Episode 109-Should you DELAY applying for your NJ Carry?

Also Available On

Google Podcasts
TuneIn Podcasts
Castbox Podcasts
iHeartRadio Podcasts

Podcast Transcript

Gun Lawyer Episode 109

Gun Lawyer — Episode 109 Transcript


gun owners, gun, permit, new jersey, law, gun rights, misdemeanors, state, judges, rights, folks, association, fighting, licenses, bill, denied, second amendment, domestic violence, lawyer, violent


Evan Nappen, Speaker 3

Evan Nappen 00:00

Hi. I’m Evan Nappen, and welcome to Gun Lawyer. Today I’m going to explore an interesting question, and that question is whether you should delay applying for your New Jersey carry permit. This is an important consideration. I’ll get into detail about whether or not that’s something you should do.

Evan Nappen 00:53

Now, I am really excited about today’s show. Because today, for the first time, this show has a sponsor. That’s right. I want you to know that I did not actively seek sponsorship. The show is not about being “monetized”. This show is about having a voice so I can speak to fellow gun owners about their rights, about what’s going on, and hopefully have a little fun while we do it. To get the word out, that the lamestream media refuses to let people know. I’m very proud to say that the sponsor of our show is the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. That’s right, our state association, and that is a sponsorship which I’m happy to accept and proud to be a part of. I’m going to tell you more about the Association and just how vital it is to our rights. It is indispensable in the state of New Jersey. And that’s not an understatement. You need to know and be a part of www.anjrpc.org .

Evan Nappen 02:24

Now, one of the things that has come to my attention, and it is coming from this horrible bill – A4769. This bill is so bad, and this is saying something because I’ve been fighting for gun rights my entire career. My entire calling, activism, dedication, my life has been defending the Second Amendment and fighting for our Second Amendment rights. Opposing both legally and politically gun laws that intrude on our rights and infringe on our rights. It turned law-abiding citizens into criminals. I have to say this is one of the most obnoxious, most reprehensible pieces of legislation I’ve ever seen. It strictly targets law-abiding citizens and admittedly so.

Evan Nappen 03:37

In the past, they would push gun laws under a guise of doing something about crime, a guise about this and that for preventing death or for safety, etc. But no longer. They just admit this is to control law-abiding citizens, and they don’t make any bones about it. So, this makes it particularly egregious. It is just a law designed to get us. It is a law designed where, folks, we are at war. War has been declared. It’s that simple. We’ve always been fighting, but this is now over the line. We have to use our political power to fight this and that includes what you’re doing legislatively to challenge it, even though it’s Page – 2 – of 9

stacked so much against us. But also in the courts, too. To fight this as soon as Murphy’s pen hits the paper. I know that our State Association, ANJRPC, will be doing that as other groups will, too, I’m sure.

Evan Nappen 05:07

This egregious bill, this horrible bill that just absolutely flies in the face of what should be a glorious expansion of liberty, a glorious time of our Second Amendment rights having been recognized by the Supreme Court and empowered by the Supreme Court, so that we no longer have to be victims, but can in fact, be defenders in New Jersey. This bill has tried to create every conceivable type of roadblock to eviscerate that right from the state. As you may know and may have heard in prior shows that we have examined it and looked at it, we saw how it creates these horrible, enormous amounts of sensitive places so that it’s virtually impossible to exercise your right in the state. How it mandates all kinds of procedural things that are just there to be bureaucratic annoyances and hurdles, making it harder for you to exercise your rights and to delay the exercise of your rights. Just unbelievable. To intrude into your privacy, to go at your Freedom of Speech for social media investigations, to require insurance, if you’re going to have a carry. To do everything they could think of to stop you and me. It is a war on you and me. It is a war on our rights. It is just disgusting that these people in our government, our own government, believe their job is to take freedom, to take liberty, to make citizens vulnerable to attack and to criminals. It’s just astounding to even think that there would be a majority of these folks in power that want to do this to us. And yet, there it is.

