Re-enactors with real guns prompt change (NJ Gun Law)

[indguard]

http://www.nj.com/printer/printer.ss...970.xml&coll=2
Star Ledger

BY JIM LOCKWOOD

Historical war re-enactors and movie/television actors who use real guns in their acts, but don't have state permits to carry them, are "technically" breaking New Jersey's firearms law, a prosecutor and gun-rights attorney said Monday.

That's the reason why a change in state law is needed to carve out exemptions for such use of firearms in historical re-enactments or theatrical productions, agreed Sussex County Assistant Prosecutor Gregory Mueller and defense attorney Evan Nappen.

Both attorneys are part of a case involving the accidental shooting of a cowboy actor at Wild West City in Byram last year. The case is pending in Superior Court in Sussex County, where Wild West City owner Michael Stabile and manager Nathan McPeak each have been charged with violating a law intended to protect public health and safety and recklessly causing serious bodily injury, by allowing operable firearms to be used during the shows.

The men have pleaded not guilty to the charges. Plea negotiations have focused on having the park's Western World corporation enter a guilty plea while Stabile and McPeak would be enrolled in pretrial intervention, a program that, if successfully completed, results in dismissal of all charges.

The Wild West City board of directors, who are Stabile and his sister, also have not yet approved having the corporation enter into the guilty plea.

A status hearing in the case was supposed to be held Monday but was adjourned as plea negotiations were ongoing.

Outside of court, Mueller said his office has been discussing the conclusion of the case. He said there would be some sort of grand jury statement suggesting a change or clarification in the law to either make it crystal clear that carrying weapons without permits, even in re-enactments or entertainment productions, is illegal, or to create exemptions for them.

"Technically anyone who carries an operable firearm without a carry permit at re-enactments is in violation of New Jersey gun law," said Mueller, adding that the Wild West City case "is a perfect example of what could happen. It's dangerous."

During a dramatization at the Dodge City theme park on July 7, 2006, a bullet struck re-enactor Scott Harris, 37, in the forehead and caused severe brain damage. Harris is still recuperating from the injury.

It is generally illegal to carry a gun without a permit, although there is a laundry list of exceptions. Historical re-enactments and film, television or theatrical productions are not among those exceptions. Existing law has not been strictly enforced regarding re-enactments and entertainment productions, they said.

"We both agree the Legislature should clarify this so folks in the historical community or entertainment business should have a set of laws they should be able to follow," Nappen said in a telephone interview. "Maybe the best thing about this case is it brings to light the problem in the statutes."

[jda3rd]

http://www.nj.com/printer/printer.ss...970.xml&coll=2

. . . Stabile and McPeak would be enrolled in pretrial intervention, a program that, if successfully completed, results in dismissal of all charges.

Intervention? Huh? I guess the families and friends of the two men will get together and try to save them from their tragic gun-abuse and addiction. Bless them.

Frank

[tompritchett]

Before everyone panics with a rash of "the sky is falling posts", let's remember that the key term here is "firearm". Most states do not define muzzleloading, replicas of historical weapons as "firearms". However, the pistols used in wild west shows do meet the criteria for being "firearms" under most state regulations.

[Silas]

You are focused upon a legal definition of the word, firearm. Most folks do not draw a distinction between that and common perception of a firearm is. The legal definition can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

For example, my repro '61 Springfield is defined as an antique under the U.S. Code which means it is an exception to the definition of firearm for that particular chapter of the code. My repro is similarly defined and exempted in the Revised Code of Washington. However, the Seattle Municipal Code uses a more common definition of firearm. Actually, the muni code is ambiguous because it does not distinguish between rimfire and nonrimfire weapons. When I and my pards would hike in one of the city's largest parks in preparation for campaign events back east, we have been visited twice by the local cops after parks people got nervous about people with GUNS hiking the trails. Since I have met many officers in my occupation, there's never been any real problem. However, we got tired of being stopped by cops and park staff so we ceased marching in Seattle parks. Tacoma has similar provisions in its parks code, but we don't get hassled there. Same goes for the state and national parks because we don't get hassled there, either.

I also agree that the sky isn't falling. This is something which has made the press and is the typical man bites dog story. From my experience with the press, they usually bend the facts all out of shape by adding a dose of sensation. It's called a story for a reason.

A little regulation which includes some gun safety wouldn't be such a bad thing. Some reenactors I've seen on the line really scare me. I'm not just thinking about the fresh fish attending their first reenactment. Some folks who have been around a few years would do their file partners a huge favor by spending a little quality time reading and walking through the procedures for loading and firing from the manuals as opposed to repeating what they've always done.

[bizzilizzit]

Before everyone panics with a rash of "the sky is falling posts", let's remember that the key term here is "firearm". Most states do not define muzzleloading, replicas of historical weapons as "firearms". However, the pistols used in wild west shows do meet the criteria for being "firearms" under most state regulations.

I lived in NJ for 43 years. Believe me, that State is paranoid about weapons. If you can shoot it with live ammo, it's a firearm, and you need a permit to carry.

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Zoiks! The Law is after me for attending the Monmouth Civil War reenactment in 1995!

[bizzilizzit]

Zoiks! The Law is after me for attending the Monmouth Civil War reenactment in 1995!

They haven't held that event for many years - since a reenactor was shot through the temple with a worm.

[MBond057]

Black Powder Cannons and Muskets at Serious Risk

Fellow Reenactors,

Here is a copy of an email I received from a fellow artillerist. The threat to our hobby is real. From what I have been told by others, the CW artillery crew involved in this incident was performing an artillery demonstration for Boy Scouts at a public park that authorized and organized the event.

The crew never even fired the cannon on this day. They just had it rolled out on the field and were explaining CW artillery basics to the Boy Scouts and their parents when uniformed law enforcement officers rolled up and made the arrest. The owner of the original antique gun was hand cuffed and his cannon and trailer were confiscated and are being held as evidence.

As of this posting the NRA has gotten involved but the Sacramento area District Attorney is pushing ahead with the charges. I hope the judge has common sense and dismisses the case.

This doesn’t sound like the America I know………….

Here is the email:

“I am an active living historian and reenactor in California, and have recently been made aware of a very serious threat to our hobby. Please read the following and act if you can.

The California Department of Justice has improperly advised the Department of Fish & Game to confiscate an original antique cannon (Lyle Gun) and charge the owner for possession of a “DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE”. Subsequently, a Sacramento area District Attorney has picked up the case and is taking it to court on November 1, 2007.

They are misinterpreting the law to include any firearm 60 caliber or larger to be classified as a DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE, which includes, but is not limited to, muzzle loading black powder .69 caliber muskets, muzzle loading black powder shotguns, and antique muzzle loading black powder cannons (and replicas thereof). We all know that primarily because these antique firearms do not used any type of fixed ammunition that they do not fall into this category; however, it appears that they are attempting to swing a new direction.

The person unlawfully detained (originally handcuffed) and whose property unlawfully confiscated was performing a cannon demonstration to a troop of Boy Scouts, something he has done many times over the years and in an area safe & legal to do so.

For more details, and/or to provide any legal assistance you may be able to offer, please contact Mark Evon immediately at nickevon@sbcglobal.net

This could set a dangerous precedent that we all want to avoid. We are of course all hoping it is simply a misinterpretation of the law, which can be quickly cleared up in court, however, without assistance or proper legal representation, this could get ugly real fast.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration of this matter, it is deeply appreciated.”

[jda3rd]

Well, to begin with, a Lyle gun has little or nothing to do with CW artillery.

http://www.cannon-mania.com/lyleguns.htm

A Civil War gun crew demonstrating Civil War artillery basics, using a Lyle gun? That's really, really basic, as in "Well here is a hollow metal tube that you can put gunpowder in, and make a big noise, and maybe not kill your self."

Now, demonstrating the Lyle gun as a life-saving device, is different. If that's what they were using the Lyle gun for, great, because Lyle guns were a valuable tool for many years, and should be preserved. But it ain't Civil War artillery.

I know that wasn't the point of your message, though. The fact that the owner was arrested and his gun confiscated is a problem. A serious problem, and one that all artillery enthusiasts ought to be concerned about. It points to the tendency of not so well informed law enforcement types to, you might say, shoot first and ask questions later. If they had asked the man what was going on the whole mess might have been avoided. It's possible some liberal anti-gun type saw it, freaked out, and determined to save the Boy Scouts the contamination of exposure to a (gasp) gun! May the owner of the Lyle gun can go through the same "intervention program" the fellows in New Jersey are having to go through.

Frank

[MBond057]

Frank,

From what I have heard they also had a Mountain Howitzer with them. I’m not sure what else they might have had because I have never worked with these guys. There were some guys with Enfield’s but they did not confiscate or arrest these guys from what I have been told. I was also told they were wearing CW uniforms at the time of the arrest.

The court date has been pushed back to December. I would anticipate further legal moves before this actually goes to trial.