Well, yes. It’s true that “When a handgun is carried in public, the serious risks and dangers of misuse and accidental use are borne by the public.” But that’s not really a compelling argument against the Second Amendment, is it? It is if you’re the The New Jersey Attorney General, attempting to thwart the Second Amendment Foundation’s (SAF) lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Garden State’s “justifiable need” gun permit standard. SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb’s press release responded to the NJ AG’s defense with the popular (on both sides of the debate) “common sense” jujitsu . . .
“That is a pretty lame argument. 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 . . .
The very nature of New Jersey’s ‘justifiable need’ requirement is arbitrary, discriminatory and wide open to official abuse.
Nevah! The Joisey lawsuit is one of many of the SAF’s post-McDonald decision clean-up ops. The SAF is also challenging gun permit provisions New York and Maryland, and filed a federal challenge to North Carolina’s Emergency Powers Act (allowing gun bans during state emergencies).
Further up the food chain, the SAF’s filed a lawsuit against Attorney General Eric Holder over enforcement of provisions in the 1968 Gun Control Act that prevent American citizens living abroad from purchasing firearms in this country.
If only the Supremes had properly defined the “reasonable” restrictions OKed by their McDonald decision. But then Alan wouldn’t have been able to afford to buy those matched Purdey shotguns. Kidding. I think.