

Louis Nappen 42:00

So, there’s one example. He proceeded to show them that. Okay, example number two. These are all actual cases that I’m currently involved in. Number two, a person hunting for deer. He’s up in his stand. It’s not a firearm. It’s crossbow related. Doesn’t matter, I guess. But he comes down, and the officer shows up, He hands him his licensing and everything, all in order, perfectly in order. But that Fish and Game Cop was not there to truly investigate whether or not he’s hunting. But if he could find that he wasn’t, that would be fine. He was there about a totally different kind of situation, about raccoon trapping. He started chatting with the guy. And the person chatted, thinking it’s a friendly conversation, and found out everything about it, about anything about raccoon trapping. Well, you know this and that. There were some traps around there. Have you seen him? And the guy just talked and tried to kind of obfuscate about some things, I think. But nothing. It’s understandable about like that other people are using this property.

Teddy Nappen 43:13

I imagine he had like a raccoon skin hat.

Evan Nappen 43:18

He didn’t have his 1920s rah, rah, football raccoon coat on either.

Louis Nappen 43:28

Yes. So, long story short, they are talking to him for an hour.

Evan Nappen 43:35

An hour. Oh, my G-d.

Louis Nappen 43:36

And at some point he had to get home, and he said that early on. So, in other words, he was kind of indicating he didn’t want to be sitting there chatting, but he’s being friendly. The bottom line is, he gets charged, and he does, in all everything that’s been said, more or less, it’s a confession, and they used everything against him.

Teddy Nappen 43:39

Quick question, do Fish and Game use body cam as well?

Louis Nappen 44:00

Yes! Oh yeah. It’s all on body cam. It’s all on body cam almost always. It’s very rare that stop. This is what’s frustrating for me right now. The stop for the first one I mentioned when the State Police, who would normally wear body cam, they’re not yet providing it. I don’t think they have that for that quick, the shorter first interrogation. But all the Fish and Game officers, as they’re getting Mirandized and everything, that is all on video of them continuing and then everywhere he showed them of shooting from where, etc. So, that’s the second one regarding it had nothing to do with him having proper Page – 16 – of 18

licensing, and it was all just a way to get him to self incriminate doing an interrogation. He didn’t realize he was being interrogated. He thought it was a friendly conversation. At what point does your Miranda kick in? Is it just investigatory, or is it that you should have been told up front? Because people forget about that they have these rights not to have to speak. He should have just said, Am I free to leave? Or go back into his hunting stand?

Louis Nappen 45:00

Okay, the last one here, but you can see how each person ignored their Miranda rights here, and that’s what got him cited. The last one is.

Evan Nappen 45:11

That’s the GOFU!

Louis Nappen 45:12

Fish and Game.

Evan Nappen 45:12

Pretty simple, yeah.

Louis Nappen 45:13

Yeah, right. A Conservation Officer, Fish and Game, comes right near the edge of a field. He comes up in his vehicle and approaches. This is a woman Hunter, which is kind of nice to see that happening more and more. The Conservation Officer immediately starts questioning. Immediately starts questioning. Hi, how are you? Friendly. Were you just shooting? Yes, I was. How were you standing when you shot? What direction did you shoot in? And all this. She proceeds to show him exactly what she did. I don’t know how much more detail I want to get into.

Evan Nappen 45:57

No, but because of her statements, she gets charged.

Louis Nappen 45:59

All she should have said is, here’s my hunting license. Here’s my license, and just handed it to him.

Evan Nappen 46:06

Here’s my license.

Louis Nappen 46:08

Like you do when you get pulled over. You just hand them the licenses. Or please take it off my back. Sometimes the hunting license is stuck on. You know, they’re in the plastic thing, whatever it is. Here they are. And if they start questioning you about anything.

Evan Nappen 46:10

Just say, look, am I free to go? Page – 17 – of 18

Louis Nappen 46:23

Am I free to leave? I got nothing to talk about.

Evan Nappen 46:27

Yeah. Say,well, I’m here to hunt, not to talk.

Louis Nappen 46:31

And many of these people had even other excuses that they could have even said to make it seem more friendly. Even I’m leaving now, because my husband’s out there, and he expects me at the car. I’m leaving or anything. You don’t have to have an excuse, but often you have one. I got to go to the bathroom.

Teddy Nappen 46:50

The best example to always, and I remember you always brought this up, Dad. Anytime, what was, what did Martha Stewart go to jail for? And I always say was it insider trading? No, it was lying to the police. If she did not talk, she would not have gone to jail.

Evan Nappen 47:06

You cannot lie to the police. Right!

Teddy Nappen 47:07

If she didn’t say anything, she would have been fine.

Evan Nappen 47:10

Yep, yeah.

Louis Nappen 47:11

I want to say one thing. This particular officer, in speaking of that, when he approached her after she shot, the very first thing that he said was, I saw you in my rear view, doing what you, shooting. But then he says to her, show me what you did. To get her to admit what he saw, allegedly.

Evan Nappen 47:30

If he saw it, why does she need to show him?

Louis Nappen 47:32

Exactly. Then you have it.

Evan Nappen 47:35

Games, games, games.

Teddy Nappen 47:36

I’m gonna say that’s a certain level of entrapment, like you’re telling them to do that. Page – 18 – of 18

Evan Nappen 47:41

Not necessarily entrapment. But that’s legal for cops to interrogate and to make. Maybe he didn’t see a damn thing. He could say anything.

Louis Nappen 47:51

That’s right, that’s right. I think it happened on video.

Evan Nappen 47:54

When they don’t have it on video, they could say, you know, we just had a witness come out who never did. I mean, it doesn’t matter.

Louis Nappen 48:01

I honestly think he heard a shot, looked in his rear view and saw her shooting. But he didn’t see the shot. That’s my thought of, actually, what, what probably occurred. And that’s right.

Evan Nappen 48:13

The bottom Line to all this, Lou? Individuals have to stand on their rights. Law enforcement is law enforcement. Fish and Game is law enforcement. Your rights apply there, as well as in a traffic stop and anywhere else. Stand on your rights. Lou, thanks so much for reviewing all that in detail. This is Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen and Louis Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 2 48:52

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Gun Lawyer Transcript – Episode 287

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Gun rights, Virginia gerrymandering, red flag laws, due process, gun confiscation, Mel Brooks, Spaceballs, New Jersey gun laws, universal background checks, defensive weapons, Second Amendment, Trump re-annexation, social media, gun owner faux pas, civil liberties.

SPEAKERS

Teddy Nappen, Speaker 3, Evan Nappen

Evan Nappen  00:15

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen  00:17

and I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen  00:18

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, Teddy, we were talking today, and you had some interesting things to discuss. What did you have? What did you have in mind, buddy?

Teddy Nappen  00:31

Well, aside from watching the new “Space Balls” trailer, which, you know, I’m looking forward to it. But it’s never going to be, better.

Evan Nappen  00:40

I love Mel Brooks.

Teddy Nappen  00:42

That’s the other thing, too. I will give them credit in the trailer, because then he said we unfortunately had to change the name of the trailer. It’s not “Space Balls 2: The Search for Money” because he found money. It was literally just a bag of money that said “Space Balls”.

Evan Nappen  00:59

Well, and Mel Brooks is in his 90s, man. But he’s still.

Teddy Nappen  01:03

Correct. Oh, wait, I think he, I think he is like 99 like, something crazy.

Evan Nappen  01:07

He’s close. I guess that’s what happened when you were married to Bancroft. I guess. You live long.

Teddy Nappen  01:15

Oh, yeah, she was Mrs. Robinson?

Evan Nappen  01:17

Yeah.

Teddy Nappen  01:17

I guess that’s how it kept them alive. Aside from scrolling through.

Evan Nappen  01:24

Well, actually, he’s trying to be the world’s oldest man. Wasn’t that his? The other thing that used to do?

Teddy Nappen  01:29

Well, that was the, that was the 10,000 year old man.

Evan Nappen  01:32

Right. I guess he’s trying to actually be it. I don’t know.

Teddy Nappen  01:35

Yeah, and I like to stand up where it was. I think he was like, 10,000 year old man. He’s like, 0h, did you try polygamy? He’s like, yeah. And what do you, what do you think about it? Well, to be honest, I always get out voted. That’s a horrible idea. Horrible.

Evan Nappen  01:58

Right!

Teddy Nappen  01:58

But anyways, I saw you. You’ve been seeing what’s going on Virginia, aside from the stupid gerrymandering that they’re doing.

Evan Nappen  02:07

Well, this is bad for gun rights, because

Teddy Nappen  02:09

Their gun rights is the worst.

Evan Nappen  02:10

Because if they take the House by gerrymandering Virginia to flip the House to the party of evil, you know, the Democrats there, we’re gonna have our hands full again.

Teddy Nappen  02:25

Yeah, other than the record gun sales now, because people were paranoid thinking that Virginia was going to start going door to door to take their guns, just because of how poorly the bills were written. To the point where the Virginia State Police comes out and, you know, the Superintendent Jeffrey Katz, Spanberger’s pick to lead the State Police goes on and says, there is no legislative proposal seeking to do this. (https://wset.com/news/local/not-now-not-ever-virginia-state-police-dispel-rumor-of-law-leading-to-gun-confiscation-firarm-control-abigail-spanberger-gun-control-bill-april-2026) There will be no. The Virginia State Police work every day to enhance public safety and protect civil liberties. Those liberties not granted by Government and will not be impeded by Government. Cut to all the laws that they just passed. (https://crimeresearch.org/2026/04/virginias-long-list-of-new-gun-control-laws/) Not now, not ever. Activity of this nature, by its very nature, is un-American. Huh? Let’s and then cutting to all the bills of Universal Background Check, Safe Home Storage, the Assault Weapon ban, Red Flag, Ghost Gun ban. You know, everything else that is impeding our rights.

Evan Nappen  03:32

Right! Well, the thing is, they have, there’s a history of going door to door in the history of gun control itself, which is what we’ve always talked about with the four key words. Beginning with Legislation and then leads to Registration, and then that leads to Confiscation, which leads to Extermination. And every major Holocaust has been preceded by those four words. And Virginia, you know, would get on the pathway of confiscation and them saying, oh, you know, we won’t go door to door. But of course, they will go door to door, and they’re liars. I mean, if you want to see their lies, just look at their Governor, who is the epitome of lying. I mean, that’s what she did to get into office.

Teddy Nappen  04:25

She called herself moderate.

Evan Nappen  04:26

She misrepresented herself, and then is doing this. So, they’re all about lies. And in America, we’ve had attempts at going door to door. New York did it, New York City, because they have registration of long arms. So, they actually, at a point, attempted confiscations. And folks may not know this, but New Jersey was going to do that. After the assault firearm law passed in 1990, there was an attempt, by way of the Administrative Code, to change what had been New Jersey’s procedures regarding Certificate of Eligibility. So, in those days, you could do a private sale. Private sales were allowed. And this is why having so-called Universal Background Checks is really just a gateway to the registration / confiscation scheme. Because back then in New Jersey, you could have private sales for long arms by doing a Certificate of Eligibility, and the Certificate of Eligibility was simply kept by the seller. As a matter of fact, with the old Certificate of Eligibility, the buyer didn’t even get a copy. The new Certificate of Eligibility that came after that, the buyer and the seller got a copy. But with the old one, only the seller got the copy when a long arm was sold. And it got filed nowhere. There was no requirement that it be filed with the Government.

Evan Nappen  06:02

They tried to promulgate, through the code, a rule that said Certificates of Eligibility had to be filed with the State Police. That was not in the law. The reason they wanted that was because they needed to connect the chain so they could go door to door, confiscating so-called “assault firearms”, which were long arms, rifles and shotguns, and to force on private sales the revealing of the information as to who they got transferred to by claiming that there was a failure to file the certificate of eligibility. And I personally, when I was working at the time for the Coalition of New Jersey Sportsmen, and we were fighting the assault farm ban, I opposed in the rulemaking process. I sent a whole piece in fighting and opposing that rule change. That it was not based on the law, that they were going beyond the Administrative Procedures Act in trying to promulgate this, and I succeeded in stopping them from doing it, which broke that link in the chain for them to continue with their confiscation scheme that they wanted to do back then. So, I saw it firsthand and was able to stop it.

Teddy Nappen  07:24

Imagine if you weren’t, you weren’t there, Dad. If you were in some other state or some other spot, and that had gone through. My G-d. Just that would have been. The only thing I could think of, is just bullets first at that point, like.

Evan Nappen  07:37

It would have been a radically different scenario, because they were on a path of wanting and considering it. And we knew this for a fact. They were actually going to try to implement the door to door confiscation and searching down every assault farm they could find. But that didn’t happen. And the other thing that didn’t happen, interestingly, is they were supposed to put forward guns they wanted to add to the list. That’s actually in the law. They have never done that, although they still could, but they never did that.

Teddy Nappen  08:16

Mass does that.

Evan Nappen  08:17

Yeah. Mass does it there. Jersey has it in the law to do it. But they never did it in New Jersey, weirdly and oddly, but they could.

Teddy Nappen  08:25

Who was it? The firearms bureau that was the Mass attorney? He was the one that worked for the Bureau. And then.

Evan Nappen  08:33

Yeah, Jason.

Teddy Nappen  08:35

Jason. And then he saw the dark side of what they were doing, and then came back and started fighting the good fight. But my G-d. Just imagine those meetings where, like, all right, what are we going to ban today? Like it’s the arbiters of truth. Like, just decide.

Evan Nappen  08:50

Yeah. They purposely, in Mass, purposely had a meeting to try to figure out how to make it as difficult as possible to get licenses, particularly for non-residents. They focused on what to do. And I’ll tell you, even to this day, that was the worst carry license application process I’ve experienced. And I’ve gotten carry licenses from everywhere you could get them. And it took, it took 14 months to get a Mass carry license, and it’s only good for 12 months. It took longer to get it than the license lasts for. It’s insane. We applied in January. They  force you to have a personal meeting, and they didn’t schedule the personal meeting for nine months after the application. Then it was another five months after that before they even issued it. And that personal meeting is utterly useless. All they do is ask you the very same questions that you’ve already certified on an application, and they fingerprint you there electronically, which could be done anywhere else.

Evan Nappen  10:02

So, it’s all just a load of absolute garbage. Just to discourage. And this is what licensing laws are designed to do. They’re designed to discourage and stop. And you know, any of these courts that rationalize say, oh, it’s. Like with Maine now, reenacting their, letting the injunction lapse so that they have a three-day waiting period, even on long arms. Oh, that’s just a small burden. Oh, it’s a small burden. You know, what are you an inconvenience? I mean, no, this, this is our rights.

Teddy Nappen  10:38

Well, they don’t see it that way.

Evan Nappen  10:39

This is intrusion in our rights. You know, how about before a news article gets published, you have to wait three days. It’s just a small burden. Just a three-day waiting period before you can exercise your First Amendment. How does that fly? Is that all right?

Teddy Nappen  10:55

You have to do a background check before you post.

Evan Nappen  10:59

Well, Virginia is really scary with what’s going on there. Especially, too, with the redistricting as they’re attempting to. Basically, you know, I mean, leave it to the Democrats. They always have to look for ways to cheat. So, this is their latest ploy.

Teddy Nappen  11:15

They cheated heavily all over New England. They cheated all over New England. Have you ever seen the breakdown? Like, the entire New England is so gerrymandered, like the split is 56, like around 56/65 in a lot of these states in New England, and it’s all Blue representatives. How does that work for Congress, if not for gerrymandering?

Evan Nappen  11:38

Well, there is a really interesting power move Trump could make in Virginia. You and I were talking about this. What Trump could do, if the redistricting cheat takes place, Trump could re-session Arlington and such. That area of land that was originally part of the District of Columbia. In 1847 that was given back, so to speak, unconstitutionally, by the way, to Virginia to keep slavery in place, essentially. It was an unconstitutional move. It was even recognized unconstitutional by President Taft, who also happened to be a Supreme Court Justice. He understood the law, and he said it was unconstitutional. It wasn’t challenged, but it was done. President Trump, by way of Executive Order, could re-secession and take Arlington and that area of land, where it’s all the Blue of the federal workers, the solid Blue, and put it in back where it belongs, into the District of Columbia. And therefore they would not have any representation in the House or in the Senate, and push it right back and literally make Virginia Red again. The way it used to be – a great state. So, that might be a power move by Trump, and he’d be better legally positioned than many of the crazy things Biden did with the auto pen. I mean, Trump has justification, constitutionally, to actually take that back and literally take away the Blue that is destroying Virginia. So, it’s something we might see happen.

Teddy Nappen  13:33

It’s really almost like having a lot of Republicans who are willing to fight and have backbone. Like, I think it was in New Hampshire where Kelly Ayotte refused to redistrict, which you see clearly, it’s been gerrymandered  into the Dems favor. They’re not willing to. It’s just the weakness and so many of them that halt and stop. Like it’s amazing where Trump, the amount of foreign power that he can exert outside the country, but he’s just hamstrung so much in from everything and the weak Republicans like Thune, who I even called.

Evan Nappen  14:09

Thune. It is true there. I mean, the problem is, Republicans need a backbone, not made a Styrofoam, a lot of them, and it’s really sad to see that the one thing you got to give the Democrats credit for is they stay together. They unite in their insanity. They do that.

Teddy Nappen  14:33

They do it out of fear, though. It’s 90%.

Evan Nappen  14:35

Right!

Teddy Nappen  14:35

They’re all in lockstep, and it’s just fear.

Evan Nappen  14:37

Well, yeah, unless you want to end up with like the hit on (Eric) Swalwell, Swalwell there that, you know, of course, was engineered by Pelosi, right? I mean, oh, he denies it. But.

Teddy Nappen  14:42

Or you end up like Jeff Shapiro, you know, with them, fire bombing your home.

Evan Nappen  14:53

Or you end up like Biden. You literally win the nomination, and then don’t run. And then they pick who they anoint for their candidate. You know, you know, like that. They’re pretty totalitarian as far as a party goes, aren’t they?

Teddy Nappen  15:09

Yeah, it’s very, it’s very funny how much they rig their elections. But, uh, anyways, I will say the other article I did catch, which you know at this point now, you just gotta learn to laugh every time you read articles from our opposition. So, everyone’s favorite gun rights oppressionists, The Trace, decided to put out a new article. “This Law May Help Prevent Mass Shootings, but GOP-Led States Are Trying to Ban It.” (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/04/republican-states-ban-red-flag-erpo-laws/) Oh, wow. So, they are trying to justify red flag. They go down this whole tangent of trying to justify red flag, which everyone here knows, the damning no due process use that they try to push where there is just no due process. You are swatted, put through the system with no, little to no recourse. But don’t worry, The Trace has their answer, because they’ve been getting so much, you know, blow back for the arguments of Red Flag. Don’t worry, Dad. You know, they say there’s due process for Red Flag laws.

Evan Nappen  16:15

Ha, ha. Okay! So, let’s just take New Jersey. I have worked New Jersey, and in New Jersey, Red Flag is called ERPOs, Extreme Risk Protection Orders. That is New Jersey’s version of so-called Red Flag. It begins with a TERPO, a Temporary Extreme Risk Protection Order, and then that can become a final permanent order called a FERPO, a Final Extreme Risk Protection Order. So, you have a TERPO. Yeah, well, they’re all known as ERPOs. The beginning document is a TERPO. It then can become a FERPO, and if it’s in Bergen County, it’s called a BERPO. I’m just kidding about calling it a Berpo. But it is really bad, because there’s no due process upfront at all, folks. Let that sink in – zero due process. Attention The Trace – zero due process!

Evan Nappen  17:24

The TERPO, the document, the court order, that initiates the Red Flag. There is no due process in its issuance for the person who gets subjected to it. It is done ex parte. In other words, the gun owner has no idea it’s taking place. Somebody makes a claim, a wild claim, and that claim is taken at face value. A judge just hears the claim, issues the order, ordering the surrender of the person’s firearms, and then ordering the search and seizure of the person’s firearms. The privacy gets invaded. Your home gets searched. Your guns get taken. You’re hit with this order. And you had no idea that it was coming. You had no chance to say anything before it’s implemented. You’re hit with it, and only after being served and having your home and privacy raped by the Government and having your property taken by the Government, only after all that occurs, do you finally get a hearing. That hearing is to take place within 10 days. That’s called railroading. Now, 10 days after you’ve just been screwed over with zero due process, folks, you then have to fight to regain your rights. That is how New Jersey’s Red Flag system works. And if the TERPO becomes a FERPO, Not only are you disenfranchised of your Second Amendment rights, not only do you lose your guns, but you are put on an electronic database that declares you to be an extreme risk. That’s real helpful in employment and other things to be on that list, huh?

Teddy Nappen  19:42

You also have to consider.

Evan Nappen  19:44

And then it affects your ability. Wait. It affects your ability to even fly, because that’s put through to TSA databases as well. So, it is bad news with zero due process up front. And it is a nightmare. So, these laws need to pay. We need a federal law banning Red Flag. Red Flag is an egregious violation of our civil rights.

Teddy Nappen  20:15

You also have to factor in the politically-appointed judges who are, you know, a political bias, who already hate gun owners, and then, you know, give them a free very, you’ve seen in the hearings. They’re very much like, oh, all this fate, it’s good to be the king and get to decide one’s fate. And hands and hands over. And every time someone like, oh, domestic violence, you know, “he threw pretzels at me”.

Evan Nappen  20:41

Yeah! I actually had that case where that was the allegation. He threw pretzels at me. I mean, yeah, the level of allegation can be just de minimis, and they don’t care. It’s essentially harder to get, you know, a sandwich at Wawa than getting these gun confiscation orders done in the courts, They have created the pre-printed forms. They are always leaning toward taking guns and sorting it out after intruding on gun owners’ rights and privacy. That’s never a concern of any great detail, and this is constantly going on in New Jersey. The lame stream media will never cover it, folks, but I see it every day.

Teddy Nappen  21:42

It also goes back, Dad. I remember the once case, I don’t remember when it was, but it was the husband and wife get into the argument. You know, they heard shout, a neighbor heard shouting, calls it in. The whole thing’s red flagged. The wife says, no, we were just having an argument. And then still they push for the Red Flag, even after everything else. They’re dragging them all through the system, where now the husband and wife are now united in that fight against the state.

Evan Nappen  22:12

So, most of the time on this, on these DV restraining orders, I’d say about half the time, the person calling me is and often it’s the wife, calling me to save the husband. To save their marriage, to save their household. Because of the devastating impact of it. She had no idea that it would cause the effect of costing the husband his job, of blowing apart their relationship. It essentially is the embodiment of Reagan’s statement, “We’re here from the Government. We’re here to help.” It isn’t helping. It’s actually destroying the family, and it’s a giant wake up call. I’ve heard it so many times in the practice. The person that originally pulled the trigger cannot believe the impact, because that’s never, ever been explained to them. What will happen is never explained. And when they see it, it’s devastating, devastating to their family. Yep.

Teddy Nappen  23:34

Yeah. But also, to go back to the article before I forget, their argument by The Trace. I love this. ERPO laws do have legal protections. The orders require approval from a judge, sworn evidence and a prompt court hearing. Isn’t that nice? People subject to the order receive notice.

Evan Nappen  23:57

Oh, yeah, yeah.

Teddy Nappen  23:59

They can contest the allegations.

Evan Nappen  24:00

First of all, nothing’s up front in New Jersey. The so-called “sworn testimony”. I’ll tell you what. Of all the times I’ve done this. I mean, I’ve had hundreds of these cases. I’ve never had a single case where a person made statements that were false, where the ERPO was not issued, and that person was prosecuted for what they said. I don’t know of a single case. Never experienced it. Never experienced it.

Teddy Nappen  24:31

This one is my favorite. Most laws also guarantee the return of firearms when the order has expired. How many guns cases do we have now where we are still waiting?

Evan Nappen  24:40

Okay. There is no guarantee of return of firearms on the expiration of a TERPO or FERPO. As a matter of fact, when it’s issued, your guns are ordered forfeited. Okay. Tat’s how it works in New Jersey. There’s no, oh, we hold them till the orders over and you get them back. That’s not New Jersey’s law. That’s not it at all, folks. Non existent. These are lies. The typical liberal nonsense. Sell the lie, sell the lie. The reality is a whole other story. And we see it over and over again. That is The Trace. Just putting out what is not true in New Jersey. It’s not true. And they love to use New Jersey as a model for Red Flag laws. Model Red Flag laws. The worst of the worst, right? Worst of the worst.

Teddy Nappen  25:44

Well, my favorite is the last bit, which is, many states punish those people who lie in their petitioners the process.

Evan Nappen  25:52

Ha! Show me the person punished in New Jersey who lied on a Red Flag. Show me. Yeah, let me put it this way. The reason they don’t want to do it is they don’t want to discourage the lies. They don’t want to discourage people from doing Red Flags. So, they will not prosecute. The prosecution is within the discretion of the county prosecutors who have an agenda that is against the Second Amendment. They don’t want to discourage anyone from spouting any BS they want to spout because they want this to continue. They don’t want to discourage it. If they actually prosecuted somebody and made an example of them lying, it would discourage the abuse from taking place. They don’t want to do that. It’s against the interest of the agenda, the anti-Second Amendment agenda. So, that’s why we don’t see it happen, folks. We just don’t. Nope. Due process? That’s a joke when it comes to Red Flag. We need a national law to end Red Flag. We need to end it dead. No more Red Flag. It is one of the worst intrusions in our Second Amendment rights that has ever been contrived – just insane.

Evan Nappen  27:07

Hey, Teddy, let me tell you about our buddies at WeShoot. WeShoot now has Civilian Shoot House Training. This is really cool! On April 25th – brand new at WeShoot. This is not a beginner class. This is where things start to feel real. That’s their new Civilian Shoot House Training. This is where you’ll learn how to move through spaces, clear rooms, and make decisions under pressure. You’ll learn room clearing fundamentals, shooting while moving, target ID under stress, use of light and positioning, working alone or as a team. It’s this kind of training that will help you to protect your home and not make, avoid making, a life-changing mistake. This training is great for homeowners, parents, Houses of Worship, security teams, armed guards and civilian groups. Anyone serious about real-world defense. Their top lineup of instructors that will be doing this is Jim Weinberg. Now Jim has got 30 years of experience in law enforcement. He’s former SWAT and UCERT operator and Police Academy instructor. Todd Friedman is a retired Detective Lieutenant, Special Operations Group Leader, with 500 tactical entries under his belt, over 500 actually. Scott Bonito is a 25-year veteran, former Lieutenant, tactical team leader, and a certified instructor across multiple disciplines. And Ryan Bonito is an Army combat veteran, 173rd Airborne, team leader, Master Breacher and CQB instructor. These are your phenomenal team of instructors. Bottom line is, shooting is one skill, and moving safely through your home is another. If you’re serious about protecting what matters, you want to look into this course and take it. Spots are limited, so check out WeShoot for this amazing shoot house training. Go to weshootusa.com, weshootusa.com. Check out their great range down in Lakewood, where Teddy and I both shoot. We got our training, got our Certifications. Great pro shop with a great group of folks down there. They’ll treat you like family. We love WeShoot, and you will, too. Go to weshootusa.com.

Evan Nappen  29:57

Let me also mentioned the Bible of New Jersey gun law. That’s my book, and it is called, surprisingly, New Jersey Gun Law. You can get your copy at EvanNppen.com, EvanNappen.com. It’s 120 topics, all Question and Answer to help you not be a GOFU and to help you get through the insane matrix of New Jersey gun laws. Go to EvanNappen.com and get your copy today. Hey, Teddy. What else do you have up your sleeve for us, for me to get all excited about? I know you’ve got something.

Teddy Nappen  30:33

Well, I think we need a good laugh from Babylon B. Now this is from “notthebee.com”, though. (https://notthebee.com/article/scottish-12-year-old-who-went-viral-with-axe-testifies-in-court-that-migrant-called-her-sexy-harassed-her?from_social=twitter) So they have to.

Evan Nappen  30:41

Well, “not the bee” is their real stuff, which is cool, yeah.

Teddy Nappen  30:45

Do you remember? Do you remember that Scottish girl who fought off the pedophile with the knife and AX?

Evan Nappen  30:51

How dare she defend herself in Scotland.

Teddy Nappen  30:54

I know, right? They dubbed her the “Sophie of Dundee”, which I appreciate that. I think it was the light, like the all the people trying to fight back against the mass migration. That is, you know, you know. You go from 12,000 rapes a year to 70,000 rapes a year and a massive cover up from the Government for grooming gangs. You know, things happen. But, apparently, she had to tell the court because, of course, you’ve got to prosecute the young.

Evan Nappen  31:24

Always prosecute the victim. That’s their rule,  right? Throughout U.K. and Scotland, Australia, New Zealand. Prosecute the victim. Make sure no one ever wants to be a defender, right?

Teddy Nappen  31:40

Yeah, of course, of course, you got to make sure to do that.

Evan Nappen  31:43

So did they make any? Did they happen to say, I bet they have wonderful statements about what a horrible person she was, or whatever. What did they say? I’m sure they something.

Teddy Nappen  31:54

Of course. First they dragged her through, trying to make a claim like saying, no, no, it wasn’t against a migrant. It was two white Europeans. Oh, yes. The two white Europeans – Ilia Belov and Nadjedzha Belov.

Evan Nappen  32:15

You can’t pronounce their names. Well, so it wasn’t John Smith.

Teddy Nappen  32:21

No, no. It was not.

Evan Nappen  32:23

No, no, no, but, yeah. But did they have bad teeth? Oh, no, that would be England.

Teddy Nappen  32:30

Okay, I know. So, it’s so ridiculous on that end. Then they try to deem like she was alt-right extremist.

Evan Nappen  32:39

OH, an alt-right extremist. That’s why she had the nerve to even defend herself, I guess. Huh?

Teddy Nappen  32:45

Of course, having the right to defend yourself and suggested that probably having a good reason to carry weapons for herself to protect herself. You know, when the Third World invade your country, and was proven right when two migrant were arrested in connection to the incident. The 13 year old said, the man repeatedly said to her, come here, sexy, which, you know, I guess he thought that would work.

Evan Nappen  33:11

Just a friendly greeting,

Teddy Nappen  33:13

Yeah, just a friendly greeting to a child, mind you. Just keep that in mind.

Evan Nappen  33:18

How old was she?

