http://www.examiner....v-gun-range-ban

 

“The right to possess firearms for protection implies a corresponding right to acquire and maintain proficiency in their use; the core right wouldn’t mean much without the training and practice that make it effective.”—Judge Diana Sykes

 

Those of you who know the history of CRRC know how important that statement is.

 

Edit: Attaching the Court's Opinion

Ezell v Chicago 9C0O43EC.pdf

Interesting read and great result. Thank you.

 

Aside from the major points I think that the concept raised in the article regarding "causing minimal harm" is interesting because we see this so often with legislative bodies where the net result of their laws, rules, ordinances etc. is to effectively infringe on individual rights by making the process by which you exercise those rights as inconvenient as possible under the guise of public safety or reasoning that such additional steps or requirements do not cause significant or substantive harm to the right in question. Obviously this ordinance was poorly written/reasoned but we see so many more subtle laws, rules, ordinances etc that end up accomplishing the same goal or otherwise deter citizens from exercising their rights freely.

 

I know these concepts have probably been discussed often but as a new owner I am just starting to read more about these things and forming opinions. From personal experience I almost did not become a gun owner because I saw the NJ process as too burdensome for me to even begin the FID and permit process etc. Thankfully I became annoyed enough at the prospect that I would be playing into the exact intent of these hurdles by giving up before I even started.

From personal experience I almost did not become a gun owner because I saw the NJ process as too burdensome for me to even begin the FID and permit process etc. Thankfully I became annoyed enough at the prospect that I would be playing into the exact intent of these hurdles by giving up before I even started.

 

I think that there are thousands of people across New Jersey who have their FID paperwork sitting on the kitchen counter or inside the middle console of their minivan for the very same reason. They are interested, but they are reluctant to fill out the paperwork.

 

I think that NJ's permitting scheme was probably a brilliant idea back in 1968. But it set the wheels in motion to norm firearms out of every day life. I don't think that this was intentional. My guess is that it probably only took a few days to get a permit, and you may have made small talk with the police officer as he typed it up. But the permitting process slowly made it more difficult to purchase firearms, until a tipping point was reached and this tipping point suddenly made NOT owning guns a normal thing.

 

Now you have politicians passing anti-gun laws and there is no reason for anybody to resist. Why would you get upset if you don't own a gun, don't intend to own a gun and don't know anybody who owns one either?

 

There is only two ways to fight this: Grown the population of gun owners, or pursue judicial action.

 

So you know what, I'm donating another $7.00 to NJ2AS right now in celebration. I intend to go skeet shooting this weekend and as I said before, if everybody just bought one box less of ammo and donated that money to NJ2AS, we would be at $15K by now and the silly FID roadbumps would be a thing of the past.

I think that there are thousands of people across New Jersey who have their FID paperwork sitting on the kitchen counter or inside the middle console of their minivan for the very same reason. They are interested, but they are reluctant to fill out the paperwork.

 

I think that NJ's permitting scheme was probably a brilliant idea back in 1968. But it set the wheels in motion to norm firearms out of every day life. I don't think that this was intentional. My guess is that it probably only took a few days to get a permit, and you may have made small talk with the police officer as he typed it up. But the permitting process slowly made it more difficult to purchase firearms, until a tipping point was reached and this tipping point suddenly made NOT owning guns a normal thing.

 

Now you have politicians passing anti-gun laws and there is no reason for anybody to resist. Why would you get upset if you don't own a gun, don't intend to own a gun and don't know anybody who owns one either?

 

There is only two ways to fight this: Grown the population of gun owners, or pursue judicial action.

 

So you know what, I'm donating another $7.00 to NJ2AS right now in celebration. I intend to go skeet shooting this weekend and as I said before, if everybody just bought one box less of ammo and donated that money to NJ2AS, we would be at $15K by now and the silly FID roadbumps would be a thing of the past.

I have an older hunter friend who got his FID card back in '68 or '69. He's never moved or had any reason to get a new card. When I told him about the whole rigamarole to apply for one nowadays, and the fact that it took seven months for mine to be processed, he practically fell out of his treestand. He said back then it was just as you described it, right down to making small talk with the local police officer.

Added a PDF of the court's opinion to the OP. It's worth reading.

 

The court ruled that a standard very similar to strict scrutiny should apply. That's good news.