Posted on 06/27/2008 8:34:36 AM PDT by NewJerseyJoe
New Jersey is prepared to "vigorously enforce" its tough firearms laws following a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down a handgun ban in the nation's capital, state officials said Thursday.
Attorney General Anne Milgram said the decision affirmed New Jersey's right to regulate firearms ownership, while gun rights proponents took a different tack, calling the ruling an "opening salvo" to a nationwide overhaul.
"We regulate the possession of handguns — we don't ban handguns," Milgram said. "But we have strict licensing requirements and we are prepared to maintain those requirements and vigorously enforce our laws."
Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, disagreed and said the non-profit will file litigation challenging similar handgun restrictions, beginning in Chicago and San Francisco.
"I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere," LaPierre said.
In New Jersey, which has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country, gun rights proponents said the high court's ruling paves the way for numerous legal challenges, including on the state's assault weapons ban.
"I foresee a flood of litigation," said Evan F. Nappen, a Monmouth County attorney who has written two books on New Jersey gun laws. "Every state gun law is now permissible to being challenged and evaluated individually."
New Jersey's restriction of semiautomatic assault weapons, which became a state mandate in 1990, is vulnerable because it is an outright ban that mirrors the Washington, D.C., handgun ban that was struck down, Nappen said.
"It's so broad in its stroke and so overbearing that it's susceptible," he said.
However, those on the other side of the debate said any possible challenge to the assault weapons ban would fail.
In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to state law that forbids the possession, sale or transport of assault weapons.
"It may be challenged now — it's possible," said Bryan Miller, executive director of Ceasefire New Jersey. "But we have nothing to fear about our gun laws. They are among the strongest in the country and I don't think we're going to lose any ground."
Although disappointed that the district's handgun ban was overturned, Miller said the greater victory is that the ruling upholds weapons regulations.
"We believe this latter affirmation is, in practical terms, the critical piece," Miller said. "Today's ruling will almost certainly enable the preservation of our state's strong and effective gun laws."
In separate statements, Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr., D-Paterson, and Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., expressed concern about the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the District of Columbia's 32-year handgun ban.
"Today marks a historic step backwards for public safety in communities all across America," Pascrell said.
ping
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I'm not holding my breath.
I was thinking along the same lines, and am going to suggest to Scott Bach (pres. of ANJRPC) that we start a mass effort on that level. At the very least, I'm going to do it on a personal level, as well as letters to the editors of the state newspapers.
SCOTUS said the purpose of the second Amendment was for hunting and self defense in the home. In the Democrat Liberal Fantasyland called New Jersey, you are not permitted to use deadly force against an intruder. You can only use deadly force if you are unable to flee and the attacker corners you. That means you have to run OUT of your house, if possible, presumably WITH your gun, until the attacker catches up to you and only then can you blow him away. Which then puts you in jeopardy for having a loaded firearm outside your home.
In the real world, like for instance in most states in the U.S., this would not be a real issue.
But in the Fantasyland of Ann Milgram, Jon Corzine and Tommy Kean (both of them - Senior and Junior) this is reality - and their relaity conflicts with this recent court decision.
I wonder what that legal Solon Tommy Kean Senior has to say about this recent decision? He's on record as stating the Second Amendment is not an individual right. Guess its back to Constitutional Law 1 and maybe basic English and American History for him!!
Judging by the Left’s response to the ruling, they have no intention of abiding by the ruling.
Three questions: a) does this ruling set a precedent by which adherence to SCOUS is not followed?; b)If libs don’t follow the law, where does that leave the rest of America? and c)do we have the tipping point for dissolving the government?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I don;t know how this decision impacts “assault rifles” but it might have some impact on two pieces of legislation the leftist rats in Trenton are considering - a ,50 caliber gun ban and a law requiring serial numbers on handgun cartridges (which would also affect some rifle cartridges).
a) possibly
b) we are still law abiding citizens
c) yes
Attorney General Anne Milgram said ‘The mafia doesn’t want the competition’......
Is the AG capable of recognizing that criminals are the only ones “less safe” when the citizens are armed?
I hate socialists.
Question; What was the actual order the Supreme Court issued yesterday?
Answer:
"In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense. Assuming that Heller is not disqualified from the exercise of Second Amendment rights, the District must permit him to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home."
If I lived in any state that had anything other than “Shall Issue” CCW and handgun permits, I would right away apply for a permit so I had standing to be included in the next class-action suit when you are turned down.
>>we are still law abiding citizens
Precisely, what law are we to abide by: the law that allows a minority to impose its will on a majority OR the Constitution of the United States.
I submit that if it is the former, we better get used to our role as a third world country with all the inherent instabilty and propensity towards dictators.
If it is the latter, then we are surely in trouble as more of our freedom is usurped by a ravenous central government that will result in dictatorship.
The only course is to fight to save our country.
Right, preaching 'public safety' by stringent control of law-abiding gunowners has only garnered you more Federal monies(our tax dollars) for expanding law-enforcement to have more control over just the law-abiding.
The laws in your state, Pascrell, have NOTHING to do with 'public safety' and everything to do with sucking on the Federal teat.
Well, it was used as an example for the Constitutional Right and the State of New Jersey in effect flies in the face of that exampe by its requirement that a homeowner flee an invading burglar before using deadly force.
I hope this decision spawns a whole fleet of suits against local and state governments that have unreasonable gun laws.
New Jersey is right at the top.
Of course not. If B. Hussein Obama were to appoint three more Ginsburgs to the SC they will just "reinterpret" the constitution and previous legal rulings based on "current evolving standards" here and abroad. The left believes that the Constitution and Bill of Rights are "living breathing things" whose meanings change with time. In effect they can't overturn the documents so this is their way of modifying them.
They will wait, delay an mark time until the haloed one gets to appoint justices, not only to replace Ginsburg and Stevens, but Scalia as well. At that point the concept of individual Liberty in America will recede from law, and yesterday’s historic annunciation of rights will be nothing more than a fading memory. Remember one justice preserved the rights of a people yesterday. The haloed one will move heaven and earth to end that situation when he occupies the White House.
It will!
What all these liberal pukes are forgetting is that now gun ownership is a civil right that can't be denied without just cause. You can sue for $$$$ damages if you are denied your rights.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.