Teddy Nappen  33:20

Oh, 13. But I believe it might have been 12, but you know,

Evan Nappen  33:25

She was a sexy 12 year old or 13 year old. So, that makes it okay,

Teddy Nappen  33:32

Yeah. I know. She is accused of attacking Ilia Belov, accused of attacking the girl in Dundee. By the way, my wife and I went there for our honeymoon. We went to Scotland. Now, I didn’t get to Dundee.

Evan Nappen  33:48

Well, you have Scottish blood in you. You’re a Baird. Yeah, that’s your middle name, Baird. You’re part of the Baird clan, who also were American patriots that fought alongside George Washington. Captain David Baird and General Ray Baird, and they’re buried at the Old Tenant Church in Freehold.

Teddy Nappen  34:04

Funny enough. We actually found there was a little book that broke down the Baird clan. I love the tagline, Patriots and Traitors. We were all or nothing with people.

Evan Nappen  34:16

Well, your relative was William Wallace’s right hand man. His top man was Baird. Yep. So, you have quite an amazing history there with the Baird clan.

Teddy Nappen  34:30

Apparently, the Honor Guard was a Baird of the clan who was for the Bonnie Prince Charlie during the risings. But anyways, so Ilia Belov was accused of following her and the three girls. By the way, the ages were 12 to 14 for the girls. Belov was charged. She told the court she had been walking with her sister and three friends in the Lockheed area, and then pointed out the sexual remarks. She turned around and shouted. The girl said her sister also started shouting, but the pair were away from the friends. At some point, Belov pushed Sophie, pushed her, so already committed assault and battery. And the other witness, the beloved sister, Nadjedzha, who also was not from the country, attacked them as well. So, the sister jumps in and attacks the girl. So, the pedophile and the pedophile’s sister have already attacked Sophie, to which, drawing the ax and knife

Evan Nappen  35:33

That she carries. Good for her.

Teddy Nappen  35:35

that she carries. Then in the viral video was the man filming, speaking of the migrant rape gangs that have been going on over the year. Thousands of British girls are now following a new trend. And it was the Babylon doing the joke where it looks like like the new fashion trend, knives and axes.

Evan Nappen  35:40

Oh, that’s the new fashion trend.

Teddy Nappen  35:52

Yeah, but this is what takes the cake. So, we’ll see if the prosecution, if they’re actually going to go and follow the prosecution here, they said. But I love this, Sheriff Tim Smith told the girl, I hope you reflect that it’s not a good idea to carry weapons in the City of Dundee. There’s no such thing as defensive weapons. There’s only offensive weapons.

Evan Nappen  36:23

Let that sink in.

Teddy Nappen  36:25

That is the true pussification of a nation right there.

Evan Nappen  36:28

Oh, my G-d. There’s no such thing as a defensive weapon. Weapons are only offensive. Imagine living in a country whose attitude is that. It’s bad enough that our states have taken that attitude to a certain degree. And of course, New Jersey had that attitude about carry licenses. They wanted everyone to be a victim and not a defender. The Bruen decision changed that. We’re still fighting to remove sensitive places and everything else that the anti-rights, the Second Amendment oppressionists try to foist upon us, because they don’t want anyone to be a defender. They want us all to be victims. But here they just say the quiet part out loud. They honestly believe that there’s no such thing as defensive weapons. I’ll tell you what. That’s what law-abiding citizens weapons are – defensive weapons, because a weapon is how it is utilized. If it is utilized in defense, it is a defensive weapon. And those that are law-abiding, that are facing threats of serious bodily injury or death when they use a weapon to defend their lives. That is defensive use.

Evan Nappen  36:37

Just to state, she was charged with possession of offensive weapons. Now, I don’t know if they’re going to proceed with it other than that. This was mostly the case against the two pedophiles. Thankfully, they’re being prosecuted, but.

Evan Nappen  38:07

As well?

Teddy Nappen  38:08

Yes, oh, of course. You know the multiple charges of pedophilia usually goes to that. Huh? Nice, huh?

Evan Nappen  38:17

Really? So, this is what they want to bring to the United States. And keep in mind, our modern gun control came to America from across the pond, as they say. It came from the U.K. It originated there after World War One, and it came here. The movement came here. Since then, the U.K. has now changed their focus after destroying all their gun rights to knives and edged weapons. This defender is facing their anti-knife laws that we have to be keenly aware of in America not to happen. So, we talk about fighting for our knife rights as well as our gun rights. Because remember, folks. The Second Amendment is not the right to keep and bear guns. It’s the right to keep and bear arms, and arms include edge weapons. It includes firearms, includes less than lethal, includes anything that can be used to defend one’s self, and underline and bold defend, and that’s what we’re about. Defensive weapons for law-abiding citizens, so that law-abiding citizens do not become victims, but instead defenders.

Evan Nappen  39:48

Well, Teddy, I’ve got to tell you about this week’s GOFU. And the GOFU is, of course, the Gun Owner Fuck Up. And reason we look at GOFUs is because these are actual F UPS made by gun owners that create real problems. Real cases and real issues. So, this week’s GOFU that I want to talk about is what you post. This, you know, is so important. You have to be careful with social media. The Government intrudes into your social media. Others observe your social media, and it can lead to ERPOs. They’ll say, oh, look what he posted, and they misinterpret it. And next thing you know, you’re a victim of no due process ERPO. Being hit with a ERPO with no due process over something on social media. Or it’s used for other investigations. It’s used to deny licensing when you apply and they look at your character. They say, we don’t like this political opinion. We’ve had cases of individuals who were persecuted for their religious beliefs. We’ve had cases because they posted about their religious beliefs. It’s really dangerous. So, the GOFU is be very careful with what you post, what you put out in public, what you do on social media. It can come back and be used by those forces that want to disenfranchise us of our rights. It can be used against you.

Evan Nappen  41:33

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They absolutely protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 3  41:48

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 10

Gun Lawyer — Episode 286 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Air guns, BB guns, federal law, state law, preemption, New York ban, imitation firearms, gun rights, mental health, firearm safety, historical context, Vatican security, Pope’s stance, gun control, legal advice.

SPEAKERS

Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 3

Evan Nappen 00:17

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:19

and I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:20

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, you know, my whole life I’ve really loved air guns. I had BB guns and air rifles as a kid. I had my, of course, the classic Red Ryder, and I had a Crosman 760 XL. Now, that was the Crossman 177 pellet and BB rifle, and the XL had the beautiful golden receiver on it. I don’t know if any of you had an XL version of the 760, but that was a really fun, great air gun. And I had a Benjamin. Man, that was a powerhouse, and it was .22 caliber pellet. You can pump that baby up, and that was my number one squirrel killer. And all as a kid. I shot squirrels in my yard, where my father had a giant garden. He needed to keep the squirrel population down, and I shot those squirrels. Then I cut off their tails, and then I sold the tails to Mepps Lure company, which would buy squirrel tails. I think they still might do that. And that got me some money as a kid. And it was used, of course, to buy more pellets and fun things. And I progressed, as maybe some of you did, to a love of adult air guns.

Evan Nappen 01:59

And then, of course, Robert Beeman and air rifle headquarters. They were bringing in those premier, phenomenal air rifles that today are the standard of an entire sector of what I’ll call the gun world. Some of you may have had great RWS guns. My favorite were the Feinwerkbaus. I’ll never forget, my dad got a Feinwerkbau 124 from Beeman that he ordered. He had it custom ordered, and they worked out, worked up the innards on it. So, that thing was sweet. And ever since then, I’ve acquired many adult air guns. I have, you know, the finest Feinwerkbau ever made, the 300 series, the Olympic Feinwerkbau. It just shoots through the same hole.

Evan Nappen 03:01

There are so many phenomenal air guns. And today, of course, the revolution in air guns is the pre-charge air gun. They have air guns that have tremendous ability for hunting, and air guns are just a blast. They’re fun. They’re a great way of learning firearm safety and shooting skills. A great way of Page – 2 – of 10

introducing young folks into firearms and the fun and joy of shooting. So, air guns are great. I have a deep love of air guns. Always have. I’m a collector of air guns. I love the history of air guns. And you may know that an air gun was taken on the Lewis and Clark expedition, which made a lot of sense, because the ability to get gunpowder in the wilderness is not an easy task. And with an air gun, there’s always air around. They would pump up that air gun and could use it to take big game. It was that air rifle. It is actually still known and around, that was used on the St. Louis, you know. When they left St. Louis, they had it with them on that great exploratory mission under President Jefferson. And air guns, even at one point, they were used militarily by the Austrians. Napoleon had the death penalty for anybody caught with an air rifle, and those were able to fire repeatedly with enough power to be used militarily. There’s an amazing history and air guns. But the modern sporting air gun today, all the way down to the BB gun, has a tremendous role.

Evan Nappen 05:02

Yet, despite the tradition and the history of air guns in America, New York is now proposing a law to ban BB guns and air guns. The law that New York Democrats, of course, are proposing is to ban air guns by making air guns all being placed in a category of “imitation weapons”. (https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2026/04/13/new-york-lawmakers-take-aim-at-bb-guns-n1232199) And by doing that, it would require that every air gun has a plug and specific coloration, and by putting them in that category, they will no longer shoot. Okay? So, you know, what’s the point there? The idea here being, if you make them an imitation firearm, and then they want to raise the age from 16 to 18. They’re selling this nonsense under a typical gun oppressionists lie of claiming police-involved shootings involving individuals who possessed an air gun, which was designed to look like a firearm. You know, the same way they sold the nonsense of cop-killer bullets, of which no cop has ever been killed by one. But why should that stop them from banning so-called cop-killer bullets. Anytime they get any angle that they can sell to the public and fool the public, who doesn’t have an understanding of guns as such, they do it.

Evan Nappen 07:11

And here, New York now may become subject to what would essentially be a ban on air guns and BB guns. But let me say right now on the Gun Lawyer podcast that if New York succeeds in passing this law, there is a magic bullet, shall we say, that can kill this law. New Yorkers can shoot the eye out of New York’s air gun ban. The way to do it, I’m going to give you right now how to kill an air gun ban. It is under the United States Code, Title 15 (Commerce and Trade, Chapter 76), Section 5001. (https://law.justia.com/codes/us/title-15/chapter-76/)

Evan Nappen 08:12

And this, my friends, is a federal law. It is a federal law that deals with imitation firearms. The reason this federal law is such an incredibly powerful weapon is that this federal law is an area of firearm pre-emption law. What it means is that federal law preempts state law. Federal law supersedes and is superior to, overrides. Overrides it, my friends. Overrides it. And because of that, we are able to take out state laws that attempt to interfere with air guns, and, for that matter, imitation firearms. The very thing that New York is attempting to use as the vehicle to create an air gun ban. Page – 3 – of 10

Evan Nappen 09:27

Let me tell you about Section 5001. Section 5001 first defines and lays out what is required to be on imitation firearms. It lays out what we have seen in the last few decades of having the distinctive markings, the blaze orange plug on look-alike or toy air guns and other imitation firearms and such. The look-alike firearm, which is what the law refers to, is defined as any imitation of an original firearm which was manufactured, designed or produced since 1898 including and

Evan Nappen 10:21

limited to toy guns, water guns, replica non guns, airsoft guns firing nonmetallic projectiles, you know, such as airsoft and such. The term does not include any look alike, non firing collector replica of an antique firearm developed prior to 1898 or traditional BB, paintball, or pellet firing air guns that expel a projectile through the use of force or air pressure. And lo and behold, this section has a statement that says, preemption of state or local laws or ordinances. Preemption. The provisions of this section shall supersede any provision of state or local laws or ordinances which provide for markings or identification inconsistent with provisions of this section. Okay. Then it goes on and it says, ready? No State shall and then number one, prohibit the sale or manufacture of any look-alike, nonfiring, collector replica of an antique firearm. So, replica collector firearms are protected. And two, very important here for New York and any other state that wants to try to ban air guns, prohibit the sale parentheses, other than prohibiting the sale to minors end parentheses, of traditional BB, paint ball or pellet-firing air guns that expel a projectile through the force of air pressure. So, should New York be as repressive and stupid as to attempt to ban air guns, federal law preempts and nullifies, supersedes, that state law.

Evan Nappen 12:54

Let me tell you another little factor, very interesting. I used this law successfully to attack New Jersey’s assault firearm law. In the case of Coalition of New Jersey Sportsmen versus Florio, which you can find at 744 F. Sup. 602, back in 1990, I challenged the then Attorney General, Robert Del Tufo. I brought an action, a civil action, challenging New Jersey’s assault firearm ban on a number, and magazine ban, by the way, on a number of things. One of the specific challenges was utilizing 15 U.S.C. 5001, which is the air gun preemption. New Jersey’s assault firearm ban, as written, included air guns, because air guns are firearms in New Jersey, and the ban on assault firearms and magazines by definition included air guns. And this case with Judge Garrett Brown, federal judge, had an injunction, which, by the way, this is why today you can still buy air guns, BB guns, pellet guns in New Jersey that may seem at first to fall under the definition of New Jersey’s assault firearm law because of this case and its outcome. The court found that the prohibition as it affects air guns was unconstitutional in that it was preempted under this federal law.

Evan Nappen 15:06

So, there’s even case law enforcing this federal preemption as it comes to air guns, even in an assault firearm ban, no less a ban that specifically attempts to ban air guns and BB guns. So, I am giving this to New York as information, folks, and anywhere else that there is an air gun ban that we have a weapon. Believe it or not, air guns, BB guns, etc, are more protected than firearms in America. More protected because federal law preempts state laws from banning them. If we had federal preemption for firearms, then the only firearm law would be the federal law, and no state law banning guns would stand. But we don’t have federal preemption. Our federal gun laws, except with very limited narrow, a few laws like Page – 4 – of 10

Title 18, 926a for interstate transportation and for LEOSA, for law enforcement carry, and retired law enforcement carry, and for armored car carry. Except for a few areas like that, we don’t have federal preemptive laws on firearms, but we do have a federal preemptive law that protects air guns, BB guns and replica firearms.

Evan Nappen 16:55

If we ever wanted to wipe out all the state bans, we’d simply have to make the federal law preemptive, but instead, the federal law specifically says it’s not preemptive. So what it does is it creates a situation, when it comes to firearms, that the federal law is the minimum gun law for the United States. Then the states are given carte blanche to go crazy, to do whatever the hell they want, to maximize the gun laws. Then the only thing that possibly limits states is the Second Amendment and its impact that we’re gaining ground every day in the courts. But if we simply said that the Gun Control Act of 1968, for example, and any of its other amendments are preemptive, it would wipe out all state bans instantly. Well, we haven’t done that, but we did do it for air guns, folks, and BB guns and replica firearms. It needs to be known out there so that when these attempts at bans are made by states or towns, this weapon, this hammer in our law, can be used to defeat them.

Teddy Nappen 18:19

Out of curiosity, just thinking on New York and their other attempts, you know, they, I give them credit, they’re always very creative on finding ways to take away people’s rights. Could they make any laws that either try to make weird compliance requirements for air guns or air pellet guns? Where they would be effectively banned, basically, without saying, oh, you can’t have it. You just have to have all these different bells and whistles. Or is it just full preemption? And there’s nothing they can do.

Evan Nappen 18:52

Well, it might, you might be able to create a license or permit system, maybe, if there’s no ban. Because currently in New Jersey, you still need a Firearms ID Card to purchase an air gun, or, you know, long arm. Air guns are technically defined as shotguns, even if they have a rifle barrel, and therefore a firearm, because they don’t fire fixed ammunition. So, it puts them into the shotgun long arm category, which is why you would need a Firearms ID Card. And if it’s a handgun, then you would need a Pistol Purchase Permit, if you’ve acquire those air guns in New Jersey. Now, if you acquire air guns outside New Jersey, federal law doesn’t view them as firearms. If the state you’re in doesn’t view them as firearms, like Pennsylvania doesn’t, you can acquire air guns outside the jurisdiction of New Jersey, and you can bring them back to New Jersey and possess them in New Jersey. Without even having a Firearm ID Card, if you possess them, by way of the exemptions. But New Jersey regulates air guns by way of firearm licensing, but it doesn’t, it cannot ban them. Judge Brown declared New Jersey’s assault firearm law a de facto ban, and because it’s a de facto ban, you can’t ban air guns with a ban, and the de facto band did just that. So, maybe New York, in theory, could create, you know, licensing, maybe. Depending on how they structure it. But an outright ban that forces guns that are air guns into an imitation firearm category, that requires a plug, is completely and utterly contradiction to the federal preemption law regarding those type of guns.

Teddy Nappen 20:59

Watch as Hakeem. Watch as Hakeem Jeffries introduces a bill to repeal the air gun preemption. Page – 5 – of 10

Evan Nappen 21:06

You never know, right? I mean, he might. He might decide that. But this was fought for back in the day, and it was great that, I know, Daisy played a major role, by the way, in getting that legislation through. And it is why we have actually stronger protections for air guns, BB guns and traditional pellet firing guns of that nature, and for that matter, paintball as well. Even though we also have the In Re Gong case in New Jersey that protects paintball markers and why you can have paintball. Essentially soft air falls under this protection as well. So, it’s interesting how our laws have evolved. But this preemptive federal law needs to be better known and out there, to be used to stop these repression Second Amendment states from doing their thing.

Teddy Nappen 22:11

Just to play with the idea. Let’s say, if things get very, very bad and the states start legislating. In terms of technology, do you think they’ll ever get to a point for air guns to be essentially like carry guns, almost where there’s a way around it?

Evan Nappen 22:27

Well, you know, we have Byrnas, right? They fire projectiles that are essentially pepper balls. It was, given how much, you know, we might be able to do that. But federal law doesn’t preempt carry. They would preempt sale. And according to Judge Brown as well, sale extends to possession. It’s not just limited to sale. And really Judge Brown in the logic in that case could actually be used, I think, as an argument against what recently has been determined in the weird trick, as they call it, the weird trick, where they’re claiming that a sale isn’t protected under the Second Amendment, just possession. And that they can ban the sale of various semi-automatics that they feel shouldn’t be possessed, even though they’re not banning possession, and that somehow you can distinguish that.

Evan Nappen 23:38

But Judge Brown cut through that garbage in terms of the air gun preemption by saying no, it is a de facto ban. When you ban the sale, you ban the possession. You could follow the logic of Judge Brown in that case and maybe apply it even in these other challenges and fights that we have. But, yeah, I mean, to make an air pistol that has the power of a weapon probably could be done. Look, even I don’t want to get shot with anything, even a BB pistol. Who wants to get shot with anything? But whether it would be effective enough for general, truly effective self-defense, remains to be seen. I don’t know of any actual lethal handgun development in air guns out there that is truly designed to be a self-defense gun. I don’t know of that. Now, less than lethal, of course, you’re dealing with Byrnas, when it comes to less than lethal.

Evan Nappen 24:43

Hey, let’s mention our good friends at WeShoot. So, WeShoot is a range in Lakewood, New Jersey. It’s a wonderful indoor range. That’s where Teddy and I both shoot, and it’s where we got our certifications. As a matter of fact, WeShoot is offering New Jersey carry permit certification for a new price of only $225. You can get your certification that you need so that you can get your New Jersey permit to carry and get it right from we shoot. You can go to weshootusa.com and check out their website. You can learn about the great programs. They’re offering USCCA, NJ CCW, carry dates. They have that. They Page – 6 – of 10

have NRA CC carry dates, and they can help you doing renewal classes, right? They have all this here. They have New Jersey carry certification for seniors, and they have special day for that. So, WeShoot is really going all out with multiple abilities here for you to get your certification. We are currently hovering somewhere around 90,000 carry permits, and we’re going to be breaking that 100,000, unless we maybe even already have. In order to join the ranks of those that choose to be defenders instead of victims, check out WeShoot. We shoot will help you to get your New Jersey carry and other states carries as well. They even have more training. From novice to the most advanced shooter, they can meet your needs. Great pro shop, too. They can get you set up with the perfect firearm for defending yourself and your loved ones or for enjoying a great day at the range. They have great rentals and a great facility. We love WeShoot, and I know that you will, too. Check out weshootusa.com.

Evan Nappen 27:01

Let me also not forget to shamelessly promote my book, which is New Jersey Gun Law. The Bible of New Jersey gun law. It is 120 topics, all in a question and answer format, and it’s over 500 pages. It will help you from becoming a GOFU. And it is the guidebook used by all. It is the authority of New Jersey gun law. Get your copy today at EvanNappen.com, EvanNappen.com. Go right there, and you’ll be able to order your book. You’ll have it to you within a matter of days. So, Teddy, what is on your mind today?

Teddy Nappen 27:45

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. I think everyone’s been kind of seeing the news hit with what’s been going on. You know, Trump with the Pope. And I want to start things off. To every, you know, all the Catholic listeners, do not think on this as a theological lens. Think of this as a political. They were not, you know, I’m not arguing spiritual, the spiritual aspect of it. I am talking the politics, the hard core politics. And what do I see here? I see an individual arguing. If you were to listen to someone who made an argument for climate change, open borders, against capitalism and economic inequalities, and also pushing for gun rights oppression, you would assume it’s a woke Democrat, progressive. Yet, those are the views espoused by the Pope. The sources are here for that. (https://www.newsweek.com/what-pope-leo-said-abortion-gun-control-2070019) You can look it up. You can see it all across the internet.

Teddy Nappen 28:51

Crowder did a great job breaking it all down. (https://rumble.com/v78i7r0-trump-vs.-the-vatican-why-the-pope-should-stay-out-of-politics.html) But I wanted to dive a little deeper on the thing that matters to us the most, which is the Second Amendment.

Evan Nappen 28:59

Wait. Who’s Crowder?

Teddy Nappen 29:00

Steven Crowder. He is Louder with Crowder. He does a great show. He breaks down the whole deal and shows what this individual, prior to becoming Pope, would go to bat on. Bashing Trump, bashing J.D. Vance, pushing for open borders. Oh, my God, what’s that thing surrounding the Vatican? Page – 7 – of 10

Evan Nappen 29:19

Oh, you mean the wall. It’s pretty crazy. I’ve been there. Vatican is cool. It really is.

Teddy Nappen 29:24

Yeah, and that’s what I mean. You have to. And then, of course, he goes on and says, I don’t want to talk about politics, but then voices his opinion on every political stance. It’s incredibly disingenuous. And almost I want to call, to call, like, cognitive dissonance, where he’s understanding, like, how much that comes off. So, just to point out a few things here. This comes right from the NCR online, right here. From the Pope, when it was two bishops, we hold prayer. This is after one of the big shootings. We hold prayer for the countless to the countless children killed and injured every day around the world. Let us plead to G-d to stop the pandemic of arms, large and small. I have heard that term many times, the pandemic of arms. Where does that come from? Oh, the gun rights oppressors. And the same Cardinals.

Evan Nappen 30:24

Well, wait and the reason is, by making it, putting it in a health context, they want to use it. So, they can use it to go after the political issue regarding health insurance. They want to make it a health issue. This was their actual plan, and I personally heard it espoused early on by Josh Sugarman, when Hillary Clinton was pushing for national health care. How they want to make guns a health issue, and they sure as hell have done a good job of that, actually. And they’ve gotten the CDC involved. They got the pediatricians and the doctors. You’re asked questions about, are you a gun owner? By your doctor. This didn’t happen by magic. This is all part of the plan. So, by calling it pandemic, by looking at it in that way, it’s pushing the gun rights oppression via the political issue of health care.

Teddy Nappen 31:32

Yeah, and also the fact that his fellow Cardinals at that time were also taking it a step further, saying the facts are clear. Guns are plentiful and common sense attempts to limit their availability have largely been rejected in the name of freedom not found in our Constitution. Huh? I don’t think they read the Constitution, or they skipped some pages. You know, they only went to the things that mattered to them. But I didn’t hear him call out and say, no, no, we’re not about that. We’re not about disarming our people. By the way, it doesn’t really work out too well when a group of individuals are disarmed. You know, those of religion, of religious faith. Just looking at history, mind you. Going back, by the way, this goes back even prior to, when he was just the Cardinal. In 2017 after the mass shooting in Las Vegas, he reposts Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat, to my colleagues, your cowardice to act cannot be whitewashed by thoughts and prayers. None of this ends unless we do something to stop it. Increase access to mental health care and stronger, quote, unquote, sensible gun control laws. Hmm, I wonder what that sounds like.

Evan Nappen 32:48

Yeah, it’s true. Well, you know, there’s the politics of it, then there’s the economics of it. You know, there’s donations and such. There’s all these kind of things that have unfortunately skewed, skewed what’s going on. As a matter of fact, I want to mention, and I don’t know if I ever told you, Teddy. About the time that Frank Perdue, okay, remember Frank Perdue with Purdue chicken there? Well, he wanted to better promote chicken, which was always his mission. You know, it’s true, true story about him. Page – 8 – of 10

Remember his slogan? It takes a tough man to make a tender chicken. Right? That was his slogan for many, many years. You’d see Frank Perdue’s face on billboards. It takes a tough man to make a tender chicken. And this is a true story now. I know this is a little bit off the topic, but I’m going to get back to how this applies to what you’re talking about.

Evan Nappen 33:49

But they did try to market in Spain, true story. And when the translators translated, it takes a tough man to make a tender chicken in Spain, they put up the billboards with Frank’s face, you know, with his slogan. And the translators for the word “tough” used the word “macho”. We all you know, in America, macho means tough. However, in Spain, in Spanish, “macho” means “sexually excited”. So, everyone was driving by billboards with Frank Perdue’s face, saying, it takes a sexually excited man to make a tender chicken. But I digress.

Evan Nappen 34:27

Let me tell you about what happened when Frank Perdue really wanted to market chicken. And, you know, he went to the Pope and he said, I would like you to change, Give us this day our daily bread, to Give us this day, our daily chicken. And the Pope said, No way. I’m not going to do that. He goes, look, we’ll donate $10 million to the church. What do you say? Pope said, No, not doing it. Frank Perdue upped his offer, 100 million. The Pope wouldn’t do it. Finally, Perdue says, look, $1 billion to change, give us this day, our daily bread, to give us this day our daily chicken. And look for a billion dollars. He figured how much good the church could do around the world with a billion dollars, and agreed to do it. And at that time, the Pope had a big meeting with all the Cardinals and everyone, and he said, I have good news and I have bad news. He said, the good news is the Purdue chicken company has donated $1 billion to the Catholic Church, and it’s going to be wonderful for us. The bad news is we lost the Wonder Bread account. Okay, so anyway. I know. That was pretty bad.

Teddy Nappen 35:51

Well, I know. Funny enough, sure enough, from MSN last Thursday, Pope Leo also met with David Axelrod, Democrat strategist.

Evan Nappen 36:00

Oh, really?

Teddy Nappen 36:01

Advisor to Barack Obama.

Evan Nappen 36:03

Oh, is that all.

Teddy Nappen 36:03

Right up in the midterms, when, when things are coming up and trying to go after the Catholic vote. But this is my point. This is where and to show the true hypocrisy. Like I said, that wall surrounding Vatican City and yet talks about open borders. I thought to myself, what do the Vatican guard carry? What does Page – 9 – of 10

the Swiss guard carry? What is their, what is their choice? (https://maxtacticalfirearms.com/blog/vatican-armory-swiss-guard/)

Evan Nappen 36:26

Wait, the Swiss guard has guns?

Teddy Nappen 36:28

I know, right?

Evan Nappen 36:29

In the Vatican?

Teddy Nappen 36:31

Not just guns, the deadly assault firearms. If they can define it for me.

Evan Nappen 36:36

No way, no way. Wait, actually, I think they’re truly assault firearms because I believe they’re select fire. So, those are actual assault firearms, not the nonsense of what the gun rights oppressionists claim are assault firearms. So, what model? Do you know what model they have? I think it’s one of the SIGs.

Teddy Nappen 37:03

Well, the original one, they were using the K31s.

Evan Nappen 37:07

Oh, well, those are bolt actions.

Teddy Nappen 37:11

They decided to upgrade after, apparently, there was an attempted attack on the Pope in 1981. So, they upgraded their arms, and now they are using, apparently, they got the Sig Sauers. They love Sig Sauer. They got the Sig Sauer SG 552 commando as their current choice.

Evan Nappen 37:32

Oh, commandos. Nice. Well, look, I totally am in favor of the Pope and the Vatican being protected by firearms. Absolutely. It makes sense. But then try to promote disarming anybody else, that’s another story.

Teddy Nappen 37:50

Yeah. And also, they upgraded themselves with Sig Sauer P220s, and along with the and that’s there. By the way, the Honor Guard carry those. The plain clothes travel ones will carry Glock 19s.

Evan Nappen 38:03

So, other than having a wall and having guns, that all makes sense for their positions. Page – 10 – of 10

Teddy Nappen 38:13

Oh, and also on the politics sevens, when they want to swap out every occasion, oh, G-d, okay.

Evan Nappen 38:21

Well, Teddy, I appreciate you pointing this out. And as you said, it’s not about the spiritual issue. It’s just that the politics are there, and we have to be vigilant about the politics. No matter where it creeps in. Even if it’s in our beliefs. You know, it’s still there, and we need to always vigorously defend our rights and put the arguments forward. And that’s what’s important.

Evan Nappen 38:52

Hey, let me tell you about this week’s GOFU. And this week’s GOFU, you know the GOFU is the Gun Owner Fuck Up. And I’m going to tell you, man, I have seen it. This one is just everywhere, because New Jersey has made anyone who gets a mental health commitment, involuntary or voluntary, it becomes a disqualifier to get a gun. Folks, let that sink in. If you voluntarily check in to get mental health help, as soon as you voluntarily commit to getting the help, guess what? You now have cost yourself your gun rights. Under New Jersey law, within five days of that, you’re supposed to turn in your Firearms ID Card. You become disqualified under New Jersey gun law. If you simply have seen any doctor or psychiatrist for a mental health reason, New Jersey will question you about it. And now you will have the added burden, just on seeing a doctor, no less a voluntary commitment, okay? Just seeing the doctor. Now you’re going to have to find a doctor willing to say that you’re safe for firearms. And the problem is, doctors are cowards. Even if they know you’re good for guns, they don’t want to say it. Because if there’s ever a problem, they’re afraid they’re going to get sued. And if you ever have a voluntary commitment, well, that’s just a per se bar. If it’s an involuntary commitment, well, you’re not only banned under state law, but you’re banned under federal law, my friends. Beware of the mental health trap that exists which will disenfranchise you of your gun rights. And look, I get it. If you need mental help, then I don’t want to say, don’t get it. But make sure you have, in your calculation, what will the ramifications be? It’s not something to do lightly, that is for sure.

