What?????
Or rather: what part of "shall not be infringed" do they not comprehend? More to the point: has anyone challenged this law since the last SCOTUS decision?
You have to understand: coming from a state with sane, rational firearms laws - this sounds utterly insane and irrational.
The provision in state law I called out IMO is not the worst weapons law in the state. That “honor” would go to the outlawed slingshot. Per guide written by Nappen the moron who wrote the law wanted to outlaw something called a “slungshot” which is a term equivalent to a blackjack - a contrivance with a stout weight enclosed in something like a sock. In drafting the law someone misspelled it as “slingshot.” Many years have passed ... and it still a felony to possess a slingshot in the Garden State.