As expected, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy has signed six stringent “gun control” bills into law. We brought these measures to your attention in our “Renzulli Run Down” earlier this week. Here is what you need to know about the new laws:
- Bill No. A-1181 mandates the seizure of firearms owned by individuals if a mental health professional determines they pose a threat to themselves or others. This seizure is permanent unless the individual produces evidence from a mental health professional that they no longer suffer from the condition that led to the original seizure.
- Bill No. A-1217 establishes the procedure for an individual’s firearms to be seized and that individual to be banned from purchasing or possessing firearms for up to a year based on the sworn testimony or affidavit of any individual. While the affected individual has the right to a hearing, this right is only applicable after the firearm has been seized. The court issuing the order is required to hold a hearing within fourteen days after the firearms are initially seized. The state must prove by “clear and convincing” evidence that the individual poses a “significant risk of personal injury.”
- Bill No. A-2757 mandates that all private sales of firearms must be conducted through a licensed dealer, who is required to conduct a background check.
- Bill No. A-2758 heightens the requirement to obtain a concealed carry permit by requiring individuals to prove that a specific threat of violence exists against them and the permit is necessary for their protection.
- Bill No. A-2759 bans the possession of armor-piercing handgun ammunition throughout the State of New Jersey, with some exceptions, e.g., law enforcement and on private property.
- Bill No. A-2761 bans magazines holding over 10 rounds, with only a few exceptions.
A lawsuit has already been filed to prevent the enforcement of A-2761. This lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court of New Jersey by The Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, Inc. The full complaint is available on our website. In short, the lawsuit alleges violations of the Second Amendment (infringement on the right to bear arms), the Fifth Amendment (unjust taking of property without compensation), and the Fourteenth Amendment (unjust preferential treatment of retired law enforcement officers).