Evan Nappen 07:27

Now, in this atrocity, this unbelievably egregious bill that goes after our Second Amendment rights, there is actually one thing, one thing in the bill that I can honestly say is good. It doesn’t mean that I want this bill to pass in any way, just forget it. But the one good thing in that bill is that it removes judges from the process. Yes, folks, you see, judges are the reason, historically, why in New Jersey, we couldn’t get carry licenses. They created the impossible to achieve, “justifiable need” test. That was not found in law. The courts created it. So that you had to show that you basically needed to use deadly force before you needed to use deadly force. This was their contraption. The courts created it. The courts did it to stop the “proliferation of handguns on the streets”.

Evan Nappen 08:44

But we’re talking about stopping law-abiding people from being able to defend themselves. And that Gambit was ended by Justice Thomas in the Bruen decision, and no longer is justifiable need Constitutional. It never was, but now it’s officially declared unconstitutional. And as Justice Thomas said, what other right is there in the Constitution that we have to ask Government officials in such a way that we have to give them our reason for wanting to exercise our Second Amendment right? That’s not how it works, and so that’s great. Now with that roadblock removed, so many applications have been filed in the courts. So many permits that the original choice by the judiciary to perform an executive function, which was issuing of licenses that they took on back then, they don’t want any part of it now. Because there’s so much that has to be done. They barely have enough time to do legal work.

Evan Nappen 09:58

So, in A4769, in the original bill, judges were removed from the process, but they would only be removed six months after its passage. The lobbyists for the judges went to the legislature and said, Page – 3 – of 9

Look, we need this right away, and they changed it. The current amended bill, when it passes, removes judges right away from the process. Now, even though our forces are valiantly fighting, to stop A4769, A4769, from becoming law, we are, unfortunately, outnumbered politically in the state of New Jersey. I’m sure that comes as no surprise to you that the legislature is a majority of folks that hate us. A majority of folks that hate the Second Amendment. Oh, they’ll say, Oh, we’re pro Second Amendment but . . . And it’s always that but and that’s because they’re not pro Second Amendment. Anyone that would sign this, it just reveals absolutely their utter disdain and their hypocrisy and their lies. No one can say they support the Second Amendment and vote yes on A4769. Oh, they can say it, but they sure as hell ain’t telling the truth. I mean, that’s a given.

Evan Nappen 11:35

So, this is going to pass. And its certain things have been, some amendments, some improvements have been made. But the overwhelming majority of the bill is horrible. What is in this bill is still, the one good thing, the removal of judges from the process. The bill is estimated that it will probably pass and become law about a month from now, that’s the estimate. In about a month, it will be law, and then immediately, it will be challenged. But the part about judges being removed sure isn’t going to get challenged. This is where you may want to consider whether in your personal circumstance, you want to wait before you apply. And that’s because all the trouble that we’re seeing on people’s applications, all the denials, all the BS that’s taking place is coming from the judges. The judges, not from the chiefs of police or the superintendent, but from judges. In some places, judges are worse than others, and they are abusing the disabilities. The disqualifiers.

Evan Nappen 13:05

The section particularly that allows for the subjective determination of whether a person having a license would not be in the interest of public health, safety or welfare. Judges are abusing that and judges are looking at a person who has anything less than a stellar record, and then denying them under this vague, this vague and undefined section of disqualifier. Then it escalates because that same disqualifier applies to their Firearms ID Card and Handgun Purchase Permits. Then you see revocation of that taking place because they applied where it had to go to a judge for the carry, and then you see guns being seized and licenses being revoked. All because the judge got involved.

Evan Nappen 14:06

So, folks, you need to seriously consider whether you just want to wait little bit, maybe a month before applying so that the judges are no longer a factor in whether or not you’re going to get a permit. The only way the judges become a factor is if you get denied by your local chief or by the Superintendent of the State Police depending on who you’re applying to. If you’re not denied by them, the judges are out of the picture. They are no longer the second tier of judicial approval, where judges exercise executive function instead of a judicial function. Then they let their own bias, prejudice and agendas get in the way of your getting a license and worse. So, it’s something to be considered. You know your counties, you know where you reside, you know about others and what they may or may not have gone through. At least you know that the judges are no longer going to be part of the process very, very shortly, and it’s something that you should put into consideration as to whether your personal needs would be better served by waiting. Page – 4 – of 9

Evan Nappen 15:39

When we come back from the break, I have a really interesting survey to tell you about. It’s just amazing this survey. This study just shows how, well, it’s just, it’s just, unicorns and rainbows, I guess. I’ll tell you all about it when we come back.