Evan Nappen 41:23

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 3 41:34

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 10

Gun Lawyer — Episode 285 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Appellate Division, firearm licensing, Bergen County, mental health, due process, public health, safety, welfare, falsification, character and temperament, court reversal, pro se, legal representation, gun rights, grassroots advocacy.

SPEAKERS

Speaker 3, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:16

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:19

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:21

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, I’m very proud to report that my firm, particularly my brother Louis, who does our appellate work, has won yet another Appellate Division appeal out of Bergen County. Now, this is the Appellate Court reviewing the trial court in Bergen County, handling firearm licensing. And this is another win that really makes some excellent legal points here that are very significant and also points out what is been going on in that county. I want to get into this case and explain the significance and how it works here in New Jersey.

Evan Nappen 01:23

So, this case just came, just got posted online by the Appellate Division and is entitled “In The Matter Of The Appeal Of The Denial Of J.L.B.’s Application For A Firearms Purchaser Identification Card And Permit To Purchase A Handgun”. (https://www.njcourts.gov/system/files/court-opinions/2026/a0464-24.pdf) So, J.L.B. appealed from an Order denying his appeal from the New Milford Police Department who denied his application for an FPIC and a PPH, a Firearm Purchaser ID Card and Permit to Purchase a Handgun. Now, on this application, J.L.B. answered “no” to the question, Have you ever been attended, treated or observed by any doctor, psychiatrist in the hospital or mental institution on an inpatient or outpatient basis for any mental or physical or psychiatric condition? In denying the application, the New Milford PD cited solely a suicidal comment made by J.L.B.’s daughter several years prior, and their inability to obtain records from the Division of Child Protection Services, the DCPP. Milford PD concluded the issuance of the permits to our client would not be in the interest of “public health, safety, or welfare”, the all inclusive miscellaneous weasel clause.

Evan Nappen 03:07

J.B.L., our client, filed an appeal to the law division, which is the Superior Court in Bergen. And he did this pro se. He did that by himself. The Court denied his appeal, and the court found him disqualified, Page – 2 – of 10

pursuant to (N.J.S.) 2C:58-3(c), for knowingly falsifying information on the application pursuant to 2C:58-3(c)(5). and for lacking character and temperament necessary to be entrusted with a firearm. The Appellate Court, upon careful review, reversed and remanded for a hearing before a different trial judge because they found there is no evidence in the record demonstrating that J.L.B. knowingly falsified information on his application. Further, that J.L.B. was not given notice of the 3(c)(5) disqualifier until after he had already presented his closing argument, in violation of his rights to due process.

Evan Nappen 04:18

Additionally, the trial court failed to address whether the alleged falsification was made knowingly, as required by the statute. Very important, folks. Furthermore, with respect to N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3(c)(5), the Court’s reasoning provided no meaningful explanation as to why the issuance of an FPIC to J.L.B. would be contrary to public health, safety, or welfare. So, one GOFU right out of the box is don’t go Pro Se to Bergen County on an appealable license. Anytime you’re dealing with the courts, you want to have an attorney. Okay? That’s number one. Now, even though he got denied, fortunately, he hired us to do the appeal. And in doing this appeal, the Appellate Court has reversed his denial, sent it back to the court, and required that it be heard by a different judge.

Evan Nappen 05:21

Let’s take a look at some of the facts here in this case. It’s very interesting, particularly how the court decided it, because it can have impact on other cases. So, the Court gathered the following facts from the trial court’s hearing. J.L.B. is a certified public accountant with no criminal history. He has primary custody of his seven children, who range from six to 16. In April of 2020, his daughter, who was nine years old, sent a text message to her teacher, saying, “I want to die” and “I spent four days with dad, and four days with my mom, and I keep switching until everything is settled. But I can’t sleep without knowing if mommy is okay and safe.” The message led to the daughter receiving several months of therapy. The DCPP was involved in the family’s life on three different occasions, each time, deeming the allegations “Not Established”.

Evan Nappen 06:19

J.L.B.’s ex-wife testified on behalf of the State, describing alleged incidents of verbal and physical abuse by J.L.B. against her and her two children, as well as her struggles with alcoholism, for which she completed inpatient rehabilitation. The wife never testified or obtained a, never filed or obtained a Temporary Restraining Order against J.L.B. The court found her testimony not completely credible and characterized it as totally based on hearsay. J.L.B.’s sister testified as a character witness, describing his demeanor and relationship with his family, expressing no concerns about him owning a firearm. Dr. Richard Cyriacks, a family friend, similarly, testified that he had no concerns about J.L.B. responsibly handling a firearm. J.L.B. testified he had purchased a biometric firearm safe in which he intended to store the firearm if his permits were granted. J.L.B. testified he had seen a psychologist, a Doctor Lenzi, from 2018 to 2022 for marital issues, but he denied ever being diagnosed with a mental health condition or receiving psychiatric treatment or medication. Briefly, at around age 19, he had also seen a therapist following the death of his father. Page – 3 – of 10

Evan Nappen 07:42

Following this testimony, the State moved to compel the release of his mental health records from Dr. Lenzi, which the Court granted. So, keep in mind, folks, if you think you have medical privacy in New Jersey, you don’t! Okay? The Court ordered the records to come in. The Court admitted J.L.B.’s counseling records and a letter from Lenzi into evidence, from the doctor. In her letter, the doctor noted that she first saw him in 2017 for “marital difficulties”. “He presented as concerned about his marriage and stressed but positive and high functioning.” He reconnected for individual therapy in 2020 because of his wife taking the children to Connecticut, causing him distress. He was seen on an as-needed basis. The doctor reported his symptoms were within normal limits of chronic stressors and the family crisis he worked through during the treatment with him. She further reported that she observed no unstable mental health issues, and his treatment focused on implementing stress management strategies, communication, awareness, improvement and relationship building with the children, decreasing internal anxiety and meeting his challenges in an aware and grounded manner as to the records themselves. Lenzi wrote that he had symptoms of anxiety and depression related to marital difficulties, and in 2020 a progress noted that he presented with anxiety and depression and expressed that he was devastated by what he was going through. In 2024, the Court denied J.L.B.’s appeal, finding he was disqualified, pursuant to 2C:58-3(c)(3) for knowingly falsifying information regarding previous mental health treatment, and pursuant to 2C:58-3(c)(5) for lacking the character and temperament necessary to be entrusted with a firearm. This appeal is what followed.

Evan Nappen 09:47

The court, the Appellate Court, says N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3 governs the issuance of FPICs and PPHs which it does. A person may not receive an FPIC or PPH, if they are, “known in the community in which the person lives as someone who has engaged in acts or made statements suggesting the person is likely to engage in conduct, other than justified self-defense, that would pose a danger to self or others.” Or if you’re subject to any of the other disqualifications under 58-3. Pursuant to that law, no FPIC or PPH shall be issued to any person who, and this is underlined in the opinion, knowingly falsifies any information on the application form for a handgun purchase permit or firearm purchaser ID card. Invoking FPIC/PPH disqualification when any falsification is tendered is consistent with the application’s underlying function, which is to provide information to facilitate the police chief’s background investigation. Further an FPIC application that includes, again underlined, a knowing falsehood is disqualified at the moment it is filed and cannot be rehabilitated by an admission made later.

Evan Nappen 11:12

The Court then noted initially that J.B.L. did not receive notice of the 2C:58-3 issue, the falsification issue. I mean, the other issue until the State raised it at closing, which was delivered to J.B.L. after he’d already presented his closing statement. And the Court here says, “To comport with due process, a judicial hearing requires notice defining the issues and an adequate opportunity to prepare and respond.” N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3(c)(3) was not cited as a basis for disqualification in the New Milford PD’s letter denial letter. It was not cited sorry. As a basis for disqualification, nor was it discussed as a potential ground for denying his appeal until both parties had presented their evidence at the hearing. J.L.B. was therefore denied the opportunity to defend himself on this ground until the hearing was all but completed. Page – 4 – of 10

Evan Nappen 12:20

Moreover, and this is important, the trial court failed to address whether JBL knowingly falsified his response. Now we’ve experienced, folks, in our practice that there are times, many times, as a matter of fact, this trifecta of a win here that we’ve had. Where the court will make any statement that they deem to be a false statement, not even over the application, to be a basis for denial. And here the court is making it clear it takes a knowingly falsified response, and it has to be based on what’s in the application. At the close of the hearings, after both parties have presented their arguments, the court pressed, pressed J.L.B. as to his understanding of the nature of his mental health treatment, his course of therapy with his doctor, and interpretation of the question on the FPIC application regarding mental or psychiatric treatment.

Evan Nappen 13:19

Footnote three, and, folks, listen to what footnote three says. This is what happened in that court. Footnote three by the Appellate Court. “We note this line of questioning by the court was improper, as were other lines of questioning throughout the hearings. When presiding over a bench trial, the court may examine witnesses ‘to clarify testimony, aid the court’s understanding, elicit material facts, and assure the efficient conduct of the trial.'” “In this case, the trial court extensively cross-examined J.L.B. on multiple occasions and, in doing so, crossed ‘that fine line that separates advocacy from impartiality’ and substantially prejudiced J.L.B.’s right to a fair hearing.” And I can tell you, folks, that there are plenty of others that have experienced that in Bergen County, the court goes on in the opinion.

Teddy Nappen 14:42

If I recall, isn’t Bergen, pretty much the only county where they ever go after people for falsification?

Evan Nappen 14:48

No, they’re not the only county, but they are the lion’s den of problems. And this is really great, that this case is shining the light on what went on in this case. And this is now critical, so let me just go on. J.L.B. explained that he had answered “no” because he had been treated by a psychologist who held a PhD, not a psychiatrist or physician. He further stated he never received a clinical diagnosis of any mental health condition, including depression or anxiety. He was never treated with any psychiatric medication. He noted he had not seen the progress notes until they were released during the hearing, and he had begun to address why he would not know what a doctor puts in her notes before being abruptly cut off by the court. Get a load of that, folks. The trial court did not address these contentions. Instead, it relied on the doctor’s progress notes, unknown to J.L.B. at the time he filled out his application, to erroneously conclude J.L.B. suffered from anxiety and depression and he had falsely answered the questionnaire. Whether J.L.B.’s response was false, however, is a question the record before us does not resolve for the following reasons: J.L.B. was not afforded an adequate opportunity to defend himself, given the lack of notice, the record contains no clinical diagnosis of mental health conditions, nor evidence of any mental health treatment, and the doctor did not testify at the hearings.

Evan Nappen 16:35

Importantly, the court’s analysis entirely ignores the statutory requirement the falsification be made knowingly. Even if J.L.B.’s response was false, he had no reason to know the contents of the doctor’s notes when he completed the application. These records were not produced until the hearings on his Page – 5 – of 10

appeal, long after the application was submitted. A finding of knowing falsification cannot rest solely on the contents of records J.L.B. had never seen. Additionally, the court also denied the appeal pursuant to 2C:58-3(c)(5), finding that no FPIC or PPH shall be issued “to any person where the issuance would not be in the interest of public health, safety or welfare. “This is the “broadest” of disqualifications for obtaining an FPIC or PPH. “In re Application of Carlstrom”, by the way, is citing another Nappen case. The provision is intended to relate to cases of individual unfitness, even though not dealt with in specific statutory enumerations, the issuance of a permit or identification guard would nonetheless be contrary to public interest.

Evan Nappen 17:58

The court’s reasoning in determining J.L.B. was disqualified pursuant to is as follows, and this is from the court hearing. This is the Appellate Court quoting this quote from the hearing in the Bergen County Court. This is the judge’s finding in that hearing. I also find that he’s disqualified pursuant to 58-3(c)(5), to any person where the issuance would not be in the interest of public health, safety, or welfare, because the person was found to be lacking the essential character of temperament necessary to be entrusted with a firearm. And that’s really due to Mr. (J.L.B.)’s testimony. Particularly his testimony before the court here today, where he minimizes his course of treatment with Dr. Lenzi, and tries to divert attention away from Dr. Lenzi’s Progress Notes, in a very long letter, which states that Mr. (J.L.B.)’s treatment, while focusing on decreasing his anxiety, and the fact that he presented with depression and anxiety, both at Intake and at various times throughout the course of his treatment. The public health, safety, and welfare doesn’t just include the public outside of (J.L.B.) household. It also includes Mr. (J.L.B.) and his children. So, that’s the court’s decision. I do find that the state has met its’ burden by preponderance of the evidence.”

Evan Nappen 19:13

Then the Appellate Court says, in response to that, “This reasoning is misplaced. J.L.B.’s discussion of Dr. Lenzi’s progress notes was not an attempt to minimize his treatment or divert the court’s attention, but rather an effort to explain why those notes did not render his answer on the application knowingly false. A self-represented applicant’s attempt to contextualize his counseling records cannot support a finding of unfitness within the meaning of 2C:58-3(c)(5). Indeed, we recently rejected the notion that an applicant’s credibility or dishonesty can serve as a sole basis for disqualification pursuant to 2C:58-3(c)(5). What case are they citing? “See In the Matter of the Appeal of the Denial of Mikhail Polatov’s Application for a Firearms Purchaser ID Card.” Another Nappen win case. They’re using it to win here for our client, in which they say.

Teddy Nappen 20:20

Polatov Cocktail.

Evan Nappen 20:21

That’s right. That was our last show. It was on that case. Finding no correlation between the applicant’s lack of credibility and the absence of essential character or temperament that would make him more likely than not to be a danger to public health, safety, or welfare if he had a firearm. The court’s reason provides no meaningful explanation for how the record supports a finding that the issuance of a permit would be contrary to public health, safety or welfare. See Weston v. State. In the final analysis for a Page – 6 – of 10

court to sustain an administrative decision, which affects the substantial rights of a party, there must be a residuum of legal and competent evidence in the record to support it. Because the foregoing is dispositive, they declined to address the remaining arguments we made. They reverse and remand the matter for a new hearing before a different judge. This case is a great win, and we’re very proud of it. We’re very glad to have helped our client here, and it is a trifecta of three wins coming out of what goes on in Bergen County, my friends. So, beware. Learn from this and make sure you have good counsel when fighting for your gun rights.

Evan Nappen 21:45

Let me tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is a great range in Lakewood, New Jersey. It’s the range where Teddy and I both shoot. It’s where we got our certifications and where we love to shoot. Great range, great pro shop. They’ve got fantastic firearms equipment and great training. Get your CCARE there, your certificate, so you can get your carry. Whether you’re beginner or an advanced shooter, WeShoot is a place for you. WeShoot is just wonderful. All I get is fantastic feedback from everybody that goes there. They treat everyone like family. You will love it. WeShoot is conveniently located in Lakewood, New Jersey, right off the Parkway. Easy to get to, right there in Central Jersey. It is a great resource. We need our ranges, folks. Without our ranges, you don’t have a place to shoot, and this is a great resource that you can take advantage of. Pay a visit to WeShoot. Check out their website at weshootusa.com, weshootusa.com. You will also really enjoy their website. They have the WeShoot girls. They have fantastic top of the line professional photography, and you can learn all about this wonderful experience that awaits you at our favorite range, which is WeShoot in Lakewood, New Jersey.

Evan Nappen 22:31

And let me also remind you that you need to get a copy of my book, New Jersey Gun Law. It is the Bible of New Jersey gun law. It is 120 topics, all answered by question and answer in a 500 page book. That book is so big it is a weapon itself. So, get your copy today by going to EvanNappen.com, EvanNappen.com. You will help protect yourself from becoming a GOFU. You don’t want to do that. You need to know the insanity that is New Jersey gun laws. And that’s why I wrote that book, to make it as user friendly as possible for you to know. Hey, Teddy. What do you have for us today in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 24:07

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free, and one of the things that is always important is to keep tabs on our opponents, the gun rights suppressionists. I was perusing through EveryTown, and they put out their press release, patting themselves on the back. Everytown Gun Safety Action Fund Announces the Endorsements of Moms Demand Action volunteers for running in the offices of North Carolina and Texas. (https://www.everytown.org/press/everytown-for-gun-safety-endorses-first-round-of-moms-demand-action-volunteersrunning-for-office-in-2026/) And they were, you know, it’s various people seems that are running in these districts because they’re trying to attack there. You notice that they’re trying to hit like North Carolina and Texas, specifically in those areas, because they’re trying to counteract a lot of the fights going on in all the other states. Page – 7 – of 10

Teddy Nappen 24:56

We all know the Democrats, their polling is lower than Trump’s and the entire Republican Party. They’re at the lowest point. You can cut to Harry Enten on CNN, who is just the golden retriever of CNN, freaking out at the numbers every time. But what I love, what actually caught my eye was what was highlighted. They were talking about the Everytown Victory Fund. Back in 2021 they launched a program known as Demand a Seat, an educational program that trains, quote, unquote, grassroots volunteers and gun violence survivors to take next steps in their advocacy efforts by running them for offices and working on campaigns. They highlight 1200 volunteers across 47 states. Operating and trying to claim and move into these positions.

Teddy Nappen 25:55

So, stop right there. Here are the sycophants, individuals that are politically driven in removing and taking away our rights and trying to run in small localities. This is the game they play. This is how they chip away at our rights, and this is where they’re targeting elections. And you know their endowment of money, funding by Bloomberg of his actions. Where does this pan out? To see the results, cut to Virginia. If anyone’s been paying attention on that end, the insanity of gun laws that were rolled out by, was it Shinebomb? Of all the insanity that they were trying to pump out through the legislation, that giant omnibus. Remember, they ran a moderate campaign and then what?

Evan Nappen 26:47

Well, this is what they do. They make believe they’re moderates, when in fact, they’re extremists. They’re a wolf in sheep’s clothing when it comes to our rights.

Teddy Nappen 26:57

Correct. And right here, they’re even bragging about it right on there. DemandASeat.org. On their whole website, 13 Moms Demand Action volunteers elected into the Virginia House.

Evan Nappen 27:10

Get a load of that. They got 13 fanatical anti-gunners into the legislature. And why aren’t we running a counter program to get pro Second Amendment rights’ candidates from the grassroots to run? Where’s our candidates?

Teddy Nappen 27:34

Here they’re out spending NRA’s 31,000 in the Virginia elections. So, it’s very much we need people. If anyone is out there who has time and ability to run locally, it could be anything on that in the positions.

Evan Nappen 27:51

Yeah, anything.

Teddy Nappen 27:52

You can be anything.

Evan Nappen 27:53

Yes, I agree. Get active. Page – 8 – of 10

Teddy Nappen 27:57

Yeah, what ever it can be in the positions, because I’ll highlight, right now.

Evan Nappen 28:02

Well, it’s the old, it’s the old thing. All politics are local, right? So this is critical.

Teddy Nappen 28:09

I’ll highlight to you right here from the New Jersey Globe. This is back in 2023. National gun control group, Everytown for Gun Safety endorses five New Jersey municipal races and candidates from their grassroots organizations. (https://newjerseyglobe.com/gun-control/everytown-endorses-five-candidates-for-local-office-in-n-j/) Here we go again. So, they’ve been running this program since 2021. You can go on the website. They’re bragging about it right here. It’s the DemandASeat.org. And they train them up on the lingo that they’re pushing, the language that they need to put in bills. Whatever program they can and will activate in locals, they will do so. Any ordinance they can get away with, they will do so. That’s how you get the air gage knife out of California. They don’t care. It’s whatever.

Evan Nappen 28:54

One thing. You’ve got to give the antis credit. Because they’re always conniving some other strategy to try to screw us out of our rights. They are good at it. I give them credit for that. Where’s our counterforce to this? Where is it?

Teddy Nappen 29:09

Well, it comes down to this. To all gun owners, who it was. Well, I forget the percentage number that vote. And look, you have to understand this is how they get us. Because I see the U.K. I see California. That is their goal. We talked about in the last episode. If they ever get in power, if they ever find the means to do so, they will take away our rights. They will take away our ability to possess firearms. They will take away our rights to defend themselves. They have already done so in all these other places, and they continue to push for it. They will continue to push otherwise. So, you see, right now, people need to be active locally. This is where they get started every time.

Evan Nappen 29:53

It’s critical, and it’s very important. Hey, Teddy, I want to tell you about this week’s GOFU, and it’s a really important one. It is a GOFU that became an epiphany to me. And I want to tell you about this. Because, you know, our GOFU is, of course, the Gun Owner Fuck Up, and it’s important to talk about these things. These are mistakes from actual cases that people make, and it can be very costly to them. Cost them their freedom, their fortune, their family, their careers, everything, and you, the listener, get to learn it for free. Well, I’ve got to tell you, folks. I just recently came across a case that has really shocked me about how this is a GOFU, and I want to tell you why. Because it has to do with the “Duty to Retreat”. Now in terms of self-defense, when it comes to the legal framework of self-defense, which falls under the heading of “justification for use of force”, justification. It’s an affirmative defense. And we talk about justification for the use of force. We can talk about non-deadly force. We can talk about deadly force. Then the law lays out when you can and can’t use force. Page – 9 – of 10

Evan Nappen 31:13

I’m not going to spend a whole, you know, three hours here explain to you the law of deadly force and force. But as all of you should be aware, New Jersey, like many other states, has provisions that even though they can allow and permit the justification for the use of deadly force and/or force, there is built into the law a check that has to be in place called “Duty to Retreat”. So, the Duty to Retreat is put into our self-defense law so that you might be justified in using, let’s say, deadly force. You might be justified in doing it, but the law says that if you can retreat with complete safety, then you’re required to do that. That’s called the Duty to Retreat.

Evan Nappen 32:10

Now, what I’ve always thought about this, I’ve always realized that, look, what type of self-defense scenario would you be in where you know you’re in a life and death situation, or something where you feel you need to use force, deadly force, and, or, you know, even non-deadly force, but you’re in this position where you need to use force and you somehow can retreat “with complete safety”. Like, how do you have complete safety? And I always thought, you know, short of “Beam me up, Scotty”, how are you going to have complete safety in any scenario like that? I’ve never encountered a hypothetical until now, where it’s no longer a hypothetical of where Duty to Retreat might actually be applicable.

Evan Nappen 33:06

And here’s the scenario, folks. Here’s where it’s a GOFU that you better be aware of when it comes to Duty to Retreat. You’re in a situation. This is based on actual case that I know of. You’re in a situation where you are encountering a threat, a threat to your life, a threat even to possibly others. And you’re, let’s say, outside of your home, encountering such a threat. And then in that encounter of the threat, you retreat into your home. Shut the door. The threat is outside. You’re inside. You arm yourself inside, perfectly lawful at that stage. What should you do? You should call the police. That’s what you do. You call the police. You’re in your home. You’ve gotten away from the threat.

Evan Nappen 34:12

Where’s the GOFU? Well, in this case, leaving your home to re-engage the threat. No, no, no. You just retreated with complete safety. You now could even call the police. You now have armed yourself to protect yourself in your home. You go back out there to re-engage a threat. That’s a problem, folks. Potentially a big problem. Potentially an argument that could raise your failure to abide by Duty to Retreat. It’s a possibility, and it’s a strong possibility. So, what’s the GOFU? Once you’ve gotten away from the threat, stay away from the threat! That’s the takeaway. You got away from the threat. Stay away from the threat. Call the police. Do not take it into your own hands. Do not re-engage. You’ve escaped the threat. Leave it at that. That’s the important thing. To do otherwise may, in fact, be a giant GOFU.

Evan Nappen 35:32

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens. Page – 10 – of 10

Speaker 3 35:43

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York. New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 12

Gun Lawyer — Episode 284 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Gun rights, Appellate Division, Bergen County, mental health crisis, firearm sale, handgun purchase permit, New Jersey law, firearm storage, third party disqualification, extreme risk protection orders, domestic violence, Second Amendment, gun confiscation, robots, Milgram experiment.

SPEAKERS

Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2

Evan Nappen 00:16

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:19

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:21

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, my firm has done it again. We have won yet another Appellate Division gun case, and again coming out of Bergen County, which is notorious when it comes to denials of individuals regarding their gun rights. And we have yet another case here that’s very important, and we’re going to discuss it fully. It really is significant in what the Court is stating. It’s addressing problems that we’ve seen throughout the practice of gun law and the gun rights oppression that has taken place judicially. And the expansion is now, finally, apparently being curtailed.

Evan Nappen 01:29

Let’s talk about this case. So, this case is “In the Matter of Compelling the Sale of Maya Kun’s Firearm”. And if you want to read the actual case, the link, of course, is online at our website, where we always put the transcript of the show. We’ll have the link to the case. (https://www.njcourts.gov/system/files/court-opinions/2026/a0076-24.pdf) But let’s take a look at what this case is about and its legal significance. The petitioner is a Maya Kun and appeals from an order compelling the sale of her handgun and prospectively barring her from being issued, you know, in the future, a handgun purchase permit and a firearm purchaser ID card. And what happened here? The police were called to Kun’s home. Her boyfriend, D.G., is what we’ll refer to him as, and as referred to in the case, was experiencing a mental health crisis. Kun voluntarily surrendered her firearm, and that’s a firearm for which she was licensed in New York on the day of the incident.

Evan Nappen 02:47

The State then filed a motion to compel the sale of Kun’s firearm, which Bergen is notorious in doing, by the way. And following the hearing, the Court granted state’s motion and ordered Kun, as follows. Kun was “prohibited from owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving firearms and/or ammunition, and from securing or holding an FPIC or HPP . . .”, being a Handgun Purchase Permit or a Firearms Page – 2 – of 12

Purchaser ID Card, “pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3, or a permit to carry a handgun pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:58-4.” And the Court says that, after further review of the record and applicable law, we conclude the trial court erred in compelling the sale of Kun’s firearm and reverse and remand for an order consistent with this opinion.

Evan Nappen 03:47

And the facts are interesting in this case, and I’ll just give you it in a nutshell. Kun called local police. Kun was a Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine and specializes in child psychology. The police responded to Kun’s home after being informed by a third party that Kun’s live-in boyfriend D.G. had made concerning statements about wanting to harm himself. Upon arrival, Kuhn said that D.G. had been drinking heavily and planned to kill himself over anguish regarding the anniversary of his mother’s death. The officer that came there smelled alcohol, said D.G. was mildly aggressive, had a bruise above his right eye from where he fell while intoxicated, allegedly, and the officers eventually decided to transport D.G. to the hospital for evaluation. D.G. was evaluated and sent home that same day.

Evan Nappen 04:55

Now, Kuhn had voluntarily surrendered her firearm to the police on that day. The firearm was a Glock 19, and it was stored in a safe in the primary bedroom, accessible only with a code and a key. The firearm was removed after D.G. was placed in an ambulance and sent to the hospital. Kuhn had a New York Firearms ID Card for the Glock, and she didn’t have a New Jersey license. But, as you should know, in your home, under N.J.S. 2C:39-6.e., you can possess a firearm without a license in New Jersey under that exemption. Kun testified that they lived together for three years, and she was the only person who had access to the gun safe. And in response to questioning by the trial court, who often acts very aggressive in questioning in that court, we’ve experienced it and seen it, said that she would have given D.G. access to her gun because she had no concerns about his mental health. However, later in the hearing, she corrected that earlier statement and said she would not have given access. And at the hearing, Kun also produced, however, keep this in mind, a letter from D.G.’s psychoanalyst, which said that he’s been seeing him for symptoms related to the mother’s passing and does not have any concerns related to suicide or homicide on his part. And this includes during the episode in question, which led to all this, and around the anniversary of the mother’s death. He has no history of violence and hasn’t had a drink in a year. And despite losing his father two months ago, he attends AA and in his professional opinion, he does not pose any danger to society or himself. Now that was on D.G., of course. The trial court found both officers credible and concluded D.G. was disqualified from having gun licenses and that he was likely to engage in conduct other than justified self-defense that would pose a danger to himself or others. And that’s of course, under N.J.S. 2C:58-3(c).

Evan Nappen 07:12

The court also found, here’s where the rub comes in, that Kun, our client, was not fit to own a gun, as she was a threat to health, safety or welfare of the public if issued a firearm. And in making its decision, the Court considered only Kun’s statement that she was willing to give D.G. access to the gun safe despite his mental health and did not credit her later testimony, correcting the earlier statement. In sum, the court held. Quote. This is the court’s holding. This is court in the trial court. “In my view, given the totality of evidence here, it is common sense given the fact that you would give access to a person who clearly has been very troubled. Who’s expressed suicidal ideation, has had an issue with alcoholism Page – 3 – of 12

and continues to treat with a psychologist for the past year, that cohabitates with you. Given the totality of evidence here, and your initial answer to me that you wouldn’t hesitate to give him access to firearms, I do find that the State has met its burden by a preponderance of the evidence and you’re disqualified pursuant to 2C:58-3.” The Appellate Court says, we review a trial court’s legal conclusions regarding firearm licenses de novo. They look at it anew.

Evan Nappen 08:35

They then in the opinion, which you can read, reiterate through case law. Reviewing all the case law and such, the court says, as N.J.S. 2C:58-3 governs the issuance of handgun purchase permits and firearms purchaser ID cards, a person may not receive either if they are “known in the community in which the person lives as someone who has engaged in acts or made statements suggesting the person is likely to engage in conduct, other than justified self-defense, that would pose a danger to self or others.” The Court then says later down in the opinion, “The statute does not require that an applicant provide information regarding other members of the applicant’s household, although there are requirements regarding the safekeeping of a firearm from minors.” Let me just tell you, folks. We run into this a lot, where guns that belong to innocent third parties in a home get confiscated due to the actions or conditions or issues of a third party in a home.

Evan Nappen 10:01

Of the other party, and here the court is saying very clearly, the statute doesn’t require that the applicant provide information about other, about others. Further in the opinion, it says that the trial court erred in disqualifying Kun based on D.G.’s alleged mental health struggles. All of the disqualifiers under N.J.S. 2C:58-3(c) address the conduct of the firearm owner, not that of an adult third party who lives with the owner. Despite this clear language, the court’s opinion was overwhelmingly focused on D.G.’s conduct and risk propensity. The trial court found D.G. was disqualified from having a handgun purchase permit or firearm purchaser ID card pursuant to several disqualifiers, including reputation in the community, mental illness, prior and voluntary commitment, character, temperament posing a threat to public health, safety, welfare. The Court considered the letter from D.G.’s psychoanalyst as a “net opinion” and insufficient to prove D.G. no longer suffers from that particular disability in a manner that would interfere with or handicap them in the handling of a firearm.

