New Jersey responds in right to carry lawsuit
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: New Jersey responds in right to carry lawsuit

  1. New Jersey responds in right to carry lawsuit

    On January 26, the New Jersey Attorney General responded to the recently-filed lawsuit challenging New Jersey’s extreme and subjective handgun carry laws. The legal brief included both a vigorous defense of those laws and a motion to dismiss (i.e., end) the case. The Attorney General is also seeking to drop plaintiffs ANJRPC and the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) from the case.

    The Attorney General’s brief included the following statements:

    New Jersey’s carefully conceived and long-standing regulatory scheme is rooted in an appreciation that a permit to carry may not afford any measure of self-protection to a particular applicant and would instead increase the risk of the applicant being involved in "the known and serious dangers of misuse and accidental use.” When a handgun is carried in public, the serious risks and dangers of misuse and accidental use are borne by the public.

    New Jersey has not merely a significant interest but a compelling interest in combating handgun violence and combating the dangers and risks associated with the accidental and misuse of handguns, which are inherent in carrying a handgun. It also has a compelling interest in reducing the use of handguns in crimes. A government’s foremost function is to ensure the safety of all of its citizenry. When handguns are permitted to be carried beyond one’s home, the dangers and risks necessarily increase and are borne by the public.

    Generally speaking, one cannot know whether crime against an individual will occur at all, much less know when, where, or how. Neither then can one know whether a handgun would provide an effective measure of self-defense and be safe to use as to other victims or bystanders. Further, the "need” for a handgun for self-defense outside of the home does not stand alone. The carrying of a handgun inherently comes with the dangers and risks of its misuse or accidental use. These dangers and risks are borne by everyone with whom the person encounters.

    The full text of the Attorney General’s brief can be found here

    http://www.anjrpc.org/link.asp?ymlin...FDismiss%2Epdf

    This historic lawsuit, brought in November, 2010 by ANJRPC, SAF and six private citizens, challenges the constitutionality of New Jersey’s "justifiable need” standard for issuance of handgun carry permits – a nearly impossible standard to meet that has all but eliminated the right of self defense with a firearm in the Garden State.

    "We are disappointed but not surprised by the State’s response to our lawsuit,” said ANJRPC President Scott Bach. "The right to defend yourself with a firearm outside the home has long been disparaged in the Garden State, and if necessary we are prepared to take this lawsuit all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to change that,” said Bach.
    40 states currently have laws recognizing the right of law abiding citizens to carry a handgun for self defense. Despite the mountain of evidence showing that sustained reductions in violent crime rates result after enactment of these laws, New Jersey has refused to modernize its own laws, instead choosing to imperil its citizens and force them to remain defenseless victims against armed criminals who don’t follow the law.

    The next step in the case is for ANJRPC, SAF and the individual plaintiffs to respond to the Attorney General, which is scheduled to occur in mid-February. Given the brisk pace at which the case is moving, there could be a decision by the lower court as early as this Spring. Regardless of the decision, appeals are anticipated.
    Last edited by lukem; 01-28-2011 at 09:25 AM.

  2.   
  3. #2
    So does that mean that after the case goes to SCOTUS and the law is struck down summer 2012 that NJ might finally have a real permit system?
    An armed society is a polite society.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by shootin.targets View Post
    So does that mean that after the case goes to SCOTUS and the law is struck down summer 2012 that NJ might finally have a real permit system?
    Do you mean, the summer of 2011? What are the odds that this actually goes through and NJ finally stops being so idiotic? I don't know how the whole process works, so any info would be great. Thanks

  5. #4
    I said summer of 2012 because it will be tied up in appeals for a good time and at best the SCOTUS will decide to hear it sometime during their next session but not this years. Kind of like how they accepted the Chicago vs. McDonald case late summer into fall but didn't hear it until march of the following year.
    An armed society is a polite society.

  6. Quote Originally Posted by shootin.targets View Post
    I said summer of 2012 because it will be tied up in appeals for a good time and at best the SCOTUS will decide to hear it sometime during their next session but not this years. Kind of like how they accepted the Chicago vs. McDonald case late summer into fall but didn't hear it until march of the following year.
    Gotcha. Thanks for the reply. Hopefully, NJ will finally get reasonable about letting citizens exercise their RIGHTS. I love how liberals jump all over the healthcare topic which is not a right, but do not defend the 2nd amendment.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by rc7838 View Post
    The Attorney Generalís brief included the following statements:

    It also has a compelling interest in reducing the use of handguns in crimes. A governmentís foremost function is to ensure the safety of all of its citizenry.

    Generally speaking, one cannot know whether crime against an individual will occur at all, much less know when, where, or how. Neither then can one know whether a handgun would provide an effective measure of self-defense.

    I live the first 1/2 of my life in the NY/NJ area and still have family and friends in the area so this is of significant interest to me...

    That said... I found these parts of the AG's statement especially interesting...

    Criminals by their very nature do not respect the laws that exist.. so how does restriction of the Second Amendment rights of the law-abiding citizens work toward addressing ANY issue ?

    Even more interesting was that the AG agrees that crimes against individuals may never happen, but when they do, there is not way to know where or when. Apparently the way to address this is to ensure that IF it ever does happen, the victim remains just that... a victim with no effective means of self defense. I mean... if the victim survives the encounter, they can always call 911 to get an ambulance.

    Or does NJ have enough police to ensure the safety of every citizen, in every conceivable location, 24 hours a day ??

    Yup... them is some well conceived laws
    Life Member GeorgiaCarry.org http://www.GeorgiaCarry.org

  8. #7
    The Attorney General is a carbon copy of the laws she protects, sorry to say. Apparently she wants to prevent the vague "accidential use or misuse" "borne by the public," but they look the other way when it comes to the debt and overtaxation in New Jersey that is also "borne by the public." They are slick in being able to basically have a ban without the specific legal documention of a ban.

    She sounds pretty negative and pessimistic in basically claiming that every firearm will be misused or accidentially used in the Garden State. So much for being a law abiding citizen in New Jersekstan.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast