NJ Responds in Right to carry lawsuit

[PeteF 1,044]

Anyone catch the AG response

 

 

"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"

 

Well not having one will ABSOLUTELY NOT afford any measure of self-protection.

So I guess no chance is better than any chance

 

 

 

"When a handgun is carried in public, the serious risks and dangers of misuse and accidental use are borne by the public."

 

"When handguns are permitted to be carried beyond one’s home, the dangers and risks necessarily increase and are borne by the public."

 

"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."

 

 

 

I wonder if she is in favor of disarming all LEO's also, since carrying a gun is such a serious risks to everyone around the person carrying it.

[Genewarper111 18]

Do you have a link, please?

 

Thanks

G

[vladtepes 1,060]

see you guys in PA... :mellow:

[Zardoz 4]

I believe this is the PDF link. My link

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Link please!

 

Is this person serious? So maybe we shouldn't drive cause we might crash or we shouldn't swim cause we might drown. Jesus Christ, I can't stand someone telling me what is good for me and what's not.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Link please!

 

Is this person serious? So maybe we shouldn't drive cause we might crash or we shouldn't swim cause we might drown. Jesus Christ, I can't stand someone telling me what is good for me and what's not.

 

 

here is the simple problem with politicians, and lawmakers in general.. they refuse to utilize logic..

[c6dino 2]

Logic is beyond them. Its all about their agenda.

[tbtrout 141]

Link please!

 

Is this person serious? So maybe we shouldn't drive cause we might crash or we shouldn't swim cause we might drown. Jesus Christ, I can't stand someone telling me what is good for me and what's not.

AKA The Nanny State

 

they know what is better for us than we do.

[I saw nothing 3]

see you guys in PA... :mellow:

 

My wife and I have been toying with this for about a year or more... I have three kids and a job here so that is what males it harder to move. I did tell them if the "bike license plate" law passed we would be putting the house up for sale. I am waiting for the outcome of this but who am I kidding? This is NJ.... it is amazing how "locked down" everything is and we don't realize it until we go to TN, NC or any other free state. Then do I truly realize how bad it is here.

[SoR 4]

here is the simple problem with politicians, and lawmakers in general.. they refuse to utilize logic..

 

No, I think they refuse to utilize and obey the laws.

If this is 2nd amendment:

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Where in this text does it say "within home" ?

Can someone please point it to me? Maybe it was written with invisible ink.

[Old School 611]

Link please!

 

Is this person serious? So maybe we shouldn't drive cause we might crash or we shouldn't swim cause we might drown. Jesus Christ, I can't stand someone telling me what is good for me and what's not.

 

 

Ray this is the issue in a nut shell. This is why our whole legislature needs to be changed.

[georgemc 18]

I guess the AG doesn't watch or read the news about Newark, Camden and other places that thugs just shoot up unarmed civilians.

[BRN169 6]

Link please!

 

Is this person serious? So maybe we shouldn't drive cause we might crash or we shouldn't swim cause we might drown. Jesus Christ, I can't stand someone telling me what is good for me and what's not.

 

Right, meanwhile them and all their friends are armed...

[ChrisJM981 924]

Duplicate thread. Check the pinned SAF vs Judge Jackass thread in Gun Laws section.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

While the outrage expressed here is understandable, you really need to put this in perspective. This was simply their answer to our request for a summary judgement. Now, come on folks, this is New Jersey afterall, you really didn't expect the opposition just to lay down and say, "OK, you got us." This is really pre-round 1, but what it does is gives us a glimpse as to how they are going to defend their position against our lawsuit. It shows us, to continue with the boxing metaphor, if they are going to lead with the left or their right (OK, OK, it's NJ - you know it's going to be the left).

 

It appears their defense hinges on the fact that Heller decision said that it does not preclude regulation. They are saying that the regulations in NJ, as currently written and enforced, are reasonable within the context of Heller. That regulation - and this is what the whole case will hinge on, in my humble opinion, is a justifiable need. The problem with that argument is that they discount self-defense as a justifiable need. They want a specific threat before they would even consider granting a carry license (and if you look at the history of the plaintiffs in this case, it is plain to see that even a specific threat usually is met with denial). The fault with that logic is that if I knew where or when evil was going to befall me, I just wouldn't go there. It is the unknown threats we may face in our everyday lives that create a justifiable need for self-defense: The nutcase shooter in AZ, the active shooter at a shopping mall, the gang violence you may get caught up in in any of our urban - and more and more lately, suburban communities. Self defense is a God-given right and a "justifiable need" in its own right - no further justification is needed.

 

So now that we've circled around the ring and felt each other out, it's time for the real fight to begin. This fight, in this court is only round one. Given NJ's tenacity to stick with antiquated, unlawful justifications, it would not surprise me to see us lose this first round. But, just like any good fighter, I'd expect to see us pick ourselves up off the canvas and get back into the fight, all the way to the supreme court if that is what is needed. Our time is now, Gnashing of teeth and woebegone wailing is a thing of the past. This time we carry the fight to them, asking, "What part of 'Shall not be infringed'" don't you understand?

 

Hang in there folks, we have a long road ahead of us.

 

JMHO

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[SpecOps2087 3]

^ That about sums it up, this means nothing excpet what we already knew - NJ will not go down without a fight, and a fight we will bring!

[CAPTBIL3 10]

That's my boss for you, God I hate this state.

[BCeagle 12]

Ray this is the issue in a nut shell. This is why our whole legislature needs to be changed.

 

You are so right, if you tell me what is bad for me (because you are an elitist jerk), there is no surer way to guarantee I do it.

 

On the brih sie, if that is the bet she can do, we are golden.

[CageFighter 236]

^ -NJ will not go down without a fight, and a FIGHT we will bring!

 

the gloves are coming OFF!

[hopper 36]

I personally love this quote .... That is a pretty lame argument,” said SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “Considering that there are more than 6.2 million law-abiding citizens licensed to carry in 48 states, and that many of these people have either intervened in, or prevented crimes by their mere presence, New Jersey’s position on this issue simply defies common sense.” :thsmiley_deadhorse:

[mggtz 3]

"When a handgun is carried in public, the serious risks and dangers of misuse and accidental use are borne by the public."

 

"When handguns are permitted to be carried beyond one’s home, the dangers and risks necessarily increase and are borne by the public."

 

"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."

 

 

It is not the job of the government or anyone for that matter, to tell us what is dangerous for us. We are free men and WE make the decisions as individuals and take on that responsibility if anything happens.

[tommy3rd 132]

It is not the job of the government or anyone for that matter, to tell us what is dangerous for us. We are free men and WE make the decisions as individuals and take on that responsibility if anything happens.

exactly. give me the right to carry a firearm, and put in a law that punishes me IF i misuse it or for accidental discharge that harms someone. Let me decide if I'm willing to take my chances.

[BRN169 6]

"When a handgun is carried in public, the serious risks and dangers of misuse and accidental use are borne by the public."

 

"When handguns are permitted to be carried beyond one’s home, the dangers and risks necessarily increase and are borne by the public."

 

"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."

 

 

It is not the job of the government or anyone for that matter, to tell us what is dangerous for us. We are free men and WE make the decisions as individuals and take on that responsibility if anything happens.

 

Amazing how the liberal mind works... In truth the laws that prevent the law abiding from carrying handguns beyond one's home imperil them by leaving them helpless at the mercy of those criminals intent on harming others and that care not about the laws that shackle their law abiding prey...

[mggtz 3]

exactly. give me the right to carry a firearm, and put in a law that punishes me IF i misuse it or for accidental discharge that harms someone. Let me decide if I'm willing to take my chances.

 

WE need to start making these people understand...enough is enough...WE want OUR country back..!

[mggtz 3]

Amazing how the liberal mind works... In truth the laws that prevent the law abiding from carrying handguns beyond one's home imperil them by leaving them helpless at the mercy of those criminals intent on harming others and that care not about the laws that shackle their law abiding prey...

 

It truly is amazing...amazingly retarded how liberals think.

[Babaganoosh 192]

 

 

 

It is not the job of the government or anyone for that matter, to tell us what is dangerous for us. We are free men and WE make the decisions as individuals and take on that responsibility if anything happens.

 

 

HAHAAHAHAHAH and HAHAHAHAHAHAH. Our freedoms are deteriorating more by the day. Last I checked nobody wants to be held responsible for their actions anymore. It's not my fault...I didn'k know the coffee was hot. It's not my fault...The package didn't say I wasn't supposed to drink bleach. It's not my fault I'm 400 pounds... the fast food companies didn't tell me that eating it everyday would be bad for me. In America common sense and responsibility for our own actions has gone out the window.

[Babaganoosh 192]

WE need to start making these people understand...enough is enough...WE want OUR country back..!

 

Won't happen. America already peaked. Time for the fall of Rome.

[n4p226r 105]

so based on their reasoning, why does ANYONE have a right to carry in this state? their argument would make more sense (not really) if nobody got permits, but about 500 people or so have them, so that kinda negates their argument right there

[PeteF 1,044]

While the outrage expressed here is understandable, you really need to put this in perspective. This was simply their answer to our request for a summary judgement.

 

We all knew that such a response was coming but I (we) did not expect that people at the AG office would sound like such complete morons in their response.

 

Head Law enforcement officer of NJ? We are doomed.

[BRN169 6]

We all knew that such a response was coming but I (we) did not expect that people at the AG office would sound like such complete morons in their response.

 

Head Law enforcement officer of NJ? We are doomed.

 

In retrospect perhaps it is a good thing NJ is not joining the Obama-care suite... Just sayin'...