Evan Nappen 11:38

But D.G. was not the owner of the gun. The weapon has not been seized from him. There was no domestic violence order in place, and he was not seeking a handgun purchase permit or firearm purchaser ID card. Folks, this goes at this giant bugaboo, this issue that has been plaguing New Jersey gun owners, that leads to confiscations, that leads to individuals losing their rights because of another. And the court has addressed it here. “The court had no reason to make findings regarding D.G.” The State did not present evidence or prove issuance of a firearm to D.G. would be a threat to health, safety, or welfare from possessing. The incident in question happened over a year ago. The State presented officers responded to the scene, but they did not proffer any evidence regarding D.G.’s present condition, etc. So, all this discussion about D.G., all that, whatever, the bottom line is that’s not about Kun. Page – 4 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 12:54

Out of curiosity, applying this to what they’re trying to push now with the, what was it, the household background check.

Evan Nappen 13:01

Well, this is just the thing. This is why they’re even trying to put legislation to make it part of the law that you can be disqualified because of somebody else. But that is not the law. And listen to this. The court then said, compounding the error, the trial court in Bergen then attributed the risk it found in D.G. to Kun because of her statement. “She wouldn’t hesitate to give D.G. access to the firearm in her safe.” Solely due to this statement, the court disqualified her under health, safety, welfare. The courts find that Kuhn wouldn’t hesitate to give D.G. access is not supported by substantial, credible evidence. The only basis of this finding was Kun’s answer, which she later clarified to the following hypothetical questions.

Evan Nappen 14:01

This is a from the transcript from the hearing. Court: Would you ever give him access to the combination or key? A. Yes, I would. I don’t have any. And then the court interrupts, You would give him access? Answer. I don’t have concerns for him being suicidal or homicidal. I’m a psychiatrist myself. So, I don’t, I mean, you probably want me to say I wouldn’t, but like honestly, I don’t have. Court: Oh no, I don’t want you to say anything other than the truth, okay? Answer. I am telling you the truth. He’s sober. He’s not, this was a one time thing. He was grieving his mother. He drank for those six days. When the officers came in, he was taken to the hospital. The psychiatrist there evaluated him deemed him not a suicidal homicidal. Sent him home the same day. He’s been in therapy. I think his therapist provided a letter. The therapist also has not been concerned for his safety.

Evan Nappen 15:01

Now this is the appellate court. “It was unreasonable for the court to construe this answer as anything other than Kun’s expression of her confidence in D.G.’s mental health and current stability. Far more probative testimony elicited at the hearing revealed Kun responsibly stored her firearm by locking it in a safe, accessible only to her. Moreover, she testified, in the three years she and D.G. had lived together before the incident, D.G. had never requested nor was ever given access to the firearm. The trial court’s finding lacks support in this record. Moreover, the trial court’s interpretation N.J.S. 2C:58-3(c) improperly engrafted a storage requirement onto the statute.” Although there is a storage requirement for minors, there exists no New Jersey statute regulating the storage of firearms for people who cohabitate with other adults. Simply put, Kuhn was under no legal obligation to lock away her firearm simply because she lived with D.G. It is not the court’s role to rewrite NJ law 2C:58-3 to impose such a requirement. State v. Jones. Citing State v. Jones. It is not our job to engraft requirements on a statute that the Legislature did not include. Rather, it is our role to enforce the legislative intent as expressed through the words used by the Legislature.

Evan Nappen 17:04

So, this is a great case. It addresses something that is seriously ongoing throughout New Jersey as a basis for search and seizure. We see this take place in ERPOSs. You know, the ERPOs, Extreme Risk Protection Orders, where third party guns get taken. We see it happen in domestic violence, where innocent third parties, who have nothing to do with the DV at all, where it’s often, you know, let’s say the Page – 5 – of 12

parents, but it’s the son and the girlfriend. Not the parents. Their guns get taken, too, and vice versa, when they’re not at all involved. And then you see the State saying, oh, well, these people are disqualified, so you’re disqualified, too. It’s this ridiculous approach of just having an agenda of disenfranchisement of Second Amendment rights based on the act of third parties and the Kun case stands in sharp Appellate contrast to those ongoing activities that take place every day throughout the New Jersey courts. So, keep this case in mind.

Teddy Nappen 18:31

Just to extrapolate off of this case, one of the things, because we know New Jersey down the pike, they’re going to try for this. They’re going to try to do this, family background check. What would be some of the legal grounds? Because you’re effectively, what you are doing is denying someone a civil right based on the fact that there’s someone who potentially should not be able to access or act or use said civil right. So that’d be the equivalent of, oh, I live with a, I live with someone who has a criminal conviction who can’t vote. So, therefore you can’t vote as well. Like it’s the. I don’t see the value.

Evan Nappen 19:10

Well, what if somebody in your household posted threats online? Do you now? Does the court say I’m sorry, but you are not allowed to go and use your computer anymore because somebody might access your computer and write something unlawful. Do you lose your First Amendment rights because of a third party? No. You know this idea of costing us our rights. These are individual rights. Let’s underline and bold that word individual rights. Okay? They’re the rights of the individual. They’re not shared rights amongst a group. They’re the person’s rights. And the courts are and should never be able to take away one person’s rights because of another person. Why is that? Because we have no control over others. Who do we have control? Who do we have responsibility for? Ourselves! Who do we have authority over? Ourselves! All right? It is therefore absolutely unfair and absurd that an individual would lose their rights because of another and that is a slippery slope that we cannot go down.

Evan Nappen 21:07

So, we’re finally getting case law that is pulling back this practice. It’s wrong. It is not justified under New Jersey law. It’s not justified under New Jersey licensing law. It’s not justified under New Jersey gun law, under the disqualifiers. And the court here makes that crystal clear why Bergen County was wrong in what they did, and this is something that has infected the system, and we have to be on guard and alert. We finally have a case law that is extremely instructive in this matter, and you can read it for yourselves, folks. And like I said, the link will be right there, and you’ll be able to read the case in its entirety. (https://www.njcourts.gov/system/files/court-opinions/2026/a0076-24.pdf)

Evan Nappen 21:23

Hey, let’s talk about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is offering New York City CCW, New York City carry certification. So, if you want to get your non-resident or even resident New York City Carry Permit, you can get it via the course being offered at WeShoot. If you’re looking to apply for your New York non-resident carry permit, they are offering that course for only $289. You will be able to take the comprehensive 18 hour court course designed to meet all the requirements necessary so you can submit your application for your New York carry. This course spans two days, featuring 16 hours of classroom instruction and two hours of live fire training. You’ll cover critical topics such as firearm Page – 6 – of 12

safety and storage, pistol and ammunition basics, de-escalation techniques, use of force, federal and state specific laws. And build live fire training. And have live fire training to build confidence and practical skills. If you’re seeking these certifications, you can go there.

Evan Nappen 22:47

They also have optional DC for Washington DC and Maryland wear and carry certification, as well as your ability to obtain Washington DC permit for just $150. So, if you’re looking to expand your ability to carry outside of the state of New Jersey, look no further than WeShoot. WeShoot is an indoor range in Lakewood. It’s where Teddy and I both shoot. You’ll love it there. It’s conveniently located right off the Parkway. They have plenty of other training, too. A beautiful range and a great pro shop. They have great deals on guns and accessories. They can get you equipped, whether you are a novice or a pro. WeShoot is for you. Go to weshootusa.com and check out their website. Check out WeShoot in Lakewood, New Jersey.

Evan Nappen 23:44

Let me also mention my book, New Jersey Gun Law. Make sure you get a copy of New Jersey Gun Law. It’s the Bible of Jersey gun law. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all question and answer, and it is your guidebook to the insanity that is New Jersey gun law. It’s written to be user friendly and to help you not become a GOFU, my friends. So, go to EvanNappen.com. You’ll be able to click the link right there and order a book. You’ll have it in a matter of days. EvanNappen.com. Hey, Teddy, what do you have for us in Press Checks, which I understand are free?

Teddy Nappen 24:28

Well, as you know, and you stole my line, Press Checks are actually free. I always want to look towards what would be if the Left had unfettered power. Where they pack the court, control the House, Senate, and President, what would they do? We don’t even have to look that far, because we are reminded to our neighbors of the North how completely, utterly insane they are when it comes to destruction of their rights. Canada, as we’ve spoken before, remember, they were doing a buyback program, the voluntary, even though it’s not it’s voluntary mandatory, even though they say, oh, it’s a voluntary program. Such a voluntary program that you have to turn it in or you’re going to be committing a felony. Yeah. Very voluntary. So, March 31 was the drop dead date of when you had to turn in your firearms that were banned. And this is the scheme that they’re pushing. This was done by the Minister of Public Safety, Gary Anandasangaree. I’m probably mispronouncing that. I don’t care. This is an gun right suppressor. So, this was their push. And after all.

Evan Nappen 25:49

He’s a hose head. He’s a hose head.

Teddy Nappen 25:52

Yeah, an imported hose head, let’s just say. But the one thing I always love is they show the breakdown numbers. This was from Colin Noir, a great Second Amendment guy. He won the Gundies Award for male influencer. A great individual. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNBwQSAYYiI) Page – 7 – of 12

Evan Nappen 26:12

I love Colin. He’s great. He does great stuff.

Teddy Nappen 26:14

He did a good breakdown, along with Rebel News, where they talked about how out of all their gun grabbing, it got to 2.5% of the firearms in the country, which was effectively 52,000 out of 2 million of the of the confirmed guns. By the way, not to mention all the other stuff that people probably, you know, buried.

Evan Nappen 26:39

Oh, like, you know that, wait, that’s what BATF stands for, by the way. It stands for Bury All Thy Firearms. Yes. Okay, go ahead.

Teddy Nappen 26:49

Including the E for everywhere. But so I love how they point out, like, okay, we’ve screwed this up. So, now what? There was an exchange between the Minister Gary and the House of Commons Member Dane Lloyd, who pointed out the failure and explained. So, the plan was in quote, March 31 was the time to complete the enrollment. And what is the option? What is to be done? Well, they’re going to roll out the Royal Mounted Police and other agencies will be available in the spring and summer to do the collection. Okay, that’s a very Canada way of saying they’re going to send mounted police and other agencies to come into your house and take your property.

Evan Nappen 27:40

Oh, God. I suddenly thought of that Mountie from the old Bullwinkle, Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoon.

Teddy Nappen 27:47

Oh, yeah, what was his name?

Evan Nappen 27:50

I don’t remember. But anyway, that would be, that’d be a good meme. They did the live action. Give me your guns with him. Hand over your guns. Please, may we have your guns? No, it’s Canadian. They’ll be very nice about it. Please, may we have your guns? Right.

Teddy Nappen 28:04

Yeah. Oh, Dudley Do-Right. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dudley_Do-Right)

Evan Nappen 28:07

Dudley. Oh, perfect.

Teddy Nappen 28:09

Dudley Do-Right.

Evan Nappen 28:11

Dudley Do-Right. Could it be any better? This is the Dudley Do-Right gun confiscation scheme. Page – 8 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 28:18

Yes.

Evan Nappen 28:19

Dudley Do-Right. Yeah. Oh, perfect, exactly.

Teddy Nappen 28:23

Yeah. And by the way, they pointed out, after the, after the Minister recommended they use the Mounted Police, the House of Commons, Lloyd responded Minister, I find that very concerning. We’re going to send police officers door to door as frankly, many police forces across the country are refusing to participate in the program.

Evan Nappen 28:51

Oh, man. I’m so shocked about that. They don’t want to go around and take citizens guns. I wonder why? Why?

Teddy Nappen 28:59

Yeah. Yeah, gee, I wonder from the fact that they are disarming their people. The fact that Canada has a rampant crime wave, which, by the way, remember Canada’s the first of mass shooters. And the ’90s were even worse in Canada, and on top of which, their economy is already teetering. Their budget is overblown from the social safety net. Now, on top of the fact that they’re very thinly stretched forces, they’re going to send them door to door to people. I love this guy’s response, where he said, oh, don’t worry. We’re going to look to. The Minister said we’re going to look to voluntary, either retired police, or off-duty police, to go to the households.

Evan Nappen 29:45

Oh, even better. I’m sure retired police wait to go door to door to try to take citizens’ guns in Canada. I’m sure they’ll volunteer in droves to do that. I mean, come on.

Teddy Nappen 29:59

Well, I love how they stress the term. This is a voluntary program. We’re not, we’re not expecting much resistance. This is just voluntary,

Evan Nappen 30:08

Yeah, voluntary!

Teddy Nappen 30:10

Yeah. How much was that? And bear in mind, this comes from like the firearm, their version of the NRA, the Firearms Rights Coalition of Canada. (https://firearmrights.ca/1500-guns-banned-from-law-abiding-canadians/) Their fighters who point out the failure of this where, not only, by the way, not only were they saying, oh, we’re not going to come for your guns. They clearly are. I love, it’s just it drives me nuts. In 2010 Justin Trudeau, when he did an interview about the mass registration, what were the words? I always hear the argument that registration of guns will lead to the taking away of guns from Page – 9 – of 12

everyone. That’s just not true. The argument is false because we have a gun culture in Canada. We are just trying to do common sense.

Evan Nappen 30:52

Oh, right. It’s always common sense. Listen, we know the four words, and we’ll say it again in case you don’t. Legislation. And then what comes next is Registration. Then Confiscation, and after that is Extermination. We’ve seen it repeat throughout history. Every major Holocaust is preceded by taking the guns. And you can see what lack of guns does in let’s say Iran. You want the people to rise up. You want them to knock out that evil terrorist regime? Cuba. Again, in all these places. What do you have? You have disarmed the population. So, Canada is going down the road of disarmament, and it is always a road that is paved to hell.

Teddy Nappen 31:36

And the Coalition highlights then in 2020 the banning of 1500 different models of their version of assault weapons. The ending of buy, sale, transfer or use of military assault weapons. What is that? They don’t know.

Evan Nappen 31:54

They don’t know. Just seize the gun. And here’s the thing, they’re having trouble getting anybody to go and seize the guns. And yet, that raises an interesting question, doesn’t it, Teddy?

Teddy Nappen 32:11

Yes.

Evan Nappen 32:12

And what is that? That we were talking about?

Teddy Nappen 32:15

Well, I under, well, we were getting to the fact that the main issue, and the Left know this is the hardest part. If they had the power, they would. They want to do this. They want to disarm the people.

Evan Nappen 32:28

Of course! This is, this is their end game goal, their end game.

Teddy Nappen 32:32

But the issue is the feasibility, because they have to get so much cooperation from the police, from the locals, and that’s why it failed in Australia. They still can’t even get the guns through. They’re trying to do it now, and they, and half the country, isn’t complying. In the U.K., anywhere they go, they cannot get the compliance.

Evan Nappen 32:51

So, what might be a mechanism that they can use? Page – 10 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 32:53

This where, this is where it’s going to come down to at this point, robots. They’re going to use robots.

Evan Nappen 32:59

Wait a minute. Now, people might laugh. They might laugh and say, robots? That sounds ridiculous. But stop a minute. Stop a minute. We are entering into a new world. Within about a year or so, Elon Musk will be selling his robots, and robots are going to become a way of life. Just like, you know, years ago, you may not have even believed the internet could exist. You may not have believed GPS could exist. All these things. AI is exploding. Yet robots are the future. We see. What are drones that we’re fighting wars with? They’re flying robots, when you get right down to it. So, robots are going to become a tool, and they are arguably a threat to our gun rights in the future because robots can be used to actually effectuate the confiscation of guns. Think about it. Officers, normally, are not going to want to go, and may even in fact, refuse to go, if they have taken their oath seriously, to take guns from law-abiding citizens. But you know, who won’t refuse? Robots. Robots won’t refuse.

Evan Nappen 34:24

You may don’t think of robots like a 1950s sci-fi movie. Modern robots are kind of amazing, and they can do things that people do. And they’re going to get better and better and better at doing those very things. Do not be surprised. And you can say, hey, I remember hearing this way back on Gun Lawyer, way back years ago. And it won’t even be that long ago, I heard about robots taking on a role of law enforcement. I could well see robots coming to houses talking about guns that they believe are there. Even having scientific mechanisms in them that can sniff for guns, that can search for guns. I mean, look, what do they do now with dogs? They have it, right? They have it now with Wi Fi, right?

Teddy Nappen 35:21

Where you’re walking into.

Evan Nappen 35:22

Right!

Teddy Nappen 35:22

If you walk somewhere, it can actually track if you’re carrying.

Evan Nappen 35:26

So, don’t, don’t right. And, yeah, don’t discount this.

Teddy Nappen 35:31

Go a step further. Now apply it to, okay, think drones. Now they get the anti-gun whack nut group where you have the appeal to authority, where, like, oh, I’m supposed to do this, and controlling the robot from a screen, because that takes away the human element, where they’re no longer going door to door. Now you’re just sending some robot and commanding it to get the gun without being there. Without, like, following the logic, because it’s what they’re training them all for. Page – 11 – of 12

Evan Nappen 35:58

Right! And now they don’t have to face the homeowner and they and it’s more impersonal. They can demand the seizure and have literally a robot army to seize guns. You think it’s laughable? I don’t. I don’t. Because they will stop at nothing to disarm us if we ever quit in our fight. The eternal vigilance that it takes to maintain our rights, and this will become a tool of the oppressionists to steal our rights, to take our guns, to essentially enslave us. That’s their goal.

Teddy Nappen 36:39

Take it a step further to the Milgram experiment. You remember that? The famous experiment where the whole idea is you have someone in the room, and they’re supposed to test like, elect like electrical shocks to basically make it so you can react. There’s someone at the lab turning the dial, and they know full well. If they turn it higher it’s going to kill the person, but they keep turning it. Then the guy in lab coat goes, well, the experiment has to continue. You have to turn the dial. And that appeal to authority. And you know what really screws up every time they do this? 90% of the people turn that dial to kill someone. So, now apply that to where you’re controlling this robot and disarming it. Well, we have to do this because it’s for your safety. They have no standards to the Left. This is what they want. If they had the means to disarm you, they will. But currently, they are not. It’s not feasible. Don’t get.

Evan Nappen 37:35

Well, I guess we’re gonna see all kinds of gun testing on robots. I’m assuming we’re going to see reports of that. Because what happens if a robot goes crazy and gets dangerous? What rounds are the best at stopping robots? Hmmm?

Teddy Nappen 37:55

Ten millimeter.

Evan Nappen 37:56

Maybe 10. I don’t think. Do we have to move up to a big 50? Probably not. We’ll see where the weak spots are in robots and all that kind of stuff. It may come down to some interesting times as the old curse goes. I’ll tell you, folks, beware, and stay vigilant. I think there is. We can never lose sight of what their end game is, and that is disarmament of the individual so that we can be controlled. And this goes to the very heart of what the Second Amendment is about. The Second Amendment ain’t about duck hunting, folks. It’s about a check on tyranny. It’s about enemies, both foreign and domestic. It is about our insurance policy for our freedom and to remain free. And these things are threats. As science and technology progresses, there’s so many wonderful things that can come from it. I’m not anti-progress or anti-science, but there also can be a lot of danger. I can foresee this danger, so stay vigilant.

Evan Nappen 39:06

Hey, let me tell you about this week’s GOFU. Now this week’s GOFU. You know, GOFUs are Gun Owner Fuck Ups. This is where you get to learn very cheap, meaning, for free, what can be very expensive lessons. And this week’s GOFU is this. If you’re transporting or carrying a gun, know your destination. Know where you’re going, and make sure that where you’re going doesn’t put you into a trap. And let me tell you right now, I have cases where individuals, maybe on the job or otherwise, or they get diverted because of some emergency, or they’re going to do something and don’t realize that Page – 12 – of 12

they are ending up, let’s say, for example, on military property, or at a protected port, for example, or at any other place like that where firearms are prohibited. If you enter these places, search of vehicles is absolutely permitted, and you’re essentially consenting to it by just coming up to that gate. And if you come up to that gate with a gun, you’re going to have a problem. You’ve got to know where you’re going to end up with your firearm, and even if that wasn’t where you were intending to go, you have to realize that suddenly you could have trouble. You could have a problem.

Evan Nappen 40:35

If you’re in your vehicle with a firearm, and you end up having to go not just to a New Jersey sensitive place, but we’re talking about having to go on to property where there’s going to be active searching for firearms and where firearms themselves are prohibited, that can be a trap. We have cases where it has become a trap, and it is absolutely a GOFU. So, folks, be aware, be clear. Make sure you don’t bring your firearm to a prohibited place, and be very careful about Federal places that you may have to enter into that will pose this risk to you and your guns.

Evan Nappen 41:25

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 2 41:36

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 11

Gun Lawyer — Episode 283 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Gun lawyer, John Petrolino, Citizens Committee, New Jersey, carry permits, African American applicants, retired police officers, freedom of information, institutionalized racism, constitutional carry, national reciprocity, Second Amendment, anti-knife movement, UK gun laws, knife control.

SPEAKERS

Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:16

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:18

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:20

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, we are currently watching with great expectation here over a lawsuit that has been brought and filed by our good friend John Petrolino with the help and assistance of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. (ccrkba.org) And what is going on here is very interesting, because John, who many of you know, does excellent reporting on firearm issues, particularly on New Jersey as well. He does great extensive coverage. Well, John was instrumental in having the permit to carry statistics getting publicized and put out there. And with it being put into the ether and made part of an awareness that otherwise really wasn’t there about the key discovery he made regarding blacks, black carry applicants. African American applicants are denied more than double their white counterparts for non-criminal reasons. Okay?

Evan Nappen 01:55

And John, he requested the records seeking the statistics on retired police officer carry permits to build on the coverage of all as to who has been denied. So, remember retired police officers in New Jersey can get the RLEO, the Retired Law Enforcement Officer, Card, which in effect functions as a carry permit for retired law enforcement. Prior to the Bruen decision, where it was virtually impossible for folks to get carries, Retired Officers through the RLEO were able to get their carry in that manner. Now, of course, there’s been even more progress where LEOSA (Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act) also covers law enforcement and actually covers New Jersey law enforcement, which to large degree makes even needing a retired law enforcement carry not as necessary as it used to be. But still, it is something that is done, that is issued. Page – 2 – of 11

Evan Nappen 03:14

John requested through, you know, essentially New Jersey’s freedom of information to get the records so that we can continue the further analysis. And what I have here is a news release from Citizens Committee. (https://ccrkba.org/ccrkba-director-sues-nj-officials-over-denied-records-requests/) And what it says, as noted in the complaint, “Plaintiff and the public has a strong interest in ascertaining the relationship between the demographics of carry permit holders amongst the general public and retired law enforcement officers including but not limited to county location, race, sex and the effect of potentially disqualifying criteria in the application population as well as the success rate for the appeal process within the New Jersey State Police.” “Having established Petrolino was deprived of his common law right of access the New Jersey Civil Rights Act was violated, the clear remedy is injunctive relief compelling the production of the records to Petrolino . . .” It continues, “The NJSP”, meaning New Jersey State Police, “has denied countless records requests that I’ve made over the years, never fulfilling even one”, Director Petrolino said. “When I emailed them about these denials, an unnamed person at NJSP basically told me to sue them — so here we are.”

Evan Nappen 04:46

That’s right. And as further noted in the news release, “Records concerning the retired police officer permits are about as public as you can get,” says Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “Do they have the same level of perceived bias in their permitting statistics? Or perhaps worse yet, do they not? The public has a right to know this information. We laud Director Petrolino in his quest to hold New Jersey officials accountable by forcing them to be transparent with those they swore to serve.” Yes, it is very important that these records get out there, because the current records already show the institutionalized racism that occurs in carry permitting systems. That alone should stand for why we should have Constitutional Carry in New Jersey, where you do not need any permit, as do the majority of the United States. They have no permit required, and it is something that is not necessary, nor in full exercise of the Second Amendment. We should not even be required to need a permission slip. And this illustrates the reasons why. Because the surest way to avoid the racial discrimination, to avoid these type of coverups over records, is to not have to have the records at all, by having what is lovingly called Constitutional Carry.

Evan Nappen 06:34

You may have heard there’s a bill federally being pursued to have National Constitutional Carry, which would preempt all states and make it so that any law-abiding citizen can carry without any permit anywhere in the U.S. Now, as a step in between getting to that would be national reciprocity, where every State has to at least recognize every other state’s carry permit, although the majority of states don’t even require carry permits anymore. So, this is what we’re working toward, because this is fundamental to our rights. The ability to carry, the ability to be defenders and not victims, and the fight continues. This is yet another important, very important, step in the fight. As it reveals, and has the potential to reveal, the flaws and other problems that go to bias, racism, arbitrary denials, discouragement built into the system itself. These are all the mechanisms that permitting systems are designed to create. They’re actually made to do this. They’re made to discourage. The idea that it has anything to do with public safety is, of course, a joke, and it’s proven by the Constitutional carry states that are doing just fine without the permission slip. So, in the states that have this still in place, it’s there to be a barrier to the exercise of our rights. Page – 3 – of 11

Evan Nappen 08:28

And you know, it’s kind of laughable to see the Left talk about how outrageous it is, unbelievably outrageous, how it’s Jim Crow 2.0, to require an ID to vote. To vote! That’s Jim Crow. But what goes on with carry permits, with gun licensing? Oh, that’s fine. Well, if that’s Jim Crow 2.0, gun laws are Jim Crow 2000. It’s insanity then, Okay? That’s what’s going on in that radical difference.

Teddy Nappen 09:10

Honestly, Dad, it makes me think back to Shaneen Allen, where, you remember, we reached out to all the pro black groups, all the others, like bringing.

Evan Nappen 09:22

Right!

Teddy Nappen 09:22

They were going to put a single black mom in jail for doing nothing more wrong than.

Evan Nappen 09:28

Seven years, with three and a half years minimum mandatory, was their best offer when I took on the case.

Teddy Nappen 09:35

Yep, reached out to Al Sharpton’s group, the NCAA, anything?

Evan Nappen 09:39

Everybody, right!

Teddy Nappen 09:41

Nothing. Crickets.

Evan Nappen 09:43

Crickets.

Teddy Nappen 09:44

Because there is a built-in reason. These people, the Left are just Marxists. And when it comes to Marxists, they have no standards. It’s about oppressor and oppressee, and it doesn’t matter what position we must take. Because that’s how you end up with Queers for Palestine. That’s how you end up with the fact that they’re pushing actual racist gun laws. Because that is the standard. Because it has to be. No, no. We have to make sure these people are disarmed so we can keep the oppressor / oppressee mindset continuing. Sorry, we can’t side and agree with common sense issues like civil rights.

Evan Nappen 10:26

And the most fundamental of all civil rights is the right to be armed. I mean, look right now at what’s going on in Iran. Gee, why haven’t the people risen up to get rid of that evil, terroristic, ruthless regime? Page – 4 – of 11

Why? They don’t have the guns. They don’t have the guns. That’s the problem. That is the big problem. And we have, as an insurance policy in America the Second Amendment, and it’s a check on tyranny. Okay? Enemies, both foreign and domestic, all right? This is why it’s there. And you can see countries that have disarmed their civilian population, and then you see what they do to them. You can see that taking place. Not just in countries as extreme as Iran, or as extreme even as North Korea, or others, what we think of as dictatorships or totalitarian states. But just look now at the U.K. and what is going on there. And Teddy, I think in Press Checks, you’re going to be talking about that, and there you can see what. I’m not going to, we’ll just put that as a little teaser. We’re going to get into that, and it’s critical. So, I want to applaud John Petrolino and Citizens Committee (CCRKBA.org) for pushing to get these records, and as we can expose the cover up. Because why? Why not release them? What is it that they’re so afraid of us finding out, right? You know, there’s something there. Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. There’s something going on there, and I can’t wait to find out the truth. We will get to the truth.

Evan Nappen 12:25

Hey, let me tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is a fantastic range down in Lakewood, New Jersey, where Teddy and I shoot. We got our training and certificates at WeShoot, and it’s a great resource, as well. They are having a big March Madness sale, and this sale is going until Tuesday the 31st. Here’s some of these deals in their March Madness. First of all, they have, for only $249, you can have a family membership with unlimited range access passes, priority lane assignment, 5 free guest passes, 3% instant cash back in rewards, 5% off accessories, special pricing on ammo and targets. This includes a spouse and all children under 21. This is regularly $425 for a family membership. Valid until 3/31. You can get this fantastic deal for only $249. This is a fantastic bargain. You’ll be able to access the wonderful range and all of these great benefits that WeShoot offers. So, you want to check out WeShoot in Lakewood. Go to their website, weshootusa.com. So this is a great family membership sale.

Evan Nappen 14:07

They’re also offering, in the March Madness sale, 20% off all their used guns. Twenty percent off all used guns. That is a fantastic sale. You want to go there and see what great pre-loved guns are there, which you can acquire for a 20% discount. They’re also offering 10% off all Savior Range Bags and Accessories. These are, of course, the wonderful Savior products, and they are doing 10% on that for their March Madness. So, go to WeShoot and check out these great sales. You can get fantastic deals on firearms and a family membership. What a great way to have great family time, what a great family activity. Take your family to the range, enjoy a great day of shooting, and really celebrate being an American in this 250th year of our birth here in this great country. And do it at WeShoot.

Evan Nappen 15:30

Let me also mention our good friends at the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. They are the stalwart defenders of our Second Amendment rights in New Jersey. They are the key group, and you need to belong to the Association. Make sure you belong. We’re going to have a bigger fight now coming up with our new governor, who will be on the same path as the old governor, being an oppressor of gun rights. You can rest assured that we’re going to be dealing with all kinds of stuff, and we’ll be talking about it on the show. But make sure you belong to the preeminent gun rights group in Page – 5 – of 11

New Jersey, the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. You can join them at anjrpc.org, anjrpc.org.

Evan Nappen 16:21

I must shamelessly promote my book, New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of New Jersey gun law. Make sure you get your copy. It will help you not to become a GOFU in New Jersey. I’ve written it to protect my fellow gun owners, and you can get your copy at EvanNappen.com. Just go to EvanNappen.com and order your copy. You’ll be glad you did. It’s over 500 pages. Yeah, that’s what it takes to try to make any sense of New Jersey gun laws, and it’s all done in a question and answer format to make it as user friendly as we possibly can. Teddy, what do you have for us today?

