Million Plus NJ Gun Owners Defy State Law, Refuse to Turn Over Banned Gun Mags

4
2177
new jersey gun laws

Over one million New Jersey Gun owners defy Governor Murphy’s gun magazine ban & turn in demands of what some estimate is easily more than ten million now illegal standard capacity gun mags.

New Jersey’s standard capacity magazine ban is now in effect making New Jersey’s one million gun owners criminals in the eyes of the state. But in an act of mass definace, New Jersey residents refuse to comply.

Any magazine holding more than ten rounds is now illegal in the Garden State. The standard magazine for an AR-15 holds 30 rounds. Glock 19s, which is the most popular pistol in the United States, holds 15 rounds. Anyone who is possession of larger magazine is committing a fourth-degree felony.

Anyone caught with one of the now banned magazines in their possession faces up to 18 months in prison and up to $10,000 in fines or both for each magazine found.

The bill was signed into law last June by Gov. Phil Murphy (D). Residents had until December 11th, 2018, to turn over magazines to police or sell or store them out of state.

Pro-gun groups sued New Jersey to try to prevent the law from going into effect. Their attempt on blocking the law failed in a federal appeals court. The three-judge panel ruled that a law limiting the number of rounds a magazine holds did not violate the US Constitution and did not put an undue burden on New Jersey gun owners.

“New Jersey’s law reasonably fits the State’s interest in public safety and does not unconstitutionally burden the Second Amendment’s right to self-defense in the home,” the court wrote in their decision. “The law also does not violate the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause because it does not require gun owners to surrender their magazines but instead allows them to retain modified magazines or register firearms that have magazines that cannot be modified.”

AG Gurbir Grewal applauded the ruling on Twitter stating: “This just in: for months, individuals have been challenging NJ’s limits on large capacity magazines—a sensible law to address mass shootings. Today, the court of appeals upheld the law. Big win for public safety and law enforcement safety!”

Residents of New Jersey on various message boards have called the magazine ban unenforceable. Some were going as far as laughing at Gov. Murphy and his attempt at regulating magazine size.

New Jersey is not saying how they plan to enforce the ban on standard capacity magazines. Gov. Murphy’s office referred AmmoLand to the New Jersey Attorney General’s office. The AG’s office refused to comment.

Sharon Lauchaire, Director of Communications for the Office the Attorney General told AmmoLand: “We do not discuss law enforcement strategies.”

AmmoLand’s sources within the New Jersey State Police that spoke on a condition of anonymity stated that they had not received any guidance on how to enforce the ban from the AG’s office. They said that there is currently no plan to investigate gun owners suspected of having the now banned magazines.

According to the source, the plan that has been discussed among officers is only to file charges against people who are guilty of other crimes. This plan might change once superiors give guidance on how to enforce the ban.

AmmoLand reached out to several local police departments in New Jersey to see how they plan on enforcing the ban and what the turn in numbers have been? Much like the New Jersey State Police, none of these departments have a concrete plan on how to proactively enforce the ban and none had a single report of magazines turned over.

From all Reports, NO Mags Turned In,  Governor Murphy & His Law are Joke

AmmoLand also asked the Governor’s office what Gov. Murphy thinks of users on the internet saying that the ban is unenforceable and laughing at the Governor’s attempt at regulating magazine sizes.

Gov. Murphy and his office refused to comment on these gun owner’s opinions.

AmmoLand also asked Gov. Murphy’s office about the number of magazines turned in by New Jersey residents. Once again AmmoLand was referred to the New Jersey Attorney General’s office.

In this case, Lauchaire would not offer a comment and referred AmmoLand to the New Jersey State Police. Lauchaire stated she was aware of AmmoLand’s previous inquire to the State Police on the number of magazines turned in meaning that State Police contacted the AG’s office about our request for information.

The New Jersey State Police have not officially responded to our request on the number of magazines that were turned over by citizens.

Two sources from within the State Police, who spoke to AmmoLand on condition of anonymity, told AmmoLand News that they both do not know of any magazines turned over to their agency and doubted that any were turned in. They also stated that the State Police also engaged the AG’s office for guidance on how to respond to inquiries such as ours. They were unaware if the Attorney General has returned to their request for guidance.

All the local police departments that AmmoLand contacted stated that they have not had any magazines turned into them.

AmmoLand has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with The New Jersey State Police to get an official count of the number of magazines turned in by New Jersey citizens. We will update the story if our FOIA request is fulfilled.

About John CrumpJohn Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotnews. John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%’ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on leftist deplatforming methods and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, on Facebook at realjohncrump, or at www.crumpy.com.

 

4 COMMENTS

  1. “…does not unconstitutionally burden the rights….”

    what the hell does that mean?!! The judgie must think we are stupid “peasants”! His words are contradictory and meant to confuse.

  2. If the blue state of NJ is aligning at this commie effort, imagine how it will be received in GA, TX, TN, NC, FL?
    I have no fear of the left since I shall never allow them to deprive me of self defense against THEM.

  3. “DOES NOT UNCONSTITUTIONALLY BURDEN THE SECOND AMENDMENT’S RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENSE IN THE HOME” Yes. You have a Right to travel that can’t be “infringed” you just can’t use anything with wheels to travel.

    The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that “Where rights (liberty) secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate (abolish) them.” (Miranda v Arizona) What’s that mean? Well, it means that in order to lawfully effect a Right/Liberty protected by our Constitution (nullify it, limit it, license it or restrict it) the powers that be (state or federal) are required to comply with the Constitution’s Article V Amendment process before they expediently make an end-run around our Constitution to take away (or “infringe” upon) your Right of self defense protected by the Second Amendment.

    A few elected bozos and the stroke of an executive’s pen doesn’t cut it my friends. Telling you they have the “authority” to by-pass the Constitution by passing some goofy law because ‘they’ voted on it is what’s known as acting under “the color of law.” The color of law is defined as the actions of an ‘official’, be it law enforcement or legislative, purported to be in the conduct of their official duties when, in fact, they have no lawful authority to actually ‘act’ or conduct themselves. An example might be law enforcement making arrests of peaceful protestors or phony traffic arrests in order to raise revenue. Another example would be a legislature passing laws effecting areas where they have no lawful authority to legislate.

    “Shall not be infringed” means that if they want to “infringe” and expand the government’s authority to nullify, limit, license or restrict that doesn’t exist, they must go through the Article V Amendment process in order to ‘acquire’ the lawful authority to legislate limits, licenses or to nullify your Rights. If they have no authority to pass such a law or ordinance (haven’t complied with the the lawful Amendment process) then the aforementioned Supreme Court stated in Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham Alabama that the individuals should “engage in the right (liberty) with impunity.” Without said lawful Amendment the Supreme Court’s Marbury vs Madison comes into play: “All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.”

    If the Supreme Court’s declarations mean nothing, Hamilton made clear in Federalist 78 that “No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid.” Jefferson said much the same thing in 1798 when he said “Whenever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void and of no force.” The Supremacy Clause (Article 6 clause 2) codifies this very principle;  that any law made by Congress that is not made in pursuance to the Constitution, is no law at all.

    You can certainly choose to allow a government, acting unlawfully, to strip you of your Rights like they were a cheap prom dress or you can/should become a bit more literate

    https://resistancetononsense.wordpress.com/2018/06/29/our-preexisting-irrevolkable-right-of-self-defense/

  4. Why don’t they offer a direct exchange program? I don’t hear of this…If they are so keen on caring then they should meet the gun owners half-way.

    Signed,
    Concerned Citizen

Comments are closed.