Speaker 3 15:59

For over 30 years, Attorney Evan Nappen has seen what rotten laws do to good people. That’s why he’s dedicated his life to fighting for the rights of America’s gun owners. A fearsome courtroom litigator fighting for rights, justice, and freedom. An unrelenting gun rights spokesman tearing away at anti-gun propaganda to expose the truth. Author of six best-selling books on gun rights, including Nappen on Gun Law, a bright orange gun law Bible that sits atop the desk and virtually every lawyer, police chief, firearms dealer, and savvy gun owner. That’s what made Evan Nappen America’s Gun Lawyer. Gun laws are designed to make you a criminal. Don’t become the innocent victim of a vicious anti-gun legal system. This is the guy you want on your side. Keep his name and number in your wallet and hope you never have to use it. But if you live, work, or travel with a firearm, the deck is already stacked against you. You can find him on the web at EvanNappen.com or follow the link on the Gun Lawyer resource page. Evan Nappen – America’s Gun Lawyer.

Speaker 3 17:18

You’re listening to Gun Lawyer with Attorney Evan Nappen. Available wherever you get your favorite podcast.

Evan Nappen 17:32

So, as I told you at the beginning of the show, I am extremely excited to have the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs as a sponsor of our show. I’m extremely selective in having any sponsor of this show. The Association is a group that I truly believe in and that’s the only reason I would even have them as a sponsorship. Because I don’t need sponsorship for this show. I want the Association as a sponsor because they are the key group in New Jersey fighting for your gun rights. Now there’s a lot of other great gun rights groups, and I’m not putting any of them down. They’re all brothers and sisters in arms. No question about it. But I just want to tell you that the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs is critical. It’s the minimum in the war on our rights. It’s the minimum that you can do to protect yourself, to protect our rights, and to be part of the fight in New Jersey.

Evan Nappen 18:55

People ask me, they say, Evan, what can I do to fight? What can I do to help? I say, look, there’s no maximum. You do everything you can, but there is a minimum. If you don’t belong to your state association, which means your NRA state affiliate, the state umbrella organization of all the gun clubs. That’s what the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs means. If you’re not a member of that, honestly, you should be ashamed. I mean it. You should be because you’re just getting a free ride. You’re not doing your part where if you join then your number counts, your membership counts. More strength, more unity. Good grief, folks. Joining is only 40 bucks. You can go right online to www.anjrpc.org . If you don’t belong to the Association, join! Do you know Ben Franklin’s old motto Join or Die? Well, that’s what applies here in New Jersey. Join or Die. Watch your gun rights die. So, join. This is not hyperbole. This is for real. Page – 5 – of 9

Evan Nappen 20:09

Your state association is going to help you personally. You’re going to get the immediate news release, the Alerts, and be kept updated on what is going on. Then you are sent immediately these great emails where you can just click the button and send out the great emails that go out to the legislators, letting them hear your voice. These go out, and when the members individually do this, the legislators get overwhelmed with the emails. It’s the greatest thing. They know that we’re watching them. It helps make a difference. It makes a huge difference. Whether or not we can stop a bill, just by the exercise of this, we can at least get certain modifications in. I can tell you, folks, through the years, bill after bill, because I’ve worked hand in hand with leadership, and I’ve seen the effectiveness of this group. Things that you don’t even know they did, but they did it. We were able to get great changes. It’s really vital. Do your part, your most minimal part. Join ANJRPC, the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, anjrpc.org . Go there and serve your interest and help others fight for freedom. It’s that simple. It couldn’t be any easier.

Evan Nappen 22:03

Well, let me tell you about this little piece here from Tufts University. https://now.tufts.edu/2022/11/16/gun-policy-platform-could-help-reduce-gun-violence-28-researchers-say This article came out 16 November 2022, explaining that they have “This Gun Policy Platform Could Help Reduce Gun Violence by 28%, Researchers say”. It says, “A new report with findings from Tufts University School of Medicine”, School of Medicine, folks, it must be okay. “. . . proposes policies molded from”, get a load of this, “common ground found between gun owners and non-gun owners”. Oh boy. Get your shovels out, folks, because we’re going to be shoveling this. You better believe it. It’s an article here I’m reading by Angela Nelson in TuftsNow.