Teddy Nappen 17:12

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free, and I always want to look to, what would the Left do, if the Left had unfettered power? Let’s say Kamala won, the House and Senate are in their favor, and they followed James Carville’s, you know, we’re going to pack the Court. Also, you know, make Puerto Rico a state and everything that they can, so they can pass whatever agenda. What does that look like? I always will point to Canada and then much further along, the U.K. In the U.K., one of the things that has been very prevalent in their politics is there have been a heavy push of the anti-knife movement. You know, they already cracked down as hard as they possibly could on guns.

Evan Nappen 18:07

So, now they need some other inanimate object to blame.

Teddy Nappen 18:10

Correct! And I was looking to, okay, who is the “EveryTown” of the U.K.’s anti-knife movement? Who is the group that is pushing for all this? What is the driving force? Because there’s always some group. There’s always one. There’s always the, you know, Moms Demand Action, which is also funded by “EveryTown”. You also have Giffords. You have all these groups. Who is the one pushing for this in the U.K.? And they’re very proud of it. They admitted it on their site, “Blades Down” group. (https://bladesdown.co.uk/) It is an organization founded in the U.K. “Blades Down exists to protect young lives and strengthen communities. We work with young people and families to prevent knife crime through education, . . .” oh, propaganda, “. . . early intervention . . .” Ah, legislation to take away your rights. “. . . and practical skills.” Oh, practical skills, so you can make clear your argument for wanting to disarm your people. “By building confidence, promoting safer choices and equipping communities with life saving knowledge . . .” I love how they dress all that stuff up. And by the way, they love how they promote that we’ve removed 199 knives out of our community.

Evan Nappen 19:30

199 knives. Oh, my. Okay.

Teddy Nappen 19:35

Amazing. Okay. Page – 6 – of 11

Evan Nappen 19:36

A whole 199? Yeah, wow.

Teddy Nappen 19:39

And I love the advertisement. I thought a knife would protect me. I didn’t know it would change everything.

Evan Nappen 19:46

You know, interestingly, about knives and protection. That is the gateway self-defense tool for women, believe it or not. Studies have shown that when women want to defend themselves, and if they’re not otherwise trained in any other type of defense, they will often go first to a knife, because they are most comfortable with knives. Normally, you know, having grown up in the kitchen, etc, there’s a familiarity to a knife. So, the knife becomes the first weapon used by women, often those that are victims of domestic violence or have been victims of crime, etc. And then once they want to grow from the knife as their primary self-defense tool, they will often discover firearms, and that is very interesting. Because what the U.K. is doing is they want to ban knives. They want everyone to be defenseless, particularly women who would go to knives even first.

Teddy Nappen 21:08

They saw the article about the little girl defending herself against the pedophile and.

Evan Nappen 21:13

Correct!

Teddy Nappen 21:14

With a knife, and they thought, right. We have to disarm the little girl to make sure the pedophile isn’t hurt.

Evan Nappen 21:20

Yeah, so in the U.K., folks don’t realize, but historically, believe it or not, the modern, the modern gun ban, gun rights oppression movement actually came here from the U.K. after World War One. This had taken effect in the U.K., and the same political forces started the movement in the United States to go after guns. And originally, they were successful in going state by state, getting different states to pass gun laws. So much so that the NRA back then, I mean, they were naive. They actually had what were called the model gun laws, and they were putting out to states. This is the National Rifle Association. They put out to states what were the model gun laws that NRA wanted to see passed. It was essentially the NRA supporting gun laws. And they focused on, number one, things other than firearms. And remnants of that law going back 1920s era, back then.

Evan Nappen 22:57

Those remnants are in New Jersey’s law. They actually have roots going back to what the NRA pursued back then, out of naivete. I mean, they were, you know, plainly naive about it. But this is why, and also the head of the NRA at the time was a kind of a, he was pro-oppression, pro-gun rights oppression. You know, he was always kind of a problematic guy that you would never think today would Page – 7 – of 11

be ahead of that organization. But regardless, they pushed these state model, state gun laws. And so, if you look, for example, where New Jersey had the ban on blackjacks, switchblades, slungshot, etc, this kind of thing, which then became slingshots because they didn’t know what a slungshot was. Well, that actually goes back to the model gun laws that NRA was pushing. It even contained elements for permitting, for carry and all that kind of stuff, way back.

Evan Nappen 24:05

And that actually originated and came to NRA from England. It came over from the U.K., and it planted the groundwork in the States. Then what happened was it became too much with different states, not blah, blah, blah, and it went national. And by the time it went national, well, what was it? It was the NFA, the National Firearms Act. And the National Firearms Act was looked at, look, we can just get a one federal law. We don’t have to do these state laws. And that’s why, when the National Firearms Act finally passed in the form that it became, and I read through all the committee hearings, watching the NFA progress. It originally, the original NFA wanted to ban all handguns. They wanted to ban all, not just full auto, but all semi autos and full autos, and magazines over 12 rounds. That was the original, original NFA. And then through the committees, you saw them say, well, okay, what do we allow? 22 handguns. And then, okay, well, how about we keep semi-autos. And then you see, and then it finally took shape to what it is as we know it today.

Evan Nappen 25:23

At the time, the NRA, in The Rifleman, you know, in the “American Rifleman” magazine, said we’ve solved the gun control problem for America, and they were proud of it. And look, I’m not doing or saying this to bash NRA. It’s not why. We’ve got to know the true history of our mistakes. Okay? And it was mistake. We see it now, plain as can be. It was plainly a mistake, but it happened. We need to recognize it, and we need to try to fix past mistakes. You know, ignoring them and putting them under the rug isn’t a good idea. So, know this history, okay? Because we don’t want to repeat this history. And yet here, Teddy, you see with knives. We don’t have, yet, in this country, an anti-knife movement in the way we have an anti-gun movement. But once they take care of getting their agenda of oppressing and disarming and disenfranchising us of gun rights, you can rest assured that it’ll be knives next.

Teddy Nappen 26:28

Well, I’ll give you a worse one for you. This is something they push right now. By the way, this is out of Ellsmore Port. (https://bladesdown.co.uk/ellesmere-port-leading-the-way-with-safer-knife-swaps/a/) Leading the way for safer knife, for safer knife swaps. “Blades Down” has created a community supported with local families to do the “Let’s Be Blunt” campaign, where you can exchange your kitchen knives for safer alternatives. Literally turning in sharp knives so you can have a dull knife. If I could write a Monty Python, this would be it. You’ve heard of the Ministry of Silly Walks. Here’s the Ministry of Dull Knives. These people are retarded with the things that they are actually pushing for. Literally the Ministry of Dull Knives.

Evan Nappen 27:19

That’s the best! Page – 8 – of 11

Teddy Nappen 27:20

Dull knives.

Evan Nappen 27:22

Okay, listen, man. The whole world of knives. I mean, I’m into knives as much as guns. Is what knives will stay sharpest the longest? How great an edge can you hold on the knife? Make it as sharp and sharpening his whole knives. And here, the whole effort is pushing “dull knives”. That is hilarious. Hilarious.

Evan Nappen 27:43

What?

Teddy Nappen 27:43

It gets even worse. Then they said, oh, we need a crackdown. They’re pushing the Government to crack down on Facebook Marketplace because people are buying kitchen knives on Facebook Marketplace without age verification. Huh? What does that sound? Quite familiar. Think of Gun Broker. Think of any other thing. This is what they do. They crack down on any forms of, you know, freedom finding a way, and by the director. And so I traced it. I went even further. Okay, who is funding this group? Who’s their Bloomberg ass group? Who is pushing for all this? Apparently, it is out of this group known as the Ben Kinsella Trust. (https://bladesdown.co.uk/facebook-marketplace-knives-being-sold-without-age-verification/) And this is the U.K. London crackdown on knives, where, you know, have pushed all the laws of trying to stop people from possessing knives. Have pushed for all the anti-knife laws. They’re the ones funding all this group. Guess who’s one of their sponsors? Facebook!

Teddy Nappen 27:44

They’re literally complaining about Facebook Marketplace having that, but also Facebook is their sponsor.

Evan Nappen 28:29

That’s hilarious. Well.

Teddy Nappen 28:29

But this is the thing. Big tech is not your friend. They absolutely supported the Democrat Party. They are the number one funder of the Democrat movement. When it comes to rights, they do not care. So, it’s just disgusting. And remember, in the U.K. for laws, the maximum penalty for illegally carrying a knife is up to four years in State Prison. If you, quote, unquote, here’s it, “you have to have a good reason for carrying your knife.” What are the good reasons ? For your work, for religious purposes, and for a national costume. I like how that was a reason.

Evan Nappen 29:36

A national costume. Yeah. Page – 9 – of 11

Teddy Nappen 29:39

Because you can’t say national, you know, like Scots carrying their Dirks. No, no, no. You can’t be too nationalistic here. And, of course, they have their rigmarole ban lists of knives that we’ve talked about.

Evan Nappen 29:50

Well, you know, New Jersey’s knife ban, quote, unquote, does talk about, under subsection D, “manifest lawful purpose”, which seems to be pretty damn vague anyway. And with Bruen talking about right to defense outside the home, I think that law is ripe to be attacked. So, it’s in a way, similar, but it’s not. The problem there is on outside the home for carry. Whereas you’re exempted under other weapons, subsection D, you have an exemption under N.J.S. 2C:39-6e., to possess knives in your home. When it comes to carrying them, then you need a “manifest lawful purpose”, which is very similar to what the U.K. has. However, they’re actually going way further. They’re wanting to ban. They have the knife surrender bins. They’re actually doing a “dull your knife” campaign, stupid like that. Actually, you know, some people like you think, like, if you really hate somebody, it’s like, I’m going to slice you up with a dull knife, right? That’s even worse. But maybe that’s where they’re going.

Teddy Nappen 31:09

Don’t worry. They’re doing their best cracking down on the rapes from going from 19,000 to 70,000 in the UK, because they let mass migration in from individuals who, you know, let’s just say don’t.

Evan Nappen 31:22

No, no, Teddy, it’s not cause of them. It’s cause of knives. It’s because of knives.

Teddy Nappen 31:25

Yeah, that’s the issue.

Evan Nappen 31:26

It’s knives. Stabbings. It’s sharp knives. Sharp knives are the reason for the massive increase of rapes. If we at least have dull knives, we’ll address that issue, right?

Teddy Nappen 31:40

Yeah, and the rampant stabbings are from which individuals? Sorry, we can’t report on that because that’s racist.

Evan Nappen 31:46

Oh, right. So, this is one thing, though. You can still buy unregistered knives in America. You can buy knives, and there’s no permit required. Yet! There’s no place that I’m aware of anywhere in the U.S. that requires a knife permit. Now, you may think that’s outrageous. Who would? How could they ever pass a law to require you to have a permit for a knife? Well, let me tell you, right now. I have a knife permit that permits a serialized knife that was done by Russia. Russia. Soviet Union. I have the actual permit and the knife that goes with the permit. It’s just a very basic, five-inch blade hunting knife. They had knife control, knife registration, and you needed a permit. And I bet, in the U.K., they want to do something similar, right? Page – 10 – of 11

Teddy Nappen 32:54

Funny enough. That’s in their charter. That’s in the “Blades Down” charter. Demanding.

Evan Nappen 32:59

There you go. How did I know? How did I guess that?

Teddy Nappen 33:01

Amazing. It’s amazing. It’s almost like they don’t even hide it anymore, that they are Marxists and push Soviet styles. It’s how you have Mamdani.

Evan Nappen 33:10

Exactly!

Teddy Nappen 33:12

With the Government-run groceries, which I love. One of my friends, is like, it’s not Soviet because they still allow for other grocery stores. Oh, really? What do you think happens when you run up a Government grocery store? What happens to the other grocery stores? They’re gonna fold and leave. Like it’s, it’s the level of how are they this retarded? Do they not pick it up, like it’s?

Evan Nappen 33:39

Well, they have an agenda, of course. But listen, the important thing is, stock up on knives. Buy as many knives as you want to and can afford. They’ll have, you’ll have all of these “no-paper knives”. Now is your golden opportunity to buy and stock up knives of all types and sizes and shapes. If you want to understand all the knife laws, well, look in my book, New Jersey Gun Laws. I do a very thorough explanation of New Jersey’s knife laws, and you can still get knives by mail. You can still possess them without any special permits or permission, and there’s no registration of knives. And here’s the kicker. Knives are still protected under the Second Amendment. It’s not the right to keep and bear guns. It’s the right to keep and bear arms. And knives are arms, as well as very utilitarian with multi purposes. They end up being pretty good investments, too, depending on what you want to collect. So, happy knife hoarding. Just shake your head when you look around at what the formerly Great Britain is doing.

Evan Nappen 35:01

Hey, I want to tell you about this week’s GOFU, which is the Gun Owner Fuck Up. And we love to talk about GOFUs, because it’s actual cases, real things, where people have made mistakes. You get to learn very inexpensively, for free, what others have made costly errors regarding guns and firearms and what we care so much about. This week’s GOFU is about AI. Let me just tell you. You know, AI is interesting. It’s fun. It has a lot of potential, but don’t rely on AI for your gun law advice or for anything along those lines. If you use, you know, these AI platforms, any of this stuff, and you ask them questions, you better verify and get confirmation. Because these AI responses, they can hallucinate. They give supposedly law that isn’t even actual law. I mean, we’ve seen actual cases with clients getting into trouble because they’re relying on AI, which is, at this time, utterly unreliable. I’m not saying that it doesn’t have good uses and purpose, and it may have great things in the future, all that, all that. Page – 11 – of 11

But right now, folks. If you go to AI as your source, so that you don’t want to get into trouble under New Jersey gun law, you are making a big mistake, a big GOFU.

Evan Nappen 36:52

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 2 37:03

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Gun Lawyer Transcript – Episode 282

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Polytoph case, gun rights, New Jersey gun law, firearms purchaser identification card, second amendment, public health, safety, welfare, Bruen decision, essential character of temperament, weasel clause, gun denial, federal case law, voluntary registration, gun lawyer.

SPEAKERS

Speaker 2, Robert Bell, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen

Evan Nappen  00:17

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen  00:19

And I’m Teddy Nappen,

Evan Nappen  00:21

And welcome to Gun Lawyer with a very exciting show today, because we are going to learn about Pearl Harbor. No, it’s all about a different issue. What we are learning about, though, is a great case that just came down from the Appellate Division that my firm was fighting for our client here. It is a really amazing case that is a published decision, and this is very important to understand. In New Jersey, when a decision is deemed published, it means it is law. It acts as law. And the great attorney who argued this case for the firm, and did, in fact, do the appeal as well, is Robert Bell. Rob, welcome to Gun Lawyer.

Robert Bell  01:23

Thank you. Great to be here.

Evan Nappen  01:25

All right, man. So, we’re all very excited about the (Mikhail) Polatov case, and that’s why we’re saying that the “Court Tossed a Polatov Cocktail on New Jersey Gun Law”. Because this case, which is a great win, actually had some very, very important impacts on our gun rights and in future fights in the courts over gun laws. Why don’t you tell us about this case, Rob, and where we’re at and what’s happened. Go right ahead.

Robert Bell  02:03

Certainly. So, Mikhail’s journey in trying to exercise his Second Amendment rights started back in 2020. He applied for a Firearms Purchaser Identification Card and was denied. Not on the basis of any convictions, restraining orders, substance abuse, or anything like that. Nothing objective. Just a 2011 misdemeanor charge that was dismissed and something back in 2002. So, it’s all very remote, and neither of them resulted in convictions, anyway. He gets denied, and he appeals it. He gets in front of our favorite Bergen County judge. I don’t need to say his name, but you can look into the record and find it yourself.

Robert Bell  02:51

Don’t worry. He listens to the show. So, it’s okay.

Robert Bell  02:56

So, he gets in front of this judge, and he testifies about what happened in 2011 in New York during this incident that was dismissed. And it’s not that the Judge disliked the behavior. He just disliked his “cavalier attitude about it” and denied the permit. Fast forward to 2023. Mikhail applies again, and this time his wife applies as well. Both denied. Simply on the basis of a previous denial. They appeal it. They deny the wife simply because she lives with him, and they deny him because he was dishonest with us before. And if he’s telling the truth now, it means he was either lying then or lying now. It doesn’t matter. It was just a catch 22 of you lied at some point, and I don’t like that. You are not of the essential character of temperament necessary to be entrusted with a firearm. And that’s that, that was the, the addition to the weasel clause that I think our viewers know, right?

Evan Nappen  04:11

So, let’s do, let’s explain a little bit. The disqualifiers that exist in the gun laws under (Chapter) 58. There’s a list of what we often call the per se disqualifiers, where somebody like if you’re a convicted felon, it’s a per se disqualifier. And virtually everybody knows that. But New Jersey has this catch-all, the all-inclusive miscellaneous weasel clause that we refer to as “public health, safety, and welfare”. And that provision, that basis for denial is the area where we see the most significant abuse, particularly racist abuse. Where there’s a disproportionate denial of blacks by more than two and a half times to whites. It is the section of the law that is fraught with abuse on stopping the individual from being able to get licensed. The law was changed in New Jersey from just “public health, safety, and welfare”, but adding the phrase about “based on character of temperament”. Well, Rob, why did they add that? Why don’t you tell listeners why? You know the history. Why was that put in there?

Robert Bell  05:26

In June 2022, when the (United States) Supreme Court issued the Bruen decision, the anti-gun states, the gun the rights oppressors in New Jersey, New York, California, Maryland, and Massachusetts, were absolutely seething. And they have been going on a temper tantrum ever since. In December 2022, they decided to pass that temper tantrum into legislation that was signed by the governor immediately. And it added “. . . the essential character of temperament necessary to be entrusted with a firearm.” Where they found that was in footnote one of the Bruen opinion. Footnote one of the Bruen opinion explains the laws of multiple states, including that of Connecticut, and they quoted a case called Dwyer versus Farrell. Now, Dwyer versus Farrell is a Connecticut case about the firearms laws.

Robert Bell  06:16

However, the Supreme Court quoted Dwyer versus Farrell, and they had a phrase in it, essential character of temperament, necessary to be entrusted with a firearm. However, the Supreme Court of the United States unfortunately has a typo in that footnote. It actually reads “character or temperament”. So, we know exactly what they were doing. They were just combing that decision, looking for anything and everything to keep this unctuous statute going for as long as they possibly can so that they can continue oppressing gun rights. So, now we have a phrase in the weasel clause that is a result of the legislature copying somebody else’s homework and passing it off as a sensible phrase, because it makes no sense.

Evan Nappen  07:05

And now it’s actually. But Rob, now it’s actually had the opposite effect of what they intended. Because in this case law, it creates a limitation, as expressed in Polatov, as to what that actually means, right?

Robert Bell  07:24

Correct. They actually have spoken up on what that means, and it’s in part because I pointed out where it came from. I think.

Evan Nappen  07:32

I think you’re right. No, absolutely, it’s why. And now what is that phrase now mean in New Jersey, as it applies to the entire weasel clause now, right? Because it modifies the whole weasel clause. What is the standard that has now been determined by Polatov? By that case.

Robert Bell  07:53

They seem to have rejected my original argument that it requires repetitive misconduct. But then they go on to say, “character of temperament” means the basic defining qualities of a person’s emotional response. And to lack the basic qualities of one’s emotional response means to have no stable or consistent emotional core necessary for responsible action. In other words, to be so volatile that armament would endanger the interest of the public health, safety or welfare. I don’t know how you prove that someone’s volatile without pointing to multiple instance of misconduct, but.

Evan Nappen  08:30

But they are basing that, very importantly, on Koons v. Platkin, correct?

Robert Bell  08:40

Correct.

Evan Nappen  08:40

Now, what is the quote that the Court relies upon, which is extremely significant, because now we have, for the first time, a New Jersey appellate case law getting published utilizing the federal win, the federal law in our favor, and now that becomes part of New Jersey state law fighting, right? It’s very significant. It bridges the state to the federal. What did they do, Rob? What did they do?

Robert Bell  09:16

They quoted Koons v Platkin when they said that the weasel clause must focus on whether the applicant armed with a firearm poses a danger to the public. So, we’re running in circles with vague rules.

Evan Nappen  09:31

But now we have the standard of the violence and danger to public. We’ve seen many times in the denial that it has nothing. They put forward nothing to do with violence or danger that they don’t ever deny, as this case illustrates. What did the judge deny him for? Nothing having to do with violence?

Robert Bell  09:57

Credibility.

Evan Nappen  09:59

Right!

Robert Bell  09:59

Credibility.

Evan Nappen  10:00

Which is not a basis. And so, this is going to have the effect of cutting down a lot of the wrongful denials that we’ve encountered, that we’ve seen.

Robert Bell  10:13

It’s certainly something we can use to smack back them.

Evan Nappen  10:16

Yes. Now, we want to see it go further, of course, and to finally be taken out as utterly and completely unconstitutional to even have this type of disqualifier in the gun laws. But what has been accomplished here, with the Polatov case, is incorporating the federal wins in gun law, the federal case law into state law, and establishing a more narrowing. It narrows more the “public health, safety, or welfare” disqualifier than we had prior to the law being changed.

Robert Bell  11:04

Oh, yes, because now it has to focus on the applicant. People used to get denied permits for individuals who live in their house with them. If they were a convicted felon, if they were under a restraining order, if they had been involuntarily committed, something like that.

Evan Nappen  11:18

Right! And that is a classic that we see going on all the time in New Jersey with an innocent third party. They attempt to disarm the innocent third party because of some other party in the household who is otherwise disqualified.

Teddy Nappen  11:37

Didn’t they just pass that law, too? Where they’re now, like doing what are they trying to know like now hold or the household background check?

Evan Nappen  11:45

What I’m talking about here, and I think Rob knows. When we enter into these cases where it’s an innocent third party who’s being denied their gun rights or have had their guns seized because, say, somebody else in the household gets a restraining order against them.

Robert Bell  12:04

Correct. Vicarious, vicarious disability, I guess you could call it.

Evan Nappen  12:08

Right! And then they abuse the case where a person said, oh yeah, I’ve let the disqualified person have the gun, you know? And suddenly that makes everybody in a household is disqualified. And so, this is going to help to end that practice, and help end those arguments of becoming disenfranchised of your gun rights because somebody else in your household is disqualified. Because it doesn’t make you, the individual, have a character or temperament problem.

Robert Bell  12:47

Correct! And it doesn’t even sound like the legislature knew that what they were doing there. They just had a temper tantrum, and they limited something that they liked to use

Evan Nappen  12:57

Oh, yeah! Absolutely.

Teddy Nappen  12:58

Rob, I just have a question regarding, I was reading through the case, just the background of like, what they were highlighting, where it was the they thought he “lied” about it. But I just didn’t understand about his history, the criminal history of the charge, of why they were denying him. It just seemed like it was a complete misunderstanding of the question when they were asking. Did he have, like, the history? Because I was reading through the transcript that was in the decision, and it just seemed like they were confused, like it just seemed.

Robert Bell  13:29

Yes, at least in that first hearing, that I did not represent him in. It seems that way. It just seems like he said, whatever. And also I don’t, I don’t know that it’s in the transcript, but that was on Zoom. That was.

Teddy Nappen  13:44

Oh, even better.

Robert Bell  13:45

Yeah, so that hearing was on Zoom.

Evan Nappen  13:47

And wasn’t both licensing hearings in front of the same Bergen County judge?

Robert Bell  13:54

And that was a beautiful point. I like to tap myself on the back for that. I said the same judge and the cops have gotten in the way of this man arming himself for five years.

Evan Nappen  14:05

And I would like to point out to folks, if they want to actually read this decision, we’re going to have the link. (https://www.njcourts.gov/system/files/court-opinions/2026/a3720-23.pdf) There’s a transcription of the colloquy of the first hearing between the judge and the client. I think it illustrates what goes on in that court. Because when you read that, keep in mind the questioning you see going on there isn’t being done by the prosecutor. It’s being done by the Court, who is aggressively interrogating the applicant. Read it for yourself. You can see what goes on in that court when it comes to a Judge, who you want to be a neutral judicial authority, but he takes on the role of a cross examiner. It’s very interesting. It gives you a taste of what goes on there and what our client went through. You read it for yourself, folks.

Robert Bell  15:11

Twice.

Teddy Nappen  15:11

Now, multiply that times 1000 and that’s almost every gun case for New Jersey. Where you know it’s a prosecutor, a judge who you know, a political appointee who has a bias and wants to take away our rights.

Evan Nappen  15:25

Well, we don’t know. Why? Why else? What is going on? Maybe, maybe not. I don’t know. Is it just simply pursuing an agenda? Is it simply a rule that is now become something where the issuing authority is, is in  prepositioned here to be aggressively questioning on the side of the Government of taking rights and not the role of protecting rights, of expanding rights, of being the one who ensures the protection of individual rights, but rather the one pushing hard on whether to take rights! That’s what you can you can argue and reflect upon.

Teddy Nappen  16:13

Well, I think it comes back to just look at the Bruen decision with the dissent from Jackson. What was her view of our rights? When you consider the Second Amendment, you have to consider the issues of gun violence and threats to the community and everything else, but not actually looking at the law. That is the mindset of these people. They always bring in that bias, every single time. You see it from reading that transcript.

Evan Nappen  16:40

From Jackson and see. You know, these are what when we talk about individual rights, they’re supposed to be a guarantee of our individual rights, and that guarantee is not voided by way of all these other political arguments. Okay? That’s not how it’s supposed to work.

Teddy Nappen  17:03

You also have the, I always think of the line from “The Untouchables”, you know, where the guy says, “let’s do some good”. Like, that’s the mindset. They think like this. Oh, man, you’re doing such a service in denying this, this poor guy who literally is, like, what was he? He was Russian born and was in the Polish military.

Robert Bell  17:23

And he knew how to handle a firearm.

Teddy Nappen  17:25

Knew how to handle a firearm. Did all this history. Comes here and gets a full degree, family, everything. And he gets denied because “I don’t like guns”. Well, it’s disgusting.

Evan Nappen  17:36

It’s a constant battle that we undergo. And speaking of that battle, one of the key fighters for our rights is the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. They are the state gun rights group. They are the umbrella organization for the NRA. They’re multiple gun clubs that all belong in the Association. They have a full-time paid lobbyist down in Trenton keep an eye on the shenanigans going on there. Plus they’re fighting in the courts. I mean, Koons versus Platkin. Guess what? Association is on that case. And these are the important things that are this great organization is doing. You need to be a member of anjrpc.org That’s the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. Make sure you join. Make sure you’re part of the solution.

Evan Nappen  18:32

I also want to talk about our really good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is a range in Lakewood. We’ve all shot. Rob, you’ve shot at WeShoot as well.

Robert Bell  18:43

Correct you are.

Evan Nappen  18:43

And so has Teddy. Yep. And we love WeShoot. That is the range. it is right there in Lakewood, conveniently off the Parkway. You can have access to a fantastic resource for being able to shoot right there. They have great training and a great pro shop. That’s where we got our CCARE certificates for getting our carries, and you can get yours there as well. And get all kinds of training – both advanced and novice. Make sure that you check out WeShoot and the WeShoot website, which is at weshootusa.com. You can see the famous WeShoot photography and the WeShoot girls. They have a lot of fantastic deals on firearms that they’re running. You’ll love it. Everyone loves WeShoot. Go there and have a great day at the range.

Evan Nappen  19:43

And let me also take a moment to shamelessly promote my book, which is New Jersey Gun Law. It is the Bible of Jersey gun law. It’s a book used by, well, everybody that wants to know about New Jersey gun law. You need to get your copy. Go to EvanNappen.com and order a copy today. It will help you get through the matrix of insanity called New Jersey gun laws and hopefully not become a GOFU, which is always a challenge in the Democratic People’s Republic of New Jersey. So, Teddy, what do you have today for us in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen  20:23

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free, and I always make it a point. And everyone who has been listening on the show knows I always want to do opposition research. What are they talking about? What is the argument? And you know, our good friends at The Trace. They always keep us abreast on whatever, you know, with their little message and propaganda. And there’s been this huge push where they’re trying to, like, you know, push Trump out and say, oh, he’s anti-gun. He’s hurting gun owners. They always try to make this argument that he’s anti-gun. They go on this Trump deranged rant, but they’re an anti-gun outlet. So, they would be praising Trump for this, but they still go after him. It’s very confusing. And it’s just the, it’s because whenever it comes,

Evan Nappen  21:11

They’re schizophrenic, man!

Teddy Nappen  21:12

Well, no, it’s the issue of the fact, you always have to remember these people are Marxists. And when it comes to Marxists, it doesn’t matter about standards or beliefs. It’s about defeating the opposition. They don’t care what position they have to take, so long as they defeat their opponent. That’s how you end up with, you know, where you end up with crazies. Where they have, like, the groups of the Left trying to join, you know, “Free Maduro” and “Free Iran”. Like, that level of insanity. So, their latest article from this guy by the name of Champe Barton. I don’t care. “Trump’s Tariffs Are Driving Up Ammo Prices”. (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/03/trump-tariffs-ammunition-prices/) This is something they’ve been pushing for for the longest time.

Evan Nappen  22:01

So, they should be totally in favor of tariffs then, because it helps promote their anti-gun agenda, right?

Teddy Nappen  22:08

Oh, that would be the argument, but they’re like. Iinstead, it’s just this whole the pro-gun President is hurting gun owners. And they go on this whole stupid thing, like pro-gun President squeezing the ammo industry. Gun owners, bullets, all the humanity, like it’s the level of like they try like the turbulence has arrived. Trump has billed himself the most pro-gun president ever. Yet steeping tariffs in metals and chemicals used to make ammunition is ratcheting up the prices and costs for ammunition. And according to the Ammunition Depot, the average daily price of nine millimeter full jacket, as widely used by the caliber of the market, has ticked up steadily. In January, it’s twice topped 35 cents, the highest level since 2023. About 10 cents more than the average price during 2025. So, I love the game. They always like try to quote, oh, this is a respective source. So you know what? I actually went to the Ammo Depot. I actually went to their sources. And let’s give a little history. So, in December 2020, full metal jacket was of

Evan Nappen  23:28

Nine millimeter, full metal jacket?

Teddy Nappen  23:30

Full Metal Jacket, 1000 rounds was about 180 prior to 2020. Then it jumped to like 600 to 700 dollars per you know, per 1000. You remember that 2020 days?

Evan Nappen  23:34

I remember.

Teddy Nappen  23:44

Those golden bricks. They were selling.

Evan Nappen  23:46

Crazy prices.

Robert Bell  23:47

Gaslighting.

