PRNJ to benefit from McDonald?

[jonnyec]

This may have already been discussed, but I'm curious to know what others think about the McDonald case possibly affecting carry laws in states like our neighbor to the east. Since I live so close to NJ, (but not in it, thank the heavens), my folks have a summer residence there, my girlfriend's family lives year-round at the Shore, I visit often, etc, etc, I'm obviously curious about any potential changes in carry laws in that state.
So, do you guys (and gals) feel the SCOTUS decision might pave the way toward carry laws being revamped in Jersey? Phil, as our resident lawyer, maybe you can weigh in? Is the court's decision directly/indirectly related to shall issue?
I'm just wondering if I will ever be able to legally carry in that state. Thanks!

[JayG23]

This may have already been discussed, but I'm curious to know what others think about the McDonald case possibly affecting carry laws in states like our neighbor to the east. Since I live so close to NJ, (but not in it, thank the heavens), my folks have a summer residence there, my girlfriend's family lives year-round at the Shore, I visit often, etc, etc, I'm obviously curious about any potential changes in carry laws in that state.
So, do you guys (and gals) feel the SCOTUS decision might pave the way toward carry laws being revamped in Jersey? Phil, as our resident lawyer, maybe you can weigh in? Is the court's decision directly/indirectly related to shall issue?
I'm just wondering if I will ever be able to legally carry in that state. Thanks!

Jersey will take years to catch up.

First, consider the ground it has to cover - the general population and their lege has been misled into thinking that hollow points are so bad that they treat them as more evil than a simple FMJ. That should be an example of the mental state of their lawmakers.

I think it was someone on here who had an educated guess that there were maybe 600 civilian carry permit holders in the whole state. So simply being in contact with a permitted carrier is so rare as to almost never happen.

Then there is the pressure for gun restriction from the east, nyc; not to mention their own issues with guns being painted as the prime cause of problems in cities like trenton and newark etc.

Hell, PA is open carry and shall issue, and we still have our share of problems with LEOs thinking they are the only people allowed to have a shootin iron.

I figure a decade, maybe 15 years, before the general public stops clutching their hearts and reaching for the nitro pills when they see a gun printing through the shirt of an obvious non-cop.

You gotta consider the public drives some amount of the schedule of the legislature. Sure a court can knock regulations down, but to get the lege to stop throwing new ones up requires the public stop getting scared of guns and start accepting there is a valid use and reason for carrying. This ties in with the mental states of the "Gun Universe" mindset mentioned before.

Then, after most of the public stops getting scared, the people in the lege have to either be cycled out of office.

Consider it like getting a heavy object moving. A little bit of pushing over a lot of time has achieved some pretty strong effects in the people. It won't change overnight, or even in the blink of a single courtcase such as mcdonald. It really will take years and years to stop the inertia and turn it around and then regain ground.

[gnbrotz]

IMO, McDonald had nothing to do with carry. Only ownership and possession within one's home - and even at that, left the door wide open for numerous and onerous restrictions.

[tl_3237]

IMO, McDonald had nothing to do with carry. Only ownership and possession within one's home - and even at that, left the door wide open for numerous and onerous restrictions.

Quoted for truth.

NJ already provides for possession/carry in ones residence:

NJSA 2C:39-6e.Nothing in subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent a person keeping or carrying about his place of business, residence, premises or other land owned or possessed by him, any firearm,or from carrying the same, in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section, from any place of purchase to his residence or place of business, between his dwelling and his place of business, between one place of business or residence and another when moving, or between his dwelling or place of business and place where such firearms are repaired, for the purpose of repair. For the purposes of this section, a place of business shall be deemed to be a fixed location.

Until another ruling on the right to carry in public is secured, McDonald will have little, if any, effect on NJ law.

[donm]

IMO, McDonald had nothing to do with carry. Only ownership and possession within one's home - and even at that, left the door wide open for numerous and onerous restrictions.

Heller applied 2A as an individual right. McDonald said it applies to state and local governments as well. Depends on how the courts ultimately interpret the "and bear" part. In any case, it's gonna be a while.

[cigarmanpa]

Heller applied 2A as an individual right. McDonald said it applies to state and local governments as well. Depends on how the courts ultimately interpret the "and bear" part. In any case, it's gonna be a while.

heller doesn't apply to states

[PhillyAR]

Here is my opinion (IANAL): The McDonald decision says that the 2nd is a fundamental right that everyone in the country has. If something is a fundamental right I don't see how any "may issue" statutes can be found to be constitutional. States like nj which are may issue will need to have a case brought against them from someone who is denied a carry permit.

[God's Country]

I fail to see how McDonald will change carry laws or restrictive gun laws anywhere.
Sure excessive gun regulations that make it near impossible to obtain a gun will be challenged and possibly reversed after 10 years of litigation.

The only way NJ will change is if it’s residents get their heads out of their asses, and understand freedom includes choices individuals may not choose to exercise themselves, but exist regardless, and are equally important to protect all freedom. Not just the freedom they like and agree with.

[MischaBurns]

McDonald has no bearing on PRNJs laws, as they do not restrict ownership, only carry.

[press1280]

NJ's precedent legal cases are now irreconcilable with Heller/McDonald. But, since Heller/McDonald didn't address carry, the NJ courts will sit on their hands and wait until a Federal Court orders them into issuing permits.

Your situation is similiar to mine(family visits to NJ), which raises a few interesting questions. For one thing, where in NJ can a non-resident legally use a firearm in self defense? Answer is nowhere. Even at a target range or gun store, the statute specifically says it must be for specific purposes(none of which are self defense). You can't have it at a home you don't own or live at, so basically, non-residents do not have any protection rights in NJ(residents can legally use a firearm at home for self-defense).

I'm guessing you could be carrying in NJ possibly within 1 year with a national reciprocity bill or 2-3 when either the Sykes or Palmer cases get to SCOTUS.