Evan Nappen 23:02

In this article, it talks about this work being done by Michael Siegel, Professor of Public Health and Community Medicine. They quote Siegel here “This is the first time I’m aware of that anyone has tried to craft a platform based on the common ground between gun owners and non-gun owners,” he says. “This policy proposal goes into nitty-gritty details of exactly what would be included in the laws, because our research explored the specific provisions of laws which we found were critical to the support or opposition of gun owners.” Then it goes on and says, “We now have a research-backed package of gun safety policies, supported by non-gun owners and gun owners, that works holistically. . . ” Oh, how nice. “. . .to meaningfully reduce gun deaths–while respecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners,” adds Adam Miller, co-founder of 97Percent.

Evan Nappen 24:17

So, what are the proposals being put forward here in this non-partisan, this groups of gun owners and non-gun owners as they claim? Well, first of all, who made up this group? What are the groups of “gun owners and non-gun owners”? Well, I looked it up in the survey and here’s who they want to thank for providing valuable input and careful review of the draft survey. “Gun Owners Action League, Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership”, gee they’re anti-gun, “Open Source Defense, Texas Gun Owners for Safety, Giffords Gun Owners for Safety, the Liberal Gun Club, Second Amendment Organization Page – 6 – of 9

(2AO)”, notice it’s not Second Amendment Foundation, that second amendment organization, “. . and the National African American Gun Association.”

Evan Nappen 25:18

Oh, gee, do you know who’s not there? The NRA. Do you know who’s not there? GOA (Gun Owners of America) Do you know who’s not there? SAF (Second Amendment Foundation) and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. In other words, every major gun rights group. Somehow, they missed them in this “gun owners and non-gun owners alike” crap. No, instead, they have the slanted bias majority groups there that have these names that are, you know, well, questionable. And, of course, none of the major groups, but if you dig further, you will find, if you dig a little deeper into this, you will find that there are some other groups that were involved in this, not just on the survey, but in terms of interviews and focus groups. Do you know what their interview and focus groups were? “Everytown for Gun Safety”. Oh, great. In other words, Bloomberg. And “Newtown Action”. Oh, great. Okay. “Newtown Action Alliance”, and then the “National African American Gun Owners Association, Maine’s Gun Safety Coalition”. Anytime you see gun safety, that is the catchphrase for anti-gun, because that’s the idea. And “Maine Public Health Association” and the “Liberal Gun Club”. Well, they surely must be stalwart defenders of gun rights. Oh, and “John Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solution”. Yeah. John Hopkins, and the “Giffords Gun Owners for Safety” another Giffords group. And then “Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership”. Yeah. Do you think there’s a little bit of an anti-gun bias with all the people here?

Evan Nappen 27:16

Well, I don’t know. Let’s take a look at their proposals, folks. Because they’re proposing four reasonable solutions that just have universal support by gun owners and non-gun owners alike. So, here’s one of the four. They want to make a prohibition on violent misdemeanors. So, you know how now anybody who’s a convicted felon is forfeit of their gun rights. Well, they want to now make anyone with “violent misdemeanors”. Now, let me just give you a little history lesson. It originally wasn’t just felons. It was violent felons, who were denied their gun rights. And lo and behold, it went from violent felons to felons. It went to individuals who commit welfare fraud. We’re talking non-violent anything. Just a money crime, a fraud crime, but they are denied their gun rights today. So, how do we go down the slippery slope? Oh, well, we want violent misdemeanors only, we only want violent misdemeanors. Really? The same way you only wanted violent felons, and now it’s all felons.