Teddy Nappen  23:48

Yeah, oh, yeah. And then cut to February 2021, and the prices was like 70 cents, a round, 90 cents around. And then 2023 to 2024, things finally started to calm down once the end of Covid, where it was 20 cents and it was 27 cents. Then it was 23 cents. Just hovering around that number. And then 2025 it’s at around 21 cents to 24 cents. And of November, 2025 it dropped to 20 cents. I went to the prices index. Went right to the index, it hovers around 12 cents per round to 30 cents per round. So, what the heck are they talking about? This whole stupidity of an argument which, by the way, the experts are still trying to figure out, where’s all this inflation? I mean, we’ve been saying tariffs are inflationary, but none of the inflation has hit.

Evan Nappen  24:42

That’s because a lot of the manufacturing has just absorbed it in a cost-of-doing business, and competition has made it so it did not skyrocket.

Teddy Nappen  24:51

Yeah. Also, we are the largest producer of lead ore. We exported 864 million of ore. Know how much we imported?

Evan Nappen  25:01

Ooooh, and a lot of that lead comes out of the front of a barrel of a little gun, right?

Teddy Nappen  25:07

I know, right?

Evan Nappen  25:08

Exporting it all around. It’s great.

Teddy Nappen  25:08

I know. We, you know, it’s good. You know what? We should export more to Iran.

Evan Nappen  25:15

We are really exporting a lot of lead to Iran.

Teddy Nappen  25:20

I know, right? But then I even pulled up. I always do this. I like citing Left-leaning sources to prove they’re against their argument. MSN, they brought on expert. You have to understand. Step one, tariffs on imports do raise the price on imports, but you have to remember U.S. experts earn the withdrawal by buying imports from other countries. So, if you have a tax on imports, it’s exactly the same on a tax of exports. That’s called linear symmetry theorem, exactly the same. And therefore what happens is, all the exported goods and services, their prices will fall. So, the increase of price imports is matched by the fall of price. So, it comes down to net zero. That’s their whole argument. That’s their whole long winded claim of like this is the reason. Instead of just admitting tariffs are non-inflationary and just accepting that reality. Because if you look to the price all the time.

Evan Nappen  26:16

Let’s step back and look how they’re trying to twist that into somehow Trump is hurting the Second Amendment, or something. Like, first of all, they would be rejoicing if, in fact, he was hurting it. So, why are they putting it out that it’s in any way a problem? Instead they’re trying to just convince what? A MAGA base of some sort that he’s betraying them or something. The politics of that is just bizarro for The Trace, otherwise they should just praise it. In other words, they’re in favor of it.

Teddy Nappen  26:49

Dad.

Evan Nappen  26:49

What?

Teddy Nappen  26:49

Well, this is the trick. Cut to the Germans in World War Two. You’re already lost. Your allies have abandoned you. You are losing men and materials. Your tariffs are causing inflation.

Evan Nappen  27:03

Right! Exactly.

Teddy Nappen  27:04

This is their game, where they’re trying to break up MAGA in that idea.

Evan Nappen  27:08

Right!

Teddy Nappen  27:10

Whereas that’s why you have all the black pillars, you have all these stupid people trying to make propaganda, yeah, and that’s the truth, and that’s why you push all these lies. And, you know. Just cut to Harry Entonces, the golden retriever of CNN – MAGA support, 100% on the GOP.

Evan Nappen  27:30

Yeah, 100!

Teddy Nappen  27:32

That’s, I thought like, he’s making that up. There’s no way. But it’s CNN, like they already undervalue it. So, at this point it’d be 110% for Trump, because it’s that level of.

Evan Nappen  27:43

Right!

Teddy Nappen  27:43

It’s so stupid. So, this psyop, they try to do a breaking up Trump from the gun owners, breaking up MAGA. This is all lies. And I have the articles here from that. From the Ore World, from showing the levels of production. It’s all lies, factual inaccuracies.

Evan Nappen  28:05

Well, I appreciate you pointing that out. I’m sure the listeners do as well. And Rob, what a great job and what a fight you had all through. From the trial level through the appellate level, but victory is yours! Because it is not just a win on the appeal, but it is a published case that actually establishes law for New Jersey and even brings in now the federal case law. It’s quite an accomplishment. It’s really great.

Robert Bell  28:40

Thank you!

Evan Nappen  28:40

And I want to want to tell you that at the end of the show, we always do the GOFU, which is the Gun Owner Fuck Up. We try to educate our folks about not making mistakes that we’ve seen others make in our practice. They’re expensive mistakes, and they can learn here for free not to do them. So this week’s GOFU, I want to ask you, Rob. Based on anything you’ve been dealing with or observing as any kind of GOFU that you’d like to let our listeners know about for this week?

Robert Bell  29:18

Sure thing. But before I do, I forgot to mention that in the Polotov case, the judge and prosecutor are absolutely seething.

Evan Nappen  29:26

Oh, really? Wait, what is that? Why is that?

Robert Bell  29:29

Well, I very triumphantly emailed an order to the Court and ccd the prosecutor who originally was on this case.

Evan Nappen  29:42

And wait, wait. An order for what?

Robert Bell  29:44

Granting the permit!

Evan Nappen  29:46

Well, let’s explain why. Because the Court in the appellate decision ordered, not just reversing the decision of the lower court, but ordered the issuance of the Firearms Purchaser ID Card. So, you sent the Court order to the trial court saying, here do this order, reversing denial and ordering the issuance of the of the FID card, as the appellate court has so stated, right?

Robert Bell  30:16

Correct!

Evan Nappen  30:17

So, you did that, right? And what happened?

Robert Bell  30:19

Yes, and the Bergen County prosecutors, there were two of them on the email said, oh, please hold off on that. We need to, we need to. We need to talk about this. We need to confer to see if we’re going to appeal or file a stay. So, they’re running scared.

Evan Nappen  30:37

For reconsideration or something? Do they actually think they could get a reconsideration of an appellate case that the Appellate Division chose to make published?

Robert Bell  30:49

Let’em try.

Teddy Nappen  30:50

When it comes.

Evan Nappen  30:51

Oh, boy.

Teddy Nappen  30:52

When it comes to guns, they’ll always make an exception for us.

Evan Nappen  30:57

Well, I don’t know why, but they’re taking it, they’re not taking it very well, huh? From what you’re saying.

Robert Bell  31:05

I would say that what they’re doing may be a GTFU – a Gun Tyrant Fuck Up. Which brings us to the GOFU.

Evan Nappen  31:15

Well, that does. And wait one second. You know anybody who’s had their firearm license, FID Card denied, this may now present the opportunity to go back. And if you were denied and if it wasn’t based on a criteria that would now fit in the violence area, right? If it was “public health, safety, or welfare” denial of old that this opens a door for you to at least put in for re-application or give a call to us or your other attorneys and see maybe we can do something about reviewing the denial that should not have occurred. So, it opens the door to that for that.

Robert Bell  32:08

They have the right not have a denial on their record if it was erroneous the first time around.

Evan Nappen  32:13

Right! So, this opens that door. But go ahead, what’s the GOFU, Rob? What is your GOFU?

Robert Bell  32:19

I have encountered it multiple times – voluntary registration of an inherited firearm. And I just don’t understand why someone would do that. I hope no one out there does do it. But in New Jersey, for example, if you inherit a firearm from a loved one, a parent, what have you, you do not have to go through the rigmarole of getting a purchase permit. It simply comes to you. However, there is voluntary registration in the Democratic People’s Republic of New Jersey. You can go to their website and voluntarily give them the information – serial number, the make and model. I don’t know. That’s like talking to cops. And with that, I’m like, I’m good. I’m good.

Evan Nappen  33:01

Yeah, I don’t know why anybody would voluntarily register. The first word is voluntary, which means you don’t have to do it. So, you don’t. There’s no reason to voluntarily register your firearm. I’ve yet to find the reason that makes it a good idea. Haven’t seen it. Now, if someone can tell me that reason, that’d be nice to know. But I don’t see it. And instead, all you’re doing is putting yourself on the radar when there’s no reason to do it. Then people that do voluntarily register, then raise the State and looking into them. So, now you’re simply saying, hey, look at me, check out the reason for registration, and what I’m writing and everything else about it. And so, all you’re doing is waving a big flag at the Government to focus on you as well. It’s completely unnecessary. Absolutely a classic GOFU is anybody stupid enough to voluntarily register one of their guns.

Evan Nappen  34:12

This is Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, and Robert Bell, reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 2  34:27

Gun Lawyer is a Counterthink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 12

Gun Lawyer — Episode 281 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

New Jersey gun law, accidental discharge, Fifth Amendment rights, criminal charges, licensing revocation, public health safety, misdemeanor offense, felony conviction, reckless conduct, gun safety, legal advice, jury trial, Second Amendment rights, gun ownership, legal protections.

SPEAKERS

Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 2

Evan Nappen 00:16

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:17

And I’m Teddy Nappen,

Evan Nappen 00:19

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Say, Teddy, I see you sent me something interesting that you found online.

Teddy Nappen 00:26

Well, I always like to check on the Reddit retards to see what they’re saying.

Evan Nappen 00:32

Oh, my God. And yeah, you did find some stuff that is very much of concern here, because I don’t want to see any of our people have a problem or get into trouble. And it made it clear to me just how important this Accidental Discharge (AD), the Dingus Law, in New Jersey, is. It is having a tremendous effect, and folks have got to know about it. They’ve got to understand that this is genuine.

Teddy Nappen 00:59

And also to be clear, not everyone on Reddit is retarded, but everyone who’s retarded is on Reddit just saying.

Evan Nappen 01:06

Ah, okay. Well, I’m glad to know the rules here. But what I want to do is go through the commentary to a certain degree. It is extremely important that individuals don’t make this mistake, because this change is dramatic to New Jersey’s law. And then it instantly has put forward Fifth Amendment rights that must be utilized by gun owners in New Jersey in order to protect themselves. Because the ramifications here are not just criminal, not just potential exposure to a year and a half in State Prison for a mere accident, but also loss of your Second Amendment rights. And not just loss of your rights from becoming a Page – 2 – of 12

convicted felon. Even if criminal charges are not pursued, you’re still going to face potential licensing revocation, pulling you in under the disqualifier of public health, safety, and welfare, what I call the all-inclusive miscellaneous weasel clause that they will use to further disarm you.

Evan Nappen 02:19

I’ve encountered case after case after case after case of this. I’ve been, you know, practicing New Jersey gun law now for 40 years. I’ve seen what accidental discharges cause to the individual. I’m not making this up. This is real, and it is a real concern. And they’ve just poured gasoline on the fire by passing this new law that essentially criminalizes this to a degree that it has never been criminalized before. So, our rights become even more critical, and I want to make sure that folks understand this law. So, I’m going to review it and talk about some of the misinformation and such that is out there. And how, again, the anti-Second Amendment, the gun rights oppressionists, how they have structured this law to get it through. To make it have a facial appearance, and yet its effect is hidden until it pounds you, the unsuspecting gun owner. I understand how this system works, and I’ve seen what they do. So, they pass these laws, and in effect, they’re sneaky as all hell. This is a sneaky law that is there to disenfranchise gun owners.

Teddy Nappen 03:57

Also the fact that anyone who thinks, oh, this will never happen to me. Oh, I’m a very responsible gun owner. They hate you. That is why they’re laying these traps. And anyone who thinks that this can’t happen to you, tell yourself, oh, I’ve never been in a car accident before. Anyone has ever thought that until it happens.

Evan Nappen 04:19

Man, I cannot tell you how many times in the practice of gun law in New Jersey, I’ve had the client say, man, I never thought I’d be calling you. I’ve heard that uncountable numbers of times. I never thought I’d be calling you. Yet here I am. And, frankly, I want the word out so people understand this, and I’m going to deal more with that very fact and the reality of that in some of the commentary that’s here, because it also deserves to be addressed. I’m going to do that.

Evan Nappen 04:53

So, first, let’s take a look at the law so you can really understand what the traps are. They’re sneaky tricks. How they passed this, and they know what they’re doing. They know what they’re doing. And they fool the public and create the ability here for the oppressionists to go after the unsuspecting folks that are thinking they’re doing the right thing. So, New Jersey, as you may or may not know, has utterly criminalized accidental discharge, and it is now in law, signed by Murphy. (https://pub.njleg.state.nj.us/Bills/2024/A5000/4976_R2.PDF)

Evan Nappen 05:36

The law begins by talking about “recklessly”, and saying, oh yeah, recklessly has the same meaning found in the criminal law. It’s what reckless has always meant, and we will review that in a minute. Then it goes on to define what a structure is. And it says. “‘Structure’ means any building, room, ship, vessel, car, vehicle, or airplane, and also means any place adapted for overnight accommodation of persons or for carrying business therein.” Okay, that’s about as broad as you can get. It’s almost everywhere, Page – 3 – of 12

right? Almost everywhere. So, why is that important? Because it’s that “structure” trick, that “structure” trap, that they weave into the law here. So that if you have an accidental discharge, even though they’re selling this law, look, a person commits a disorderly person’s offense. That’s the New Jersey level of misdemeanor. It’s just a DP. It’s not a felony, just a disorderly person’s offense.

Evan Nappen 06:37

“. . . by recklessly discharging a firearm using live ammunition rounds unlawfully or without a lawful purpose . . .” And there you go. It’s so freaking reasonable. It’s so reasonable. No, it is outrageously unreasonable. And here’s why. Because when you actually are going to face this, here’s what’s going to hit you in the face, folks. Here’s what it’s going to be. Number one, oh yeah, it’s a disorderly person’s offense. So, hey, at least it’s not a felony. I’m not going to become a convicted felon, right? Well, if you go down a little bit in the law, it says. A person who commits a violation of this section shall be charged with a crime of one degree higher than what would ordinarily be charged if the violation occurs within 100 yards of an occupied structure. Wait a minute! That occupied structure was any building, room, ship, vessel, car, airplane, or any other place that’s adopted for overnight accommodation or for carrying on business. Oh, you mean, basically, everywhere!

Evan Nappen 07:46

Oh, so, wait a minute. It’s one degree higher for just about everything. Unless you’re in the middle of the woods and have an AD with the trees, that’s about it, you know. Short of that, you’re just about guaranteed to be within a structure, the way they’ve written, “within 100 yards of a structure”. It’s one degree higher. Well, what’s one degree higher than a disorderly persons offense? Felony level, fourth degree crime. Felony level. A year and a half in State Prison, folks. Okay? What does that mean? It means that is a disqualifier for the entire United States if you become convicted of that AD charge. Even if you don’t get a day in jail, it’s a fourth degree felony. You’re officially a convicted felon and a prohibited person, disenfranchised of your gun rights for the entire United States. So, that’s what an AD now means in New Jersey. Felony conviction. It would be the rarest of exception if it wasn’t charged as at least a fourth degree felony in New Jersey. So get that through your head first, straight away.

Evan Nappen 09:10

Now, what about this reckless, recklessly, reckless. Okay. So, here going into Reddit.com and looking at the discussion and what have you. Okay, that’s all good. One of the folks there said they don’t agree with me, but I’m not a lawyer, and no sense taking a risk. You don’t need to. But then they go and quote, “recklessly” discharge. You can emphasize reckless, and then pull the legal definition of reckless, which is fine. You may recall, we actually even in the show. We discussed it. We reviewed reckless. Let’s take another look so we can fully understand what reckless means in New Jersey and how it interweaves to this new law. So, recklessly, a person, now this is the definition in New Jersey law of just recklessly. A person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense, when he consciously disregards a substantial risk, a substantial and unjustifiable risk, that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that considering the nature and purpose of the actor’s conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the actor’s situation. Page – 4 – of 12

Evan Nappen 10:50

Okay. I know that’s confusing or sounds like a lot of legal mumbo jumbo. It’s not, and let me show you where the pressure points come in, where the gotchas are there for New Jersey citizens. In reality, in the reality of the practice of law here, conscious disregard. Again, what? There is a consciously disregard substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists. What’s the material element existing in the AD? That a gun will fire. Okay? Material element. You’re disregarding that a gun will fire. And why would a gun fire? Well, if the actor’s conduct and circumstance is known to him. Do you have a gun in your hand? Is that known to you? Yes, it is. Do you know that guns fire when the trigger is pulled? Yes, you do. Gross deviation from the standard of conduct. Well, everyone knows the basic rules of safety, right? Make sure your gun is unloaded. Make sure your gun is unloaded. Did you just grossly deviate from standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe? And that’s it. You betcha you did. You bet you that they can.

Evan Nappen 12:11

And I’ll tell you what. You may say, no, no, it was an honest mistake, an accident. I didn’t realize, for whatever reason. A reasonable person. Who is a reasonable person? What is a reasonable person? How is reasonable person determined? And I’ll tell you how it’s determined. By 12 people who aren’t smart enough to avoid jury duty. That’s who’s going to determine your level of reasonableness when handling a gun. That you know goes bang. That you know can discharge, and there happened to somehow, while it was in your control, end up with a round that went bang. Do you want that in front of a jury in New Jersey? Do you think that’s fine? You can just say I didn’t consciously disregard it. Yeah, do you see where we’re going?

Evan Nappen 13:05

And wait. Now it gets worse. Now it gets way worse. It gets way worse because of how they wrote this law itself. Let’s go back to the law itself. It says a person commits a disorderly person’s offense, which we already talked about, is automatically getting upgraded to felony, by recklessly discharging a firearm using live ammunition rounds unlawfully or without lawful purpose. You tell me what accidental discharge has a lawful purpose. Obviously, there’s no lawful purpose because it’s an accidental discharge. So, every accidental discharge becomes one without lawful purpose. And a jury is going to be thinking about this law and saying, well, reckless. He had a gun. It was loaded, and he didn’t have a lawful purpose because it went off without a reason. And boom, there you go. There you go.

Evan Nappen 14:06

You instantly, now, on an accidental discharge, have Fifth Amendment protections, a right against self incrimination, and you need to stand on those rights. If you self-report, if you do that, you are incriminating yourself. You are giving up your Fifth Amendment rights when it comes to an AD. And I say, do not do that. You have a Constitutional right against doing that. If you choose to give up your Fifth Amendment right, what will happen? Your Fourth Amendment rights are going to be brought in because they’re going to want to search and seize, take your guns, and that is routinely what happens. Then you’re going to face the criminal charge, and then you’re going to face the licensing, disenfranchisement of your Second Amendment rights and the forfeiture of your firearms. This is the escalation that I’ve seen occur over and over and over again. And that’s without the enhancement that New Jersey has just dumped on Dingus, okay? Page – 5 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 15:22

It actually reminds me. You know what it reminds me of Dad?

Evan Nappen 15:26

What?

Teddy Nappen 15:26

When you deal with guns, you do so at your peril.

Evan Nappen 15:30

100 percent, Teddy.

Teddy Nappen 15:32

If they’re going to go into that courtroom.

Evan Nappen 15:34

And that is actual case law in New Jersey. When dealing with guns, you do so at your peril. That is New Jersey court case law, folks. Case law, not just a slogan. It’s actually how they look at it. And so here I am. I’m trying to warn folks. To tell folks. It’s my calling in life. This is what I do. It’s what I believe in, from the bottom my heart. Fighting for our Second Amendment rights. Making the education of these traps out there so that you can protect yourself. And then there’s this kind of comment in Reddit that just makes me go, you know what? Unbelievable. Here. Keep in mind that Nappen sells books, event tickets, legal insurance and legal services. The guy has incentives to scream, the sky is falling, and he’s been doing so for decades. Parentheses, he’s more right than wrong, though. Well, thanks for that little he’s more right than wrong.

Evan Nappen 16:39

Let me just tell you something, man. If you think that that’s my objective here, to freaking sell books. The books are a labor of love. I can make more money working at McDonald’s than selling books. And event tickets? Event tickets, are you kidding me? Ten bucks and you get it back when you attend it, if you’re even charged. Legal insurance? It’s not insurance. It’s a member program. I’m the Independent Program Attorney for them. That’s not my program. I’m just an attorney for them, because I want to defend people in that. My incentive to scream to the sky is not that the sky is falling, but that it has fallen. That New Jersey is out to screw gun owners left and right. I deal with it on a daily basis and seeing it. And my mission here is to educate the people I care about, you guys and gals. To be warned, to realize the traps, to realize what it’s like trying to live as a law-abiding gun owner in this God forsaken state that constantly tries to oppress us. That’s what it’s about. That’s what it’s about.

Evan Nappen 17:56

It is kind of annoying to see that kind of a statement made, because a person is clueless, clueless. And even if you think about it, if I was really about that, if I was really about making the money, why would I warn anybody? Hey, the more accidental discharges, the more criminal charges, the more licensing revocations and forfeitures, that means more work for me. Why would I want to tell anyone about it? Page – 6 – of 12

Let’s just let the system keep crunching people, destroying people, and I’ll make even more money, right? But I don’t do that. Do I? No, I try to make it so you don’t have to become a client of Evan Nappen’s. Just the opposite, pal. Just the opposite. So, keep it in mind. I’m here trying to protect people. I’m here trying to educate people. I’m here fighting for our rights, one gun law victim at a time that I would rather never have seen become a victim of New Jersey gun laws.

Teddy Nappen 19:10

What I look at Dad is, remember when Shaneen Allen? When all of that, everything had broken through with that? It was, what was it? 100 pending cases? Of the exact same charge that had to be changed because of the ruling of that case.

Evan Nappen 19:27

By fighting there and changing it, we succeeded, Teddy. Right! Right at that moment even, of saving 100 pending cases. Hey, that would have been a ton more work for me, and I could have made a lot of money. Why would you do that? Why would you educate? Why would you go out there and try to make these changes? Why would you fight for rights? I mean, hell, it’s like saying I’m a cancer doctor and I want more cancer so I can make more money. Really? Seriously? Do you really think that’s what it’s about? Well, it isn’t, folks. Because you don’t dedicate your life to what you believe in for that. You’d know it! Come on. It’s crazy, crazy stuff. I’m here. I want you to protect yourself. Beware of the Dingus law, and I’m happy to say that since we’ve been talking about this, I’ve had less Dingus cases, substantially less. And that’s very interesting. I think the word’s out. I think people are learning this is how you have to be. It’s good. And those that have called and have followed the advice. We’ve been able to save them. We’ve been able to not have them become the supplier of their own rope to hang themselves with. So, this is critical and important.

Teddy Nappen 20:46

It honestly reminds me of you. Do you remember that scene in Better Call Saul? Where it’s Kim? She’s the public defender, and I think she’s representing this guy. He’s about to get like, I think, maybe 10 years in prison, and she negotiates it down all the way to, essentially, like, it was three months community service and probation.

Evan Nappen 21:08

Exactly.

Teddy Nappen 21:09

She negotiates it down. She just turns something that would have been a 10 years jail sentence. He walks out with her, and the first thing out of his words, three months? Could you’ve done better? It’s the level of no appreciation for this shit that has gone down.

Evan Nappen 21:29

Ungrateful clients. Yeah, we’ve, we’ve, heard of those. We’ve heard of such things as ungrateful clients. But the system is unbelievable when it comes to New Jersey’s oppression and the turning into criminals of law-abiding citizens. And if the actual lame stream media ever actually covered it, maybe they would finally quit doing it. But of course, they’re in cahoots with the same powers that be, because they hate Page – 7 – of 12

us just as much. So, this is why we’re here, doing Gun Lawyer, trying to educate. We want you to be protected. It’s the reason for the books to be out there. So that something’s out there explaining it, and you can hopefully protect yourself. It’s why we do it, and that’s really what it is.

Evan Nappen 22:21

Look, folks, if I wanted to make money, I’d go be a personal injury attorney, right? Go do that kind of garbage. It’s not what I believe in. I do this because it’s what I believe in. That’s why we’re here, doing it. If we didn’t believe in it, there are plenty of ways to make a hell of a lot more money than by being a gun lawyer. But that’s not what it’s about. It’s about doing something for a cause, and feeling that your life has meaning because you’re doing that.

Evan Nappen 22:48

And that is also why I want to mention our good friends at the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. Because they have a cause, and their cause is fighting for our rights. They are the largest gun rights group in New Jersey. They’re the NRA affiliate. You need to be a member of anjrpc.org. Make sure you join, make sure you get the newsletter, make sure you get the email alerts, and stay in the fight. Be part of the solution. Join anjrpc.org.

Evan Nappen 23:19

And also our really great, great friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is an indoor range in Lakewood, New Jersey. It’s where Teddy and I both shoot. It’s where we get our training. It’s where we got our certifications. They have a great pro shop, great guns. A lot of good toys there. They got a lot of great sales, good stuff going on. They treat their members and the shooters and their customers so well. Just like family. Everybody loves WeShoot. I know you will, too. They’re conveniently located right in Lakewood, close to the Parkway. They are a resource for Central New Jersey. You know, our ranges are critical. It’s important. You need a place to shoot. You need a place to practice. You need a place to gain your skills and keep them sharp. WeShoot is ideal for that. You can go to weshootusa.com and check out their website. Beautiful photography. They have top of the line firearms, and they can get you equipped, set up right. Whether you’re new at this idea of gun ownership or whether you’re just a grizzled old gun owning veteran like myself. And I don’t mean veteran in a military sense. I’m not a military veteran, but I mean a veteran of owning guns for many, many years, many, many, many, many, many, many years. Since I was a kid. And, you know, not everybody has had that experience, but luckily, Teddy, you have. I think you’ve shot a gun since you could shoot a gun. I don’t know. Do you know when? When did I first have you shoot a gun? Do you remember?

Teddy Nappen 24:54

Well, if I remember, I think it was probably eight years old.

Evan Nappen 24:58

Well, that would be an actual firearm.

Teddy Nappen 25:02

When? When you actually let me shoot a gun? Page – 8 – of 12

Evan Nappen 25:07

Yeah, the actual firearm. But prior to that, you had BB guns. Air guns.

Teddy Nappen 25:10

Oh, BB guns. Yeah, oh yeah, from the little cap guns. I remember the little popper cap gun that you could get where it had the it, you know, you would have to reload it with the little red caps and pop it in.

Evan Nappen 25:22

And I taught you basic gun safety, loading things from toys, right?

Teddy Nappen 25:31

That’s how it went. I had my little cowboy, the carol spinner that you got me. That I could actually learn how to spin.

Evan Nappen 25:42

Spinning was fun, huh?

Teddy Nappen 25:43

And the training video you gave me as well from the western.

Evan Nappen 25:46

You got good at it, too, buddy? Yeah, right up there. You could, you could do the Doc Holiday scene? You know, with Ringo doing the gun spinning. Yeah, that’s good.

Teddy Nappen 25:57

Wow. Johnny Ringo, exactly.

Evan Nappen 26:04

Hmm, do I like him? Reminds me of me. Now I know I hate him.

Teddy Nappen 26:09

Well, someone walked across your grave.

Evan Nappen 26:11

Great stuff. Great stuff. Love the movie Tombstone. Okay. And I can’t forget to plug my book. My book that I make so much money selling. New Jersey Gun Law. Make sure you buy lots and lots and lots of copies. Please go to EvanNappen.com and get that book. It may even save your ass, believe it or not. And that’s why I wrote it. It’s 120 topics, all question and answer. It explains this insanity called New Jersey gun law. Get your copy today at EvanNappen.com. Teddy, what do you have for us today in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 27:02

Well, as we know, Press Checks are always free. And speaking on standing on one’s rights, which lack thereof in the U.K. You know, I always wonder. At some point, is the U.K. ever just going to hit rock Page – 9 – of 12

bottom? And apparently not. They still keep going lower. As coming here out of, you know, I always enjoy, you know, browsing Breitbart. The British government plans to scrap jury trials. (https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2026/03/11/british-govt-plan-to-scrap-jury-trials-clears-first-hurdle/) It’s like, you know, what? You know, King George was right on a few things. That’s the level of insanity. So it’s right out of the article from Breitbart. The left wing government plans to scrap jury trials by Kurt Zindulka.

Evan Nappen 27:53

Okay, wait a minute. They got rid of the Second Amendment protection. They have no First Amendment protection. Now they’re dumping their right to a grand jury that they don’t have. They never. They don’t have that right. We have that right. You can see how important the Bill of Rights is, and why our Founding Fathers, fighting the British, were so foresighted to get the guarantees of the Bill of Rights. Because look at what the UK does.

Teddy Nappen 28:18

Yeah, and I love the idea of it’s cleared a major hurdle. Ah, yes, that’s how they view rights, a major hurdle. And it can write.

Evan Nappen 28:28

A major hurdle. Worthy oppressors.

Teddy Nappen 28:32

As the deeply controversial measure concocted by a Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Secretary, David Lammy. Oh, a Lammy. A Lemmy or what are they? Sorry, what were the limies? It would upend a millennium, English legal tradition. It’s supposed to reduce the backlog of cases. Ah, that’s the problem. Need to reduce the backlog of cases. You know, those feeble rights. It eliminates juries for any case where a defendant is facing three years or less. Ah, that is where this is the insidious plan comes into play. Because it’s like, wait a second, three years. So, they are claiming, like, go into the records already 80 cases backlogged, upward of 200,000, by 2035. And their quote “to restore a swift and fair justice”, we are pulling every level available . . .

Evan Nappen 29:31

Oh boy. You’ll be tried and hung very quickly.

Teddy Nappen 29:34

You’ll have a fair trial and then be shot.

Evan Nappen 29:40

Right! Round up the usual suspects

Teddy Nappen 29:42

Exactly, exactly. Meanwhile, 3200 lawyers have written a letter calling the government to reverse course, arguing that the central pillar of this legislation that will reduce backlogs lacks actual evidence to actually reduce backlogs. So, the very thing that they are citing. But I love this. And by the way, this Page – 10 – of 12

isn’t a new thing. They’ve been pushing this all the way back in November of 20. I pulled this from The Guardian. The Guardian poll goes like the whole line of why they’re trying to justify it. We have to stop the criminals from gaming the system by choosing a trial by jury, to increase the chances of the proceedings collapse. That is there they’re worried about the criminals, the drug dealers and career criminals laughing at the docs, knowing that cases can take years to come to trial. And we got to do this. Oh, the poor cases of a court cases involving rape take over two years on average. So, it’s all about the rape cases, not the fact that you let mass migration in your country, where it goes from 12,000 rapes a year to 70,000 rapes a year. A mass majority committed by the illegals and immigrants that you have led into your country. But whatever. And that’s the crux of it, because, and that’s the insidious part, all of those cases will get a full trial. So, the immigrants and the illegals get the full trial when it comes to rape, but the hate speech laws, oh, two years just short. So, you get a politically appointed judge who already hates the idea of free speech now is going to crack down on. You know, I’ll give you the few highlights of that. U.K. free speech crackdown has seen 30 people a day arrested for petty offenses of retweets and cartoons that are deemed offensive.

Evan Nappen 31:41

And then the cutoff is up to three years, right? So, you don’t get a jury trial, even though you could face three years in prison. You can be sentenced to three years with no jury trial. It’s outrageous.

Teddy Nappen 31:54

Twelve thousand arrests a year under these hate speech laws.

Evan Nappen 31:57

All right. So, let me tell you about in America and in New Jersey, how our right works and where the cut off is. So, particularly in New Jersey and in the U.S. for that matter, the cut off, my friends, is six months. So, if the penalty you face, if the potential incarceration, incarceration, that you face is six months or less, then you do not have a right to a jury trial. But if you face any penalty that is over six months where you could go to jail for six months and a day, then you have a right to a jury in America. So, this is why it’s structured in this way for New Jersey in the six months. Now, many states will have systems where, even though you have a right at six months, they will still have a misdemeanor lower court. New Hampshire is a good example, where you could face a year as a penalty. However, you can opt for it to be heard, and waive your jury right, in effect, for that max of the year. So, you can, by your own choice, decide to stay what’s called a bench trial.

Evan Nappen 33:31

But essentially, the six month is the cut off. Anytime after that, you can, you have the right to demand the jury trial. That’s just how New Jersey functions. So, every disorderly persons offense in New Jersey is six months or less. Every matter heard in municipal court, in district court, the lower courts, they are six months or less. It’s also why you can be held in contempt, and the punishment is six months or less. You know, the right to that jury trial for contempt, even because the judge has that power up to six months. And by the way, if you were charged with 10 disorderly persons offenses, each carry up to six months in jail. In theory, you could be convicted of all 10 of those offenses and be given the maximum sentence of six months and have them all run consecutively. So, you could be forced to do 60 months Page – 11 – of 12

of jail with no jury trial, which would be the five years, theoretically, without having a right to a jury trial, even in America.

Evan Nappen 34:49

But, of course, realistically, that isn’t what happens. There’s merger of all the different offenses. So, I’ve never heard of that happening. But in theory, in theory, that’s how. It’s a six month cut off on whatever offense it is here. Now the U.K. wants to make it three years. Think about that. You’re giving one judge, one political hack of a judge, imagine the power, to incarcerate for three years. Now, you know, if you face any charge that’s over a year, that’s a felony, and you lose your gun rights. Even in America, if the offense that you are end up found being found guilty of or pleading guilty to is a penalty that exceeds one year, which as federal law defines, believe it or not, as over two years. I know that’s confusing, but that’s the law. And so what happens is the. That’s for federal law purposes, okay? State law in New Jersey, anything that we talk about felony can still be over a year for state law, but talking federal law. But in the U.K. Now, if you look at it, three years is an option to have a bench trial with no right to a jury. That is crazy. That is absolute felony land, with no jury. There’s a reason our Founding Fathers put that in the Constitution, and it’s glaringly obvious why.

Teddy Nappen 36:35

Well, it’s actually pretty funny as well, because I pulled the history of it. And there’s a reason the ropes, the Sixth Amendment and the Seventh Amendment to have the right to a jury, both for criminal and civil. The reason was the British crown, at the time, thanks to the Stamp Act, they were trying colonists through a special Admiralty court, quote, unquote. No jury. A single judge appointed by the Crown to decide cases. So, a foreign judge from across the pond who’s loyal to the King gets to decide the colonists’ fate when it came to that issue. It was a direct assault on fundamental rights, and that was why it was written and list, depriving us many cases of benefit of a trial by jury. That was in the Declaration of Independence.

Evan Nappen 37:26

Well, and this is exactly why we also have the Fourth Amendment right. Because the British would have a general warrant, and they would just search under a “general warrant”. There’s a reason we have the Second Amendment. There’s what did with Gage, General Gage. What was it seizing the colonists’ arms. Okay? The reason for our Bill of Rights, for our rights, is what we experienced from the British, and they’re still at it now.

Teddy Nappen 37:57

What’s funny is, it reminds me of that scene in “Turn”. The very opening scene is the colonists, the Tory there. And guess who comes running out? A British soldier for the whole amendment on storied soldiers right, quartering soldiers like, wow, really.

Evan Nappen 38:20

There we go. Hey, that’s still an amendment that shows our right to privacy in a way, right? It demonstrates even their concerns and what we had to deal with. But hey, Teddy, let me tell you about this week’s GOFU. That’s the Gun Owner Fuck Up. Where you get to learn a valuable lesson that it was quite expensive for someone else to learn. These are all based on real cases. Real cases. This week’s Page – 12 – of 12

GOFU is real simple here, folks. Don’t leave your gun in a car and have somebody else use your car. It ends up being extremely problematic. Because, you know, we often will lock up our gun in a car, which is legal under the Carry Killer Bill. How you’re supposed to secure it. But what happens is, though, if it’s left there, and then somebody takes your car? Like your wife or your kids or someone, and now they’re driving around with a gun that isn’t theirs in the car.

Evan Nappen 39:32

You have to be cognizant of where your gun is. Do not leave it locked in the car. Do not leave it. Because then these folks can inadvertently go to sensitive places. They can have other problems that lead to you having problems. And then you’re lucky if the problem is simply a licensing problem and not a criminal problem, as well. It can even be a criminal problem, arguably, for them, because they’re now, it could be argued, they’re in possession of your gun, and it just escalates. So, the GOFU is this. Know where your gun is. Don’t keep it in the car. Beware. If anyone uses your car, make sure your firearms are with you and not in the car when they take it.

Evan Nappen 40:18

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 2 40:28

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 11

Gun Lawyer — Episode 280 Transcript

SPEAKERS

Speaker 3, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:17

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:19

and I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:21

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Hey, Teddy, guess who finally quit smoking?

Teddy Nappen 00:28

You quit smoking?

Evan Nappen 00:30

No. The Ayatollah Khomeini.

Teddy Nappen 00:32

Oh!

Evan Nappen 00:35

There you go. Actually, the thing is, we’re now in a situation where you may have seen the warnings going out about an increased, seriously increased, threat of danger in the homeland. For the, who knows, how many that the Biden administration let in, actual terrorists on the terrorist watch list, and how many unknowns and got aways, and just all those folks that have infiltrated the country that they’re warning about sleeper cells and already starting to see some incidents occurring. And I think it’s fair to say that we all need to be very vigilant, and since most of us are folks that are armed, that carry, we become an important element in the defense of our country.

Evan Nappen 01:39

So, I want to talk today about practical considerations regarding firearm carry guns in New Jersey. We want to talk about the guns that are appropriate and are really some of the top most popular carry guns in New Jersey. Now, none of this means these are guns we’re going to talk about that make it that. You know, if you choose to carry any gun that you like, that’s fine. None of this is critical of any firearm that you may be carrying. I just want to talk about ones. It was inspired to talk about this from an article I found in Breitbart. Now Breitbart’s article is the “Five Concealed Carry Guns First-Time Buyers Should Consider”. (https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2026/03/03/five-concealed-carry-guns-first-time-buyers-should-consider/) Page – 2 – of 11

Evan Nappen 02:30

and I want to.

Teddy Nappen 02:32

Number one, Gyrojet pistol.

Evan Nappen 02:34

Right. Definitely grab that old Gyrojet. Oh, my God. In case you don’t know what a Gyrojet is, it was, literally, a rocket firing pistol. It launched cartridges or bullets or projectiles, if you will, in a similar way that you fire rockets, not a bullet. So, it’s actually, a gyro jet gun is closer to an Iranian missile launcher, frankly, than a gun. But they were not a commercial success. They’re very collectible and fascinating. You can read more about Gyrojets online. I happen to own a Gyrojet as an example of a rocket pistol. But no, that’s not a gun I would suggest carrying in New Jersey.

Evan Nappen 03:27

First of all, it’s too valuable just to carry, and the ammo is like incredibly hard to find. Each cartridge is very valuable as a collectible in and of itself. But here it is from Breitbart. Now this article is by AWR Hawkins, who’s an excellent gun writer, and as he begins the article, he says, with military action in Iran raging and concerns about staying safe stateside, we thought it would be helpful to put together a list of five concealed carry guns that first time buyers should consider. So, I’m going to, and that’s a good thought right now, what we’re dealing with. I’m going to modify from what he’s talking about, is just to carry guns in New Jersey, whether you’re first time or not a first time. There are advantages and disadvantages to a number of the firearms that they’re putting out, and we have to put in the concerns that we have in New Jersey. One of the primary concerns at the moment in New Jersey is, of course, that you can’t have a magazine that holds over 10 rounds. So, the handguns that we’re going to carry in New Jersey have to have a limitation in the magazine of 10 rounds. Now, that does not include one round in the chamber. So, in theory, you can have 10 rounds in a magazine and one round in the chamber, and you are legal in New Jersey for that carry gun.

Evan Nappen 04:56

So, what happens is there are a number of handguns out there that, of course, are wonderful, wonderful guns. They are larger frame and normally hold standard magazine capacity definitely over 10 rounds. And you can start, you know, with just a Glock 19 that would have the standard magazine of 15 rounds. An excellent carry gun and super popular. But in New Jersey, putting aside, let’s just say the Glock 19 happens to fit your hand really well, and I understand that. But in reality, you’re carrying a gun that is larger than you necessarily need. Again, if it works for you, that’s fine, but it’s larger than you necessarily need, which makes it arguably somewhat less concealable. And yet you’re being limited in one of the nice features about it is that you could have the increased firepower of 15 rounds, but New Jersey stops you from that. So, you have to have a 10-round mag in your Glock 19, that’s a nine millimeter.

Evan Nappen 06:04

So since New Jersey is forcing us to have 10 round mags, why not conform, at least to the degree of having a much more concealable, but just as deadly, more concealable handgun that would carry up to Page – 3 – of 11

the 10 rounds. And in our modern world today, there are a lot of excellent choices of, you know, nine millimeter and other calibers. But nine is primarily one of the most popular self-defense calibers out there at the moment that hold 10 rounds, but are very compact, very concealable. And the article lists these, and let’s talk about some. Some others that I’ll add in.

Evan Nappen 06:57

They put as the number one, the Sig Sauer P365. So, the P365 is an excellent carry gun for sure, and it’s very compact. And as you know, Sig re-designed or created into the design. They designed a gun around the magazine so they could have a 10-round magazine and have a gun that is extremely compact. The P365 is striker fired, and it’s about, you know, 4.3 inches tall, about 5.8 inches long. It weighs in at about 17.8 ounces, and it comes with two 10-round mags. So, it’s New Jersey legal. There’s all kinds of you can get go MOS. It’s set up for that so you can have your sites if you get an MOS model. There are many different variations on the P365 that will have features that may fit you better. It’s a proven gun. So, it’s definitely one of the most popular and definitely a good choice for New Jersey.

Evan Nappen 08:10

The next gun in the article is the Glock 43X and that’s also one of the most popular pistols in America. It’s single stack. So, what that means is the magazine loads one round on top of the other, as opposed to the SIG 365 which is kind of that double stack, where the rounds are kind of side by side in the magazine, filling it up as a box. Whereas the Glock is single, straight down in the line, and they do, and it does have a 10-round mag. The Glock is somewhat slightly larger. It’s about 6.5 inches long, and it’s about 1.1 inches in width, and about 5.04 inches in its height, tall. It weighs in at about 18.7 ounces. So, it’s a slightly heavier, slightly larger than the P365. But it’s very popular, very concealable, and it has a 10-round magazine.

Evan Nappen 09:29

Now keep in mind that it’s possible for any of these guns, the Sig, or any of these two, of course, to have magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. But they’re essentially made from their creation as a 10-round gun, and that’s important in New Jersey. Because, at the moment, and hopefully this will go away, but at the moment, we’re restricted to that. So, having the concealable ability of being very, very stealthy and not being made, let’s say, as being a carrier. Because you’re concealing a firearm so well, you’re less likely to have printing and other issues where it can be kind of signaled to folks that you might be carrying, which is a good way to think when dealing with New Jersey. Because even though we have a carry permit, even though we’re legal to carry, discretion is still the word of the day. So, you want to remain discrete.

Evan Nappen 10:27

Your best bet is for no one to know that you’re carrying in New Jersey, and that is both the cops and the criminals. We need to be discrete because we’ve experienced many times through the office that individuals, where their gun is somehow ID on the person, and even though they’re legal, maybe their shirt showed for a brief second, which the law actually understands can happen. It’s not a crime when that happens. But the next thing you know, police are called about somebody carrying a gun, or they believe someone has a gun, and it can escalate into all kinds of problems. So, the idea in New Jersey Page – 4 – of 11

is to be able to be armed and be armed to the max that the law allows us to be. But to keep the concealability factor and the discretion and discreteness very tight. We are NOT an open carry state. We want to make it so that that firearm gives you a tactical edge in the fact that should you need it, the use of it is, to a certain degree, giving you the advantage of surprise. So, keep that in mind. And so these guns are fitting that bill very nicely.

Evan Nappen 11:42

Now the article also talks about the CZ P-10 C, which is a ported pistol. This is also a compact gun and also has the 10-round magazine. The CZ is interesting because the German army actually adopted this pistol model, you know, and so it has certain definite reliability. And a lot of folks like the ergonomics, but it, too, is polymer, and in the same kind of class as the 365 and the 43X. Again, it’s a good choice for New Jersey, should you like that gun. Now, the article talks about the Palmetto Dagger. Palmetto is a decent gun for the money. And let me tell you, they’re a bargain, that’s for sure. They are budget oriented, but they are, you know, they shoot. They’re reliable, they work and such. But the Palmetto Dagger is more along the lines of a Glock 19 and there, yeah, you can get a 10 round mag for it, and maybe you want the slightly, you know, somewhat larger frame, what we might call a medium frame. But in terms of its, you know, you can get more concealable with the other guns we’ve been talking about. It’s still a good gun out there. It’s a nice package, especially for the money. Palmetto puts out a gun that really is a bit of a bargain, honestly, for what they’re offering. But you don’t have the same compactness as the other firearms offer.

Evan Nappen 13:36

And the fifth gun talked about in the article is a Ruger LCR polymer revolver. So, that is a revolver similar to, it’s essentially a snub nose .38. But in Polymer, it still can handle the plus P 38. Some folks might prefer a revolver to a semi-auto pistol. Of course, the rounds get less. You’re probably talking here about a five shot and such. But it is an excellent firearm for what it is. If you’re, if you want a wheel gun for its simplicity, it doesn’t leave cartridge cases lying around, or whatever. A revolver may be your way to go. Now, in terms of that type of revolver, the Ruger is good gun. But I happen to have a personal love of the J frame Smith, of the Smith & Wesson. You know, the J frame class, which includes the model, the original, of course, is the 36 or the Chief Special, and you get into all the variations of the J frame, on that J frame. There’s a lot of other snub .38 out there that Smith makes that would also fill the bill. These revolvers are affectionately known as pocket rockets, and they’re good guns. So, if you’re a revolver person, if you’re looking for something concealable, there are plenty of great revolvers. But if we’re talking concealability, then this is a classic. The Ruger and the Smith would fit that bill in snub nose .38. It would give you features that a revolver offers.

Teddy Nappen 15:29

If the whole, I would say, for the whole article is supposed to be the idea of people like this is your first gun to buy. Like that was kind of the main focus. I lean off of for Ruger, like the very first revolver I ever got, the GP 100. That was very like, yeah, learn to work with right yourself.

Evan Nappen 15:47

And revolvers are good for that. But here, the article in Breitbart is about, like, your first gun. And getting into that. I get it. But what I’m looking at here is taking this article and talking about, not Page – 5 – of 11

necessarily that it’s your first gun, but looking at guns that meet the criteria under New Jersey law, that are effective for carry, that can get you the concealability. And yeah, you know, they’re bigger revolvers that can fire even more powerful, so that you can bump up easier to a .357. You get a four inch barrel or a six inch barrel revolver and have a full size frame. Really be able to put some powerful loads, get some great target shooting and great experience. There’s something to be said for that. But when it comes to carry, we’re looking for the concealability and the stopping power. We’re looking for the ability to conform to New Jersey law and remain discrete.

Evan Nappen 16:44

One of the other guns that I would like to talk about that is not mentioned in the article, but one that I happen to particularly like, is the Shadow Systems CR920 Elite. (https://shadowsystemscorp.com/cr920/) So, if you haven’t seen a Shadow System CR920, that gun is pricier, for sure. But it is really a great gun, and it is nine millimeters well as a 10-round mag. So, it fits the bill for New Jersey. They have a lot of features on it that kind of make it a highly upgraded Glock 43X to be honest. It’s very similar in the size. In fact, the holsters that would take a Glock 43X will actually work perfectly with a with the Shadow System CR920. So, it’s something to consider. If you ever had a chance to shoot shadow systems, you’ll know what I’m talking about. It is definitely a bit of an upgrade and a gun that I personally like, but all these guns will be able to serve you well and be able to protect you and your loved ones.

Evan Nappen 18:03

And you can know that you can carry them lawfully under New Jersey law with your permit to carry. You stay concealed and discreet in your carry and that’s the way we as New Jersey gun carriers need to be. So, this is something to consider when talking about guns that you carry. And again, there are so many other great handguns, great calibers. None of this is saying that any of these are any better than anybody else’s. You have to look at your needs and what you want, what your budget and what you can afford. But stick to the key principles. That is that you practice, that you shoot it well, that you exercise safety, that you know the laws, that you stick to being discrete, discretion is key in New Jersey. So that you don’t end up having to call me, even though you are 100% innocent, but now we have to deal with the legal situation. You’re best bet is to do what I’m saying. Be discreet and protect yourself in that manner. Hey, let me.

Teddy Nappen 18:05

Or have them all put in for the CMP, and you can carry a piece of history with yourself.

Evan Nappen 18:49

Yeah, right. Well, if you want to get a nice 1911. We’re definitely upping the game here. And nothing wrong with carrying the 1911, but it is definitely a much larger firearm and very powerful, very reliable. I love my 1911. Who doesn’t? But, you know, this is a different way of thinking when it’s coming to protecting yourself. And of course, you still can max out to the 10 rounds easily with this in a compact package. So, that’s what makes these nice. Page – 6 – of 11

Evan Nappen 19:13

If you want to check out any of these guns and you want to get your practice and your training and even your certifications, well, we know no place better than WeShoot. WeShoot is a gun range in Lakewood. That’s where Teddy and I shoot, and we got our certification. They have guns there that you can try. They’ll be able to set you up with your perfect concealed carry gun and get you the training. Help you get your license as well by getting the qualifications that you need. And this is also part of the package. So, when you want to become a defender and stay a defender, you need to have the training. You need to have a place to practice, a place to shoot. And WeShoot does that very thing. They’re an indoor range in Lakewood, conveniently off the Parkway. A great place right there in Central New Jersey. So you want to check out WeShoot at weshootusa.com. Go to their website. They will absolutely be able to set you up perfectly with a firearm that meets your needs, especially in this environment where we are at war with the number one sponsor of terror.

Evan Nappen 20:50

And, folks, I would find it hard to believe that they have not preempted our ability to defend ourselves by having sleeper cells and other agents that are in our country that we should expect will be looking to wreak havoc and chaos. And, you know, this was done under the, with the eyes closed of the Biden administration, primarily. President Trump for trying to clean up that, that mess that allowed that to happen, and he’s currently engaged in changing the world, changing the world where we can make such a huge difference. And it’s finally President. You know, I’ve been, as many of you have lived through 47 years of Iranian Islamic fundamentalism, terror, and all the things that it brought upon us. And it may finally, finally, be coming to an end. But it isn’t over yet, and it may very well come down to your ability and my ability, our ability, to defend ourselves right here at home. And luckily, the expansion of our ability to carry because of Bruen and forcing the issuance of carry permits, gives us this opportunity to be able to do something that, you know, half a dozen years ago, we would not have even been able to do in New Jersey. And that’s carry to protect ourselves in the face of a national security threat to our homeland. So, take advantage of that and check out weshootusa.com for your firearm needs.

Evan Nappen 21:12

Let me also mention our good friends at the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. They are the state affiliate of the NRA. They are the folks fighting for our rights in Trenton and in the courts. Hopefully they’ll get that magazine ban finally overturned. We’re looking cautiously optimistic at that. So we’ll be able to actually have guns to carry more than 10 rounds. When that happens, we’ll be able to buy larger capacity magazines for our highly concealable nines that we’re currently carrying, and that will give us even more ability to defend ourselves and our loved ones and our in our country, for that matter. So the Association is hard at work. Go to anjrpc.org so you can join and be part of the solution. You’ll get email alerts. You’ll be told what shenanigans are going on down in Trenton and what case law changes are taking place. So, check out anjrpc.org, the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs.

Evan Nappen 24:28

And while you’re at it, make sure you pick up a copy of my book, New Jersey Gun Law. It’s the bible of New Jersey gun law. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all question and answer. Make sure you have a Page – 7 – of 11

copy of that book so you can keep your gun rights and not end up in jail and turned into what I call a law-abiding criminals because of New Jersey’s insanity of gun laws. I tried to create this very user-friendly manual. Go to EvanNappen.com, EvanNappen.com, and pick up your copy today. Teddy, what do you have to share with us today in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 25:09

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free and well, we can all see right now that Trump’s Operation Epic Fury is going well. It’s already met multiple of the objectives and frankly, the level of damage that we have just taken out the entire Iranian Navy and the multiple sites they have hit and taking out not only the Ayatollah, the Ayatollah’s successor, who was there for seven minutes. You know, just here’s your hat, and he’s gone. And then the successor’s successor. It’s just, their leadership has been toppled. And this really sets the tone and level and power that the U.S. has. And all it took was having someone actually with the will to act. So, just going off of that, I was scrolling through AmmoLand, and I saw a very interesting article that made a good point. And this is by they just said the AmmoLand Staff. “Iran’s Power Vacuum Highlights the Importance of an Armed Citizenry”. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/03/irans-power-vacuum-highlights-the-importance-of-an-armed-citizenry/)

Teddy Nappen 26:28

So, they were referencing from the Citizens Committee for Right to Keep and Bear Arms, where they put out a press release talking about how the Iranian people’s lack of the most important safeguard of liberty that the Americans possess, the right to keep and bear arms. The Chairman of the group, Alan Gottlieb, says that Iran does not have the equivalent of our sacred Second Amendment. The Iranian people need it bad. And highlighting to what the Founding Fathers believed were the Second Amendment is the safeguard to a tyrannical rule. Everyone can agree that Iran was a tyrannical rule. It was a theocracy ran by radical, crazy clerics. You know that, and I just love every time the Left. You know the hands off Iran, Free Maduro like that. It just shows you the level of disingenuousness from the part from that party.

Teddy Nappen 27:30

But just to highlight the fact, for those of you who may be living under a rock, the Iran regime has ruled for more than four decades with authoritarianism. Suppressing dissidents, jailing critics, killing them also, and slaughtering protesters. They actually were importing in Iraqi militia groups to just start gunning down protesters after Trump had taken out the, and as the protests were breaking out in Iran, prior to Epic Fury. So, as was also stated, the symbol and freedom in our nation, the symbol and freedom in a nation of slaves is the gun. Because it enshrines the ability for the people to keep the Government in check. Again, I always hear the stupid Leftist argument like, oh yeah, you really think your Second Amendment is going to help you against the F15s or the United States military? Give me a break. Every single one of us who are able to carry, it would be one of the largest standing armies in our country.

Teddy Nappen 28:38

And also, I love how they make that argument. And also say, you know, an unarmed group of protesters about to overthrow the Government. So, you know. But, you know, they keep referencing Page – 8 – of 11

January 6, like it’s Chris, like it’s a Christmas holiday. But the point being is that the Second Amendment keeps these things in check. Because right now, that was the whole push, was to have the people rise up against their oppressors. Imagine what would have happened if all the Iranian people actually had access to firearms? I actually pulled the laws. So, I went and see like, okay, what was it? What was it like? What were the ways of getting people to, if you wanted to buy a gun and you were an Iranian citizen in Iran, what would you do? And it seems they’ve modeled themselves off of New Jersey. You have to obtain a gun license in Iran, and it involves several steps, including a background check, psychological examination, and firearm safety course. You have to apply for your gun permit at your local police station. They have to do criminal record, military service status, complete a psychological evaluation to ensure mental stability, taking a firearm safety course and passing a written practical exam, pay your fees, of course, and wait to be approved. So, if you do everything else, you have to be approved by higher authorities, which could take several months.

Evan Nappen 30:03

It isn’t that far from what New Jersey actually requires. Jersey is virtually the Iranian totalitarian state of gun laws.

Teddy Nappen 30:17

Yeah, and also, it is illegal to possess a firearm without the proper licensing, which is punishable by imprisonment and fines. Carrying a firearm without a license is punishable up to three years in prison.

Evan Nappen 30:31

Wait. Only three years? In New Jersey, you can go for 10 years. So, they’re actually a little more reasonable in Iran than in New Jersey.

Teddy Nappen 30:42

Yeah. And also, this is something that people need to remember. We are a nation of firearms. Firearms are enshrined in our culture. They cannot take that away, as much as the Left tries to propagandize us out of it. To give you a perspective. In Iran, this is cited from gunpolicy.org. In 2017 it was about 3.5 firearms per 100 residents, as opposed to in 2017 there are 120 firearms per 100 residents in the United States. And that was in 2017. So, imagine actually having the accessibility for firearms, actually having the ability to rise up if you ever needed to. That’s why you have all the Leftists right now flocking the gun shops, trying to buy firearms.

Evan Nappen 31:30

Well, the latest, the latest numbers, we have over 500 million privately owned firearms in America. Yep, over 500 million.

Teddy Nappen 31:42

We have to get those numbers up.

Evan Nappen 31:43

I agree. Page – 9 – of 11

Teddy Nappen 31:44

Yes.

Evan Nappen 31:44

Let’s hit that 1 billion mark. Let’s work on it, folks.

Teddy Nappen 31:47

This isn’t and also this isn’t a vacuum. When you look at other dictatorships, this is the first step. This is what they do. You have to disarm the populace because they do not want any rising up, any resistance groups or militias, when you’re being an authoritarian regime. And cut to another one of Trump’s highlights of Venezuela. What did you, under the Venezuelan Government, another authoritarian regime, where they also made it nearly impossible to get firearms. Where you could apply for a license to the Venezuelan armed forces. Of course, you need a background check, training requirements, inspections. But here’s the kicker. In 2012 the Venezuelan Government suspends all legal firearm sales to private citizens.

Evan Nappen 32:39

Hmm. Why would they do that?

Teddy Nappen 32:41

Yeah, I wonder why? Oh, in their words, combating criminal organizations and preventing weapons from falling into the wrong hands.

Evan Nappen 32:53

It wouldn’t happen to do with who was in power politically at that time?

Teddy Nappen 32:58

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Former leader Maduro, no, guar, no, guar. Yeah. And also, they try to make like, there’s no explicit law banning firearm ownership, just a suspension on firearms of private citizens. I know they’re so reasonable. Oh, and they are required to register all their firearms with the Government. Oh, hmmm. I wonder why? It’s the, it’s the disingenuousness on the Left for why the Second Amendment is so important.

Evan Nappen 33:37

Well, let’s answer that question for folks. And that’s because the Registration leads to the Confiscation, and that’s what registration is all about. Why do we fight registration? Because it is a step toward confiscation. Then after confiscation comes the political reality of a extermination. We’ve seen every major Holocaust preceded by these very steps when it comes to private ownership of firearms.

Teddy Nappen 34:09

Yeah, and cut to any of the European countries that have just disarmed themselves. Cut to the United Kingdom, with their rapes going from 12,000 a year to 70,000 a year. Page – 10 – of 11

Evan Nappen 34:20

I mean, there’s a reason we did lend lease, and reason why they put ads in the American riflemen to please send guns to England. They even disarm themselves in the face of having to face a Nazi terror. And here, they don’t learn. They don’t learn from their prior mistakes. They continuously repeat them.

Evan Nappen 34:40

Well, when they were good and ready, they were done with Winston Churchill, and they said, oh, we don’t need you anymore. That’s how it always goes. And then when things come around, they’re going to need a Churchill. And maybe, just maybe, they might learn their lesson this time. But for now, the Left, gun control will forever be the losing argument on the Left. That is a fact. They will occasionally jump out whenever there’s a mass shooting, but in this point in time, that issue is effectively won on our side. We have to be vigilant, though. Because they always try to sneak things in and go off the, unfortunately, the emotional side of our country, who just do not think logically and actually apply and try to think, oh, what would happen if we take away all these firearms? Is this actually going to solve the problem?

Evan Nappen 35:37

Well, in Iran, it’s a shame that people aren’t armed, because they’d be able to take action now, especially with the efforts that the U.S. has already done to their infrastructure, militarily and politically. Right?

Teddy Nappen 35:58

I want the CIA to do the, you know, the black book, and just start dropping them, like the leaflets. The ways how to like, to make the gun out of the soup can.

Evan Nappen 36:10

Right. Yeah.

Teddy Nappen 36:12

Or the traps you could make where it was literally, like, what is it like us use like you make a bomb out of like piss and aspirin.

Evan Nappen 36:23

Hmmm. True. Well, Teddy, I want to talk about our very important segment of GOFU. GOFU is the Gun Owner Fuck Up. And the reason we talk about this is it’s expensive lessons that others have endured, that you get to learn very reasonably. You get to learn it for free from Gun Lawyer radio. So, this week, I want to talk about, and these are actual cases that come through our office that we see all the time. This has to do with lost or stolen firearm in New Jersey. You need to know that New Jersey has a law that if your firearm is lost or stolen, okay? Lost or stolen. You must report it to local law enforcement within 36 hours. So, you have a 36 hour window to report a lost or stolen firearm. You must report it to the chief law enforcement officer of the municipality where the theft occurred. Or if there’s no local police, to the State Police. Page – 11 – of 11

Evan Nappen 37:40

Now, once you report a gun as stolen or lost, there can be further ramifications on you. And I want to talk about the ramifications if you fail to report it. Let’s keep this in mind. If you fail to report a stolen gun, it is a civil penalty of $500 for the first offense. So, it is technically not a crime. It’s not necessarily. It’s quasi criminal for failing to report the stolen firearm. It’s a civil penalty of $500 for the first offense and $1000 for subsequent offenses. So, your failure to report puts you in that category. It’s not as if there is a potential jail sentence if you fail to report. Now, this doesn’t mean you shouldn’t report, necessarily, but I’m telling you what the actual penalty is. So, what happens when you report? When you report, you need to provide the make and model and serial number.