Evan Nappen 28:43

But let’s just say we accept this premise of violent misdemeanors, only violent misdemeanors. Well, I have got a question for you. What’s a violent misdemeanor? Can you tell me what misdemeanors are violent misdemeanors? Let me give you an example. In New Jersey, there are domestic violence laws and domestic violence, very serious, domestic violence. Do you know what type of offenses qualify as domestic violent misdemeanors? Now remember, these are restricted only to domestic violent misdemeanors, which already prohibitors, and to qualify as domestic violence, the victim is the key. The so-called victim, alleged victim, has to be a spouse, or a girlfriend, or household member, current or former of any of those. And so, if you commit a criminal offense that they outline, a domestic violence misdemeanor offense, against any of these people, then they are prohibitors. Page – 7 – of 9

Evan Nappen 29:51

Now they want to expand to violent misdemeanors without distinction of even having it focused on domestic violence. Do you know what one of the violent offenses is? Folks, one of the violent offenses in New Jersey law is harassment. That’s right. Harassment is a domestic violence crime, harassment. The essence of the misdemeanor charge of harassment is it’s doing something with purpose to annoy. Now, I’m sure none of you have ever annoyed your spouse. You’ve never annoyed your boyfriend or your girlfriend, because if you ever annoyed them, you’ve committed the domestic violence misdemeanor offense of harassment. And now, what these folks propose is to make all “violent misdemeanor offenses” into prohibitors so that any type of conviction, whether domestic violent or not, misdemeanor or felony, becomes a prohibitor. And what it does is expand the base of prohibitions to all these offenses so that what happens next? All misdemeanors, just like now, it’s all felonies. And so, it’s a slippery slope that even from its beginning, will create a huge net of individuals.

Evan Nappen 31:27

By the way, these things are retroactive. You may say, wait a minute, that would be unconstitutional to make it retroactive. It’d be ex post facto, you might say, if you knew the fancy Latin word for it. And I’d have to tell you, no, it wouldn’t be because only having ex post facto is an application to your being prosecuted for something prior to the law taking effect, but not for it to become a disqualifier. Ex Post Facto doesn’t apply to that. That’s why, when the domestic violence misdemeanor law, domestic violence restraining orders took place, 10s of 1000s of individuals became retroactively disqualified from gun ownership. So, as far as this policy suggestion of one out of the four, I totally oppose it. And so should you.

Evan Nappen 32:34

Well, let’s see what the other proposal is, oh, look at this. Universal background checks. Oh, great UBC, Universal Background Checks. That means that every transfer of a firearm demands a background check. And what is the basis for that? It’s called Universal Gun Registration. Because if every transfer requires this, then every transfer is recorded and registered. This is the effort toward complete registration. And if you don’t know history, you need to. The four words go like this: Legislation, Registration, Confiscation, and then Extermination. You can see that pattern throughout history. And if you want to be a history denier, go right ahead. I’m not going to do that. I’m not going to deny history. I don’t want gun registration. And I don’t want anything that’s going to put that on our freedom and on our rights. And that’s what UBC is. It’s Universal Gun Registration. Anytime you hear Universal Background Check, think Universal Gun Registration. So, I oppose that one.

Evan Nappen 34:07

Oh, look at what their third proposal is: Gun permit laws. They want to make sure everybody has a permit no matter what. And if you want to see the failure of gun permit laws, just look at New Jersey. If you want to see the abuse, if you want to see the hurdles placed so that individuals cannot exercise their rights in a timely manner, sometimes precluded at all. If you want to see arbitrary and capricious denials. If you want to see one messed up system. Just look at permit laws. Because gun permit laws are designed to do one thing, stop you and delay you and create hurdles and problems for you to exercise your Second Amendment rights. Now New Jerseyans are good at putting up with all that, and we have for years. We deal with the crappy permit system that we have. We put up with one gun a Page – 8 – of 9

month, even though every gun that’s acquired is registered. Why does New Jersey have one gun a month in our permit system? Hmm. Guns are permitted. What are you doing buying more than one handgun papered to yourself so you can sell it on the streets? I don’t think so. Where are we going with this? It doesn’t matter. You look at the requirements that get placed on New Jersey gun owners, and you realize mighty fast, why gun permit laws aren’t going to work. And yeah, what makes me laugh here is how little they understand it.