Evan Nappen 38:42

But then we see ramifications from the reporting where then they may try to move, they being the Government, to take your gun licenses. Revoke your carry permit, revoke your firearms ID card, because they try to then claim that you fall under the category of Public Health, Safety, and Welfare as a danger or problem under that category. And that is it because you didn’t exercise proper care and had your gun stolen, which is, of course, how can, you know, the actions of a third party, being the thief, end up taking not just your gun but your gun rights? But New Jersey never misses an opportunity to do that. So, you need to keep in mind that even though the law requires a reporting, you may end up, from the reporting, having to have a battle over keeping your firearm license.

Evan Nappen 39:38

If this happens to you, where you believe a gun is lost or stolen, the best thing to do is call an attorney right away and work through the very specific issues that may be present in your case. How it got stolen, how it gets reported as stolen, if you choose to report it as stolen. These are all issues that you want to have attorney / client confidentiality and discuss, because there can be escalation, and there can be ramifications. Then if there’s a failure to report, of course, and the gun comes up used in a crime, what are the implications from that? There’s a whole array of issues that need to be considered if you are dealing with a lost or stolen firearm.

Evan Nappen 40:28

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 3 40:38

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 11

Gun Lawyer — Episode 279 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Supreme Court case, marijuana user ban, Second Amendment rights, ACLU, NRA, New Jersey, Hughes amendment, West Virginia, machine guns, loopholes, gun rights, felon restoration, Epstein files, Michael Bloomberg, gun violence prevention.

SPEAKERS

Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:16

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:18

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:20

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, we have some exciting things coming in the future here. I want to make sure the listeners are well aware. In the Supreme Court, we have a case coming up that is going to look at the prohibitor for firearm possession concerning marijuana use, if you’re a user of marijuana. And the case is U.S. versus Hemani. This is very interesting, because it is widely believed that the Court is going to strike down the gun ban for marijuana users. Regardless of how you feel about marijuana use, I’m looking forward to seeing this opinion, because it may be useful in knocking down other gun disqualifiers. Because, folks, gun disqualifiers, such as the gun ban for marijuana use, is an area of exploitation by the gun rights oppressors.

Evan Nappen 01:38

So, if they can’t just get a flat out gun ban through, which they try to do all the time, if they can piece meal gun bans to various classes of individuals, then they get the job done that way. That’s why you see the ever expanding list of persons who they try to get disqualified from being able to exercise their Second Amendment rights. And this case has, I believe, potentially very far reaching implications as to subverting that anti-gun rights, that gun rights oppression tactic. So, we want to look at it at as more than just the marijuana. It will be fascinating to see it be a victory, because we have parties in support of this ban going away as diverse as, on the same side now, the ACLU and the NRA. Both. The ACLU is in favor of getting rid of the marijuana user gun ban, because it is, of course, beneficial to in their view, I’m sure, legalization of marijuana, which is something that they would be in support. The NRA is in favor of it going away, because it is consistent with The NRA’s position of supporting Second Amendment rights. So, this has created the classic strange bedfellows situation. (https://www.marijuanamoment.net/aclu-attorney-confident-supreme-court-will-strike-down-gun-ban-for-marijuana-users-after-oral-arguments-next-week/ ) Page – 2 – of 11

Evan Nappen 03:28

But ultimately, what we see coming from it should be a victory for gun rights. And I believe and hope it will be even further reaching than simply addressing the marijuana question. It’s going to be, I believe, very helpful in fighting other disqualifications. Remember, New Jersey is one of the states that tries to always have an expansive list of what disqualifies a person from being able to exercise their Second Amendment rights. They love to create disenfranchisements of our rights because they are rights oppressors, and this tactic, hopefully, will be taking a hit here. So, we’ll keep you informed about the progress and what occurs under the Hemani decision.

Teddy Nappen 04:30

I will say, just from the ACLU, just to be clear, they are heavily backed by the Democrat for their super PACs. I’m just saying. Like that is the, and I can’t wait to see all the individuals of the ACLU all out in mass as they’re about to help win a pro-gun victory as well. Yeah.

Evan Nappen 04:55

I guess they’re looking at it more as a pro-marijuana victory and ending prejudice toward marijuana users. But whatever their motivation may be, we are going to be consistent in our support for Second Amendment rights. Getting rid of disqualifiers is getting rid of disqualifiers that are disenfranchisements to our Second Amendment rights. So, hey, at least they’re on the right side on this one, and maybe we can get them to continue to see the light on other disqualifiers. Such as restoration of rights for felons and such, right? I mean, this is something you would think they would be in favor of, as well, for restoration of rights. You paid your dues. You served your time. And if you’re not a violent felon, why are you disenfranchised of your rights? I mean, even violent felons, when you get right down to it. I mean, there’s, I missed that in the Second Amendment, where it says we have a right to keep and bear arms, unless you’re a felon, you know, or any of these exemptions. They aren’t there. So, to what degree we tolerate them, to what degree we may think they’re even valuable, I don’t know, but we need to. I’d rather be seeing us pull back on every type of ban and maximize freedom and maximize our Second Amendment rights.

Evan Nappen 06:31

Also, in regards to maximizing our rights, there is a really interesting I just love this. I love this. There is an attempt, now, a very shrewd attempt on the pro-rights side to create the ability to get around, yes, a loophole, folks. Because you know what loopholes are. Loopholes are freedom finding a way. And this.

Teddy Nappen 07:08

I thought it was a hole in a Castle.

Evan Nappen 07:10

Yeah. Right, exactly. Loopholes were the hole in the castle that you would fire your arrows from, because you would still be protected. You could still fire through those, those square, rectangular hole. They’re the loopholes. So, that’s why they’re called that. But, anyway. The key loophole here is in the Hughes Amendment. What there’s an attempt to do, particularly in West Virginia, who has taken the lead here with a bill in West Virginia, which is SB 1071. This is right from AmmoLand, by the way. Page – 3 – of 11

(https://www.ammoland.com/2026/02/contact-chairman-willis-now-sb1071-could-restore-machine-gun-rights-in-west-virginia-if-it-gets-a-hearing/) It could restore access to modern machine guns. That’s right.

Evan Nappen 08:00

What they’re doing, what they’re attempting to do is a bill that will create a state run Office of Public Defense within the West Virginia State Police. To procure and sell modern, select-fire machine guns directly to qualified, law-abiding citizens. That’s right. You know how some states have State liquor stores. This will become the state machine gun store. That’s right. It can operate via the Hughes Amendment. Now, the Hughes Amendment was the law back in ’86 that prohibited the, I mean, actually the Hughes Amendment prohibited the new, the sale of new manufacture of machine guns. Okay? So, that created this situation we have now where it’s legal for a citizen to obey the NFA and acquire a machine gun and pay the $200 tax. But the problem is no new machine guns could be put into registration, you see. And that created this essentially, artificially, ridiculously high, crazy prices to own full auto. So, this bill takes the Hughes Amendment and essentially flips the script on the Hughes Amendment by stating that, and this is under Title 18 922(o), that the Hughes Amendment. Here’s, the key loophole language. “. . . does not apply with respect to a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, a State or any department or political subdivision thereof.”

Evan Nappen 10:20

So, in other words, the bill will create a State agency that purchases machine guns and transfers them by quote, right in the law, “by or under the authority of”, the State of West Virginia. The transfers are therefore fully compliant with federal law and critically exempt from the National Firearms Act $200 transfer tax because they’re government facilitated. It’s brilliant. It’s brilliant. It’ll make it so that qualified persons, any adult, who can legally possess firearms under federal and state law, they’d undergo a background check at state police, state police troop headquarters. The office would, where possible, prioritize West Virginia manufacturers, operate distribution points using existing facilities, and issue official state certificates of transfer. Subsequent transfers between qualified citizens would require a simple $275 re-transfer fee through the office, which is waived for heirs. A $250 surcharge per gun plus a modest administrative fee capped at 50 bucks, would flow to the new Public Defense Fund to cover costs, generating revenue for the state without raising taxes.

Evan Nappen 11:48

And it was GOA (Gun Owners of America) that drafted this bill. This is really cool. And now I think Kansas is putting a bill forward, and I’m sure we’ll see other pro-gun states moving to create this. This way we can gut the Hughes Amendment and open up the market for new full auto. And by doing that, they’ll become even more commonly owned and become an even greater argument for the Second Amendment and their protection. Eventually, with enough exploitation of loopholes, laws themselves that created the original ban become useless and in fact, go away. We’ve seen this happen. We’ve seen this happen. For example, when it came to NFA Trusts, to purchase NFA, you had to get, at one point, what was called a chief law enforcement officer to sign off. And if your chief didn’t sign off on that, you could not appeal it. You were just dead in the water and could not acquire NFA. Then along comes the idea of setting up a trust where trusts do not require a chief law enforcement to sign off. So, everyone started doing NFA Trusts to acquire NFA, because it avoided the Chiefs sign off. And Page – 4 – of 11

because of that, there were about 10,000 trusts at ATF on NFA. So many just got around it that they finally just repealed the rule and said, guess what? You don’t need to have your chief law enforcement approve it. They just have to get notice of it. But they got rid of the sign off. Why? The loophole defeated it.

Evan Nappen 13:50

We see that even going on with switchblades. We’ve seen how there’s been a huge expansion in knife rights based on the ability to work the loopholes for interstate sale and for state sales to be independent. And how the federal prohibition was simply affecting very specific transactions under federal law. To the point where the federal government, in trying to uphold the federal switchblade law, said, as one of their justifications, well, the law isn’t even enforced anymore. That’s right. Why? Loopholes! Loopholes. Freedom finding a way. And so this is exciting to see this taking place on machine guns. Finally going at the NFA. Not shying away from taking on the big stuff. Not letting them get away with claiming that any firearm is somehow intrinsically evil, wrong or bad. We’re finally fighting back with offense. Offense for once. Not just totally on the defense.

Evan Nappen 15:07

Speaking of which, you may encounter a new group called “Bridging the Divide”. (https://bridgethedividenow.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Brief-Policy-Outline.pdf) Bridging the Divide on Firearm Policy. Oh yeah, they’re claiming that there’s some bipartisan, that they have taken pro-gun folks and anti-gun and uniting them on principles that everybody believes in. They’re claiming to do this. And here’s their wonderful policies. Lo and behold, when you look closely at this so-called, you know, “Bridging the Divide”, which is, you know, bridging the gap, which is more of laying a trap, my friends. Laying a trap. What you see are their policies that they’re claiming is, you know, they have this bipartisan, so to speak. This is pro-gun and anti-gun right oppressors. Gun rights oppressors and gun rights people.

Evan Nappen 16:08

And of course, here’s their policies. They have eight of them, eight of them. This so-called “Bridging the Divide.” One, Prohibiting Factors for Firearm Purchase and Possession. This is right from their “Firearm Policy Outline.” They want to prohibit gun possession by those convicted of violent crime at the misdemeanor level while removing state restrictions on those non-violent felonies. So, they want to expand prohibitions to misdemeanors. Claiming, of course, non-violent felonies, right? Yeah. And then remove prohibition of gun purchases by persons who use marijuana. Well, yeah, guess what? The Court’s already going to kill that. So, they’re throwing this in. They want to, essentially, what they’re looking to do is expand prohibitions to misdemeanors. Who’s kidding who? Come on. Give me a break.

Evan Nappen 17:04

Two, Background Checks. Create state level background checks for private sales. Oh, so, in other words, Universal Background Checks, and they want to impose it state by state. More of that. So, end private sales. But they want to have “logical exemptions”? Well, it’s the same, so-called logical exemptions. Let’s just instead of logical, we’ll call it “narrow”, narrow exemptions. No. Private sales should remain private sales. It is more of an intrusion, more of oppression, on our gun rights. How about three? What’s the third thing? Extreme Risk Protection. Oh, seriously? Red flag. We have seen, Page – 5 – of 11

experienced, and are currently experiencing the unbelievable denial of due process that takes place from that garbage.

Evan Nappen 17:55

Four, Dealer Registration and Gun Trafficking. They want to focus on the small number of dealers from whom the majority of traced crime guns originate. Oh, really? Well, guess what? What creates those statistics? Anytime they’re run – when guns are seized. And if you’re seizing guns the way New Jersey does, at the drop of a hat and those guns are run, that raises dealer numbers as quoting “crime guns”, even though they’re not crime guns. It is absolutely a flawed basis, and they want to focus on that. Five, Child Firearm Access Prevention. Oh, lock up your safety. That’s what that’s called. Lock up your safety to protect the children. Here we go again. Six, Firearm Suicide Prevention. Ah. In states where murder rates are low, well, let’s go at suicide. Anything we can do to go at the guns, right? And what happens with suicide prevention? Oh, well, that’s the wellness check. You know what’s going on in New Jersey with wellness checks? Anybody calls on anybody, and the police come. They take you away. They take your guns. They hold you for about three days to see if you’re okay. And even though you’re fine, now we got to fight to get your rights back. Fight to get your guns back. There’s a million ways to kill yourself, folks. Focusing on the gun isn’t the answer. Focus on actual causes. But no, it’s just an excuse.

Teddy Nappen 19:34

I think the biggest issue with this whole concept of “Bridging the Divide” is take a step back and let us, let us be on equal terms. Here’s the problem, they cannot define what an assault firearm is. They are.

Evan Nappen 19:50

Wait, wait, Teddy. I haven’t even gotten to that yet. I haven’t gotten to that.

Teddy Nappen 19:54

All right.

Evan Nappen 19:54

Number seven, Firearm Injury Prevention Education. They want to tie public health to firearm injuries. Why? Because that goes to healthcare so they can regulate it. Get it regulated back through the health, federal health agencies. Get it back to the CDC. Get them back on it. Cranking out anti-gun nonsense. That’s the game. Eight, Community Violence Intervention. Oh, that gets funding to who? Anti-gun groups. That’s what it’s about.

Evan Nappen 20:33

So, we’re looking at these policies and then who’s on it? Well, their board is chock full, chock full of all former and bunch of all anti-gun rights folks. Then they sprinkle in a few that are supposedly pro-gun. So, who’s one of them? Rob Pincus. Rob Pincus is on there, proudly on there. They have listed him as a gun rights advocate. Except here’s a little article from Lee Williams back in March 29, 2021, from thegunwriter.com. (https://thegunwriter.substack.com/p/huh-rob-pincus-supports-expanded?utm_source=publication-search) It says, “Huh? Rob Pincus calls for expanded background checks, gun control and then says he didn’t.” Oh, really? Interesting. You can read that article and see. Page – 6 – of 11

The people they’re getting on board. There’s no major player there that is truly an advocate of our gun rights that I could find, and plenty that aren’t.

Evan Nappen 21:30

Nowhere in their policy does it say repeal assault firearm bans, repeal large capacity magazine bans, repeal sensitive place prohibitions, or enact national reciprocity. All the things that we’re fighting for, for our rights. No. All it is is more, more, more. Just a subterfuge of more bans, more back doors to taking away rights. I didn’t see a damn thing here that expands our rights. Nothing. It’s just take, take, take. And package it as some kind of compromise. Their compromise is always us giving up our rights. Forget it, folks. Just forget it.

Evan Nappen 22:18

And finally, let me point out, right from The Trace, right from The Trace. Sent out in an email blast, and I just want to read you this from The Trace. (https://mailchi.mp/thetrace/inside-the-loosely-regulated-world-of-gun-manufacturing-4869976?e=a13774efb8) This is fascinating. “Since the Trump administration snatched. . . ” This is The Trace. Snatched. They think of the Mel Brooks. You know, sees snatched, right? But anyway. “Since the Trump administration snatched funding from gun violence prevention . . .” Oh, in other words, let’s decode that. Since Trump took away all the money going to gun rights oppression groups, “. . . the field’s practitioners have had to confront an uncertain future.” Oh, they’re no longer getting the money from the Government. Huh. “Without federal dollars, state and local governments will have to decide whether to pick up the tab. It’s far from a sure thing. Gun violence intervention programs have long had to fight to prove the value of their work. The problem, however, is that it’s difficult to measure. Studying gun violence is expensive, and the nature of violence makes it a uniquely challenging subject to pull apart.” In other words, to propagandize into an anti-gun policy, to take away our rights. “And while gun violence research has seen a resurgence in recent years, the Trump administration cut funding for that field, too.” Yeah, isn’t that cute? I love it. “. . . meaning the available evidence for these programs could grow slimmer.”

Evan Nappen 23:46

So folks, The Trace is bitching and moaning about losing their money, and who took it from them? President Trump. And it’s about time. There’s no reason our tax dollars need to go to oppression of our gun rights, and it’s the Trump administration that ended this funding. Keep that in mind.

Teddy Nappen 24:10

Just to kind of going back to the whole issue. Whenever the Left try to present themselves like no, no, we need to find these common sense issues. Okay. Let’s define our terms, because the Left does not see the Second Amendment as a right. We know this because the Left wing nut case of a judge, Jackson went and broke down her entire descent of Bruen, describing how it is not a right. It’s a privilege. Arguing that when we deal with gun cases, you have to consider the victims of gun violence rather than looking to the law and the Constitution. That is where they’re coming from. They’re coming from the stupidity and suicidal empathy when they say they’re bridging the gap. That is their argument. Page – 7 – of 11

Evan Nappen 25:01

Just don’t fall for it. Don’t fall for it. But here’s something that you would, that you would like to do, something that you should do, something that you would enjoy doing. And that is going to WeShoot. WeShoot is an indoor range in Lakewood, New Jersey. It’s the range where Teddy and I shoot and where we get our training. You will love WeShoot. And WeShoot is offering some great deals on guns. As a matter of fact, they have a Troy A4 Defender. It’s compact, balanced, and NJ compliant. This platform delivers serious capability in a maneuverable package. It shoulders naturally, runs smoothly, and feels purpose built. They also have a Sig Sauer P365 AXG Fuse. This is where innovation meets metal. The AXG alloy grip module gives you the premium weight and control, while the longer slide and enhance sight radius makes fast, accurate shooting effortless. Try out that SIG P365 at WeShoot.

Evan Nappen 26:16

They’re also offering a Smith & Wesson CSX. Now, this is a micro-compact with an aluminum frame and a very crisp single-action trigger feel. It’s slim. It’s refined, and it’s built for discrete carry without sacrificing shoot ability. It has that classic metal construction in a defensive, ready size. Also, you can see Julianna and the MAC 5. This is a retro-inspired style with modern execution. The MAC 5 delivers iconic roller-delayed energy, and Juliana brings the confidence to match. So, check that out as well. Go to weshootusa.com, weshootusa.com. Check out the guns, check out Julianna, and check out the great things that are offered there. Fantastic training, top training. You can get your CCARE certificate so you can get your carry and have a great time in their pro shop. The service you’ll receive is second to none. Go to weshootusa.com.

Evan Nappen 27:37

Also, please, please make sure you are a member of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. They are the premier gun rights group in New Jersey. They are the umbrella organization of gun clubs in New Jersey. They are fighting for our rights. My good friend and colleague, Dan Schmutter, is there in federal court. He’s doing a great job. We’re waiting for some more results to report. Exciting times. We’re going to have some, I feel, excellent results over “sensitive places”, the magazine ban and the assault firearm ban, as we keep fighting and slogging through it. Getting our rights back. Plus the Association is on guard at the courts, at the legislature and the courthouse, both. We have a full-time paid lobbyist and, man, New Jersey is always a challenge. So, make sure you’re a member. Go to anjrpc.org and join today. You’ll get news sent right to your email. You’ll get a beautiful newsletter, and you’ll know that you’re part of the solution. You want to be part of the solution. The solution to the problem. The problem is gun rights oppressors, and the Association fights them in the belly of the beast, New Jersey, right there. ANJRPC.org.

Evan Nappen 29:04

And don’t forget to get a copy of my book, New Jersey Gun Law. It’s the bible of New Jersey gun law. It is the book you need to navigate through the insanity that is New Jersey gun law. I try to make it as easy as possible. Question and answer format with 120 topics. It’s a book everybody uses, and you need one. Just go to EvanNappen.com and order yours. And when you get it, don’t lend it out, because you’ll never get it back. I hear that complaint all the time. So, make sure you keep your hands on it, or you’ll lose it. Go to EvanNappen.com and get a copy of New Jersey Gun Law today. Now, we have Press Checks with Teddy. Teddy, what do you have for us today in Press Checks? Page – 8 – of 11

Teddy Nappen 29:50

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free, and I just want to preface this on this one. Where you see in the news media, they’ve been pushing the whole Epstein thing. All right? They’ve been trying to push that. And of course, the Left ended up destroying themselves, as they’ve lost multiple power players who have been implicated in the whole, in the whole surroundings that it comes with the Epstein files being released. And one of the individuals who, by the way, this individual had close ties to Jeffrey Epstein since, like, the early days, Michael Bloomberg. You know, maybe it was because he had a, you know, big gulp in his hand, and that’s why, you know, he’s like, Oh, how dare you. But, yeah.

Teddy Nappen 30:41

So, we go to AmmoLand, where this was a wonderful article written up by Alan Gottlieb. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/02/ccrkba-demands-bloomberg-come-clean-about-epstein-relationship/) Regarding the fact that now we are demanding that all the anti-gun groups, including Everytown, including all of his multi anti gun right the gun rights oppressors groups cut ties with Michael Bloomberg. You know, the money. And there was, I actually went. And funny enough, anyone can do this. You can go on to the Epstein files on the government website, and they have the entire files library. You can type in word searches. So, you type in “Michael Bloomberg”. I went and read through the different documents on it. Now, to preface this, there was no showing of wrongdoing in what was discovered by the fact he was. However, he was invited with Michael Bloomberg, George Stephanopoulos, Eric Schmidt, all these individuals, to a cocktail party with Jeffrey Epstein to watch The Imitation Game. You know, that movie about Alan Turing where he broke the German Enigma. Okay. Bear in mind, this is 2015. Jeffrey Epstein had already been convicted of the first initial charges back in 2000.

Evan Nappen 32:05

He was a felon, you know. So, hey, they love to make a point that they shouldn’t have guns. Epstein kept trying and trying and trying to get his rights back so he could get guns. Yet, here he is with the king of anti-gun funding, Bloomturd.

Teddy Nappen 32:25

Yeah.

Evan Nappen 32:26

What’s that all about?

Teddy Nappen 32:27

There was also a letter. Now, again, there was no direct correspondence with Michael Bloomberg. However, there was a letter from Maxwell, Jillian’s mother, basically inviting him to attend a premiere, apparently, this was a movie, Power of Good. I’ve never heard of this one. But this very clearly shows that there was direct information going back and forth. There was also, it seemed to be, there was a massive invitation, and Jeffrey Epstein was trying to create this almost investor group. I want to tell you. Like he wanted to make this online new media. He was naming these board of directors, one of which was Michael Bloomberg, the Rothschild, Lee Rothschild, Alan Goodman. So, various individuals. He Page – 9 – of 11

seemed to be almost like a financial advisor or a bank roller for Jeffrey Epstein. Again, there’s no showing of wrongdoing, but it’s just, clearly, he had a relationship with him. Even highlighted to the articles where, in 2011 the Palm Beach Daily News, Epstein’s address book included Michael Bloomberg. In 2013, there were multiple pictures taken with Bloomberg and Maxwell together having book parties at the Four Seasons restaurant in New York City, where I guess they were reading gender queer, but also the level.

Evan Nappen 33:51

Well, the way they brought in the Clintons to the committee, they need to bring Bloomberg in. I mean, you know, this is. The Left kept pushing and pushing and pushing about the Epstein files. Hoping against hope, that they could somehow get President Trump on this, when, in reality, what we’re seeing is it blowing up in the Left’s face, aren’t we?

Teddy Nappen 34:12

Yeah. Also, here’s a really big one. Epstein was invited to a Bloomberg hosted fundraiser for Plaskett. Congresswoman Plaskett. You know, the woman who took direct funding from Jeffrey Epstein, actually got donation money. So, not only was he hosting the dinner, cordially inviting Epstein to come on down. Even writing a letter. Please join our host. Michael Bloomberg. Dear Jeffrey Epstein, please join our host, Michael Bloomberg, to the dinner. So, very clearly he was running in these circles. There’s a very clear tie relationship. Again, no showing of wrongdoing. There wasn’t a direct correspondence with him in the emails. And if you actually go through a lot of the emails, he would email news articles. That’s why you know Bloomberg News. And he would email them to others. So, that did also come up. It just shows the very clear ties. This is the one that really sticks out to me. Documents release revealed he was interested in gun politics and Bloomberg’s work. They don’t show direct donations to EveryTown. However, in 2013 there’s an email soliciting Epstein for a donation to American for Responsible Solutions, which is run by Gabby, Gabby Giffords, who later became Giffords.

Evan Nappen 35:34

That’s right. But all they care about with Epstein is Trump. And how does that all relate? Is Trump in the Epstein files, Teddy?

Teddy Nappen 35:46

Oh, very much. Yes, yes, Trump is in the Epstein files. Okay, I’ve got to tell this to everyone here. The black pillars, all those out there, we do not have all the information. We know that for a fact. Okay? Has it been mishandled? Absolutely. Pam Bondi should resign. Fall on her sword. Because she has damaged the administration on Trump for the mishandling with the stupid binder gate, all the stupidity of, oh, I have the client list on my desk. That was a lie. And the whole situation there. However, if you actually look at the timeline, you can go see the articles. See the full breakdown of it for Donald Trump.

Teddy Nappen 36:24

Here’s the timeline, 2004 to 2005, there was reported abuse by a 14-year-old girl by Epstein. Then Trump immediately ended the relation with Jeffrey Epstein. Banned him from Mar a Lago. In 2008, Epstein was convicted with the help of Donald Trump, who cooperated with the victims of Jeffrey Epstein’s lawyer, who fully deposed himself to the lawyers. As opposed to all the other people that are Page – 10 – of 11

implicated, who just stayed away. He actually went in to help the victims. Imagine that. And going in next 2000, after Maxwell is convicted as well, where she trafficked to Epstein. Also in 2019, he’s later arrested again. Guess who’s President in 2019? Donald Trump. He was arrested for sex who invested arrested Epstein for sex trafficking, and then he’s later dead in 2019. So, not only does it exonerate, where, after he was convicted, Trump broke off all relationships with Epstein. He helped get Jeffrey Epstein. That is all that they have on Donald Trump when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein.

Teddy Nappen 37:32

All the fake news, all the fake and you know why he said hoax? He wasn’t saying the Jeffrey Epstein whole pedo ring was a hoax? No, he is saying hoax, as in talking about the Dems whole plot to directly connect Trump to the pedophile ring. That is their plot. That was the hoax. Was it misspoken? Yes, Trump fires from the hip. Sue him. That’s how it goes. But actually looking at the facts of what came down, this is what he should have said. Under four years of Biden, not one committee was formed to go at the Epstein files, to go after the Epstein files. The Dems didn’t even want to touch it, which, by the way, all the people that were running in Epstein circles, Schumer, all the, all the heavy donators, Bill Gates, all these individuals are running in Michael Bloomberg, running heavily donations, including Jeffrey Epstein, who heavily donated to the Democrats. So, it’s the level of insanity that goes into it.

Teddy Nappen 38:37

By the way, for everyone to remember. Did you know? Did you also know the fact that all of a sudden, the victims who never spoke out during the four years under Biden are now taking Super Bowl ads saying, release more files. Okay, what happened to we have our list. We’re making our list. Just say it. Are you worried about defamation? Musk said he’ll pay for defamation. And good luck as trying to go after women of victims of sexual abuse. I’m sure a go fund me will be immediately formed and covered. So, what are you waiting on? Oh, that’s right, these are just political cudgels for you to abuse. Okay? That is a fact, and that’s what I’m saying to the victims who, all of a sudden, will not name names. So, that it’s one of the big things, like, very clearly, it’s being used as a political tool. They don’t actually want to release the names.

Evan Nappen 39:28

Well, I think it’s interesting that it’s come around to Mr. Bloomberg, and that has major effect in terms of funding of further gun rights oppression. He needs to explain the way they’re looking at it. Forced it to be opened up. Hey, guess what? You’re there. You need to explain it now. At least do that.

Teddy Nappen 39:52

Also this.

Evan Nappen 39:53

There you go.

Teddy Nappen 39:54

Proof in concept. Peter Mandelson, who was directly connected to Jeffrey Epstein. He was Keir Starmer’s Cabinet Minister, who just recently resigned. He resigned in shame. So, the proof is in the Page – 11 – of 11

proof is, in fact, that this has the effect. If we could break up Bloomberg from EveryTown. I mean, there is their money. They have nothing aside from.

Evan Nappen 40:17

Well, they’re not getting funding anymore from the Government. Yeah, from USAID killed all that. Yeah, so that’s good. Well, let me tell you, Teddy, about this week’s GOFU. That is a Gun Owner Fuck Up, where you learn about expensive mistakes that others have made so that you don’t make them. Now this week’s GOFU that I want to talk about, might even be considered a future GOFU. But it applies still today. If West Virginia, Kansas, or any of these places end up creating State machine gun stores, if you will, which I believe they will, and this ends up taking off, make sure that you do NOT, as a non-resident of those states, acquire a machine gun from those states and then, no less, bring it to New Jersey. In other words, the GOFU, in the big picture, is you have to be cognizant of your jurisdiction and what you’re doing in your jurisdiction, and when you’re in another jurisdiction, what you can and can’t do.

Evan Nappen 41:34

We see the jurisdictional problem arise all the time. Whether it’s in carrying a gun where you’re allowed to carry in one state and not in another, whether it’s purchase or possession of a firearm in any given state versus another, people bringing guns or accessories or other things that were legal in one place and illegal in another. The burden is on you to know this. I am constantly seeing cases where people make that very critical error. So, the GOFU, in a general term, my friends, is make sure you know your jurisdictions laws and do not inadvertently violate them because you are in another jurisdiction, and you are coming into this other jurisdiction, this is where the trouble can begin. It can be quite serious. So, be very cognizant of this when dealing with guns.

Evan Nappen 42:40

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 2 42:51

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)