Evan Nappen 35:41

Because here’s their great example for why you need gun permit laws. “Say you live in a rural area, your brother comes to visit for a weekend, and you decide to go hunting. Your brother has a gun permit but did not bring his gun, so you can loan him one of yours”. Really? Well guess what? You can’t even do that in Jersey, gun permit. Temporary transfer only means limited. They have to be with you while you’re hunting. That’s right. You cannot just loan a gun, even with licenses. You can’t do a transfer in Jersey with gun permits to your brother-in-law even if you both have Firearms ID Cards. You still have to do paperwork. It’s ridiculous. We’ve seen fail after fail of gun permit laws. And that’s just on long arms, forget handguns. That’s going to require a separate pistol purchase permit every time and has to go through a dealer because that’s what universal background check means. Oh, I’m sorry, you want a universal background check and then gun permits. But are you going to allow gun permits to be an exemption of universal background check? Something you’re not doing now. Really? No. So even the suggestions contradict one another.

Evan Nappen 37:03

Then finally, number four of their wonderful, humorous proposal is in the discussion of the Bruen case in which they recognize that the requirement to show proper cause what we call “justifiable need” has been cut down in the so-called “may issue” laws that violate Second Amendment. They argue that “may issue” laws exist in eight states. And it says they should allow law enforcement the ability to deny permits to people who they know to be at high risk for violence, but do not meet any criteria to prohibit them from obtaining a gun permit. They talk about suitable person. And he (Siegel) says it’s likely that these will be struck down. So, they are proposing that if a state enacts this package, there would no longer be a need for “may issue law” because the major risk factors of violence included in background checks would cover it, and they believe, “This is a concrete way for states that are concerned about the Supreme Court’s decision to plug loopholes.” So, think about that.

Evan Nappen 38:41

In other words, their belief is that if you enact the mandatory gun permit requirement, mandatory UBC requirement and making violent misdemeanants disqualified that that will solve it and you’ll be good to go for having carry permits, and they can then be issued because the problems will be solved. Well, they obviously have no clue about what’s going on in New Jersey today. Because in New Jersey, we have Universal Background Check. We have gun permits to purchase handguns and to purchase long arms. We already count misdemeanants and are asked about violent misdemeanants, asked about any misdemeanor by the way, in our licensing law. In New Jersey, those offenses are called disorderly persons offenses. The application actually asks about them, and you can be denied in New Jersey already for disorderly persons offenses. This is already part of New Jersey’s permitting system. Page – 9 – of 9

Evan Nappen 40:02

With New Jersey having every one of these things that they are suggesting, does that make our carry permit system fine and dandy? Does it make it great with the state? Does it overcome all these things that for limitations on rights, that they’re wonderful proposal that they claim it will do? No. In fact, what does it get us, folks? It gets us A4769. It gets us the most atrocious, egregious gun bill ever proposed. So, having all these laws that they suggest only gets you one thing — more rights taken. And that’s what it is if you fall for any of this stuff. If you agree to any of it, it never ends. It’s take, take, take. Let’s package it up this way and sell it and package it up that way and sell it. And as they sell it, they want to sell you more and more and more, until you have no rights left. They push it as far as they can go. New Jersey is the standing example of why this suggestion, this so-called study is full of crap. Just look at New Jersey, that’s already done it. It hasn’t created anything that is acceptable for gun owners. It has instead created a gun owners hell in which we are constantly fighting to maintain any of the rights that we have. When we make an incremental gain with the Bruen case, they throw everything except the kitchen sink to try to kill it. That’s the reality, folks. Not this BS being sold by academics at a medical school to just sell more gun control, by way of utilizing slanted groups with an agenda that you can see, by New Jersey’s shining example, that it won’t work.

Evan Nappen 42:44

Folks, this is why you need to join the state association, our great sponsor, anjrpc.org. Please do that. When you listen to this podcast, if you’re not a member, go on that website and join. Join the fight and be part of it. I want to thank you as well. Being a listener of Gun Lawyer of this podcast, we can get this information out so we can dispel the myths and get the truth out there. Let me say if you enjoy these podcasts, the only thing I’d ask of you, if you so desire, is go to EvanNappen.com That’s my website, EvanNappen.com. And give me a five-star Google review, if you like what you hear, and I appreciate it. This is Evan Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 3 43:55

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 Evan@gun.lawyer. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Downloadable PDF Transcript

About The Host

Evan Nappen, Esq.

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 Evan Your Comments and Questions 

  • talkback@gun.lawyer

Join Evan’s InnerCircle

Here’s your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America. 

Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL. 

Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits.  

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: . You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact