New Jersey governor signs (most of) his anti-gun wish list into law

New Jersey governor signs (most of) his anti-gun wish list into law
AP Photo/Seth Wenig

While it may have seemed too good to be true that the governmental bodies in New Jersey have not been standing in the way of honest law abiding citizens applying for their permits to carry, cold hard reality is coming in the way of more infringements from gun-hating Governor Phil Murphy. On July 5th, a day after the Murph spitefully noted on social media on Independence Day, that he was in fact going to take away liberties, he brought pen to paper surrounded by failed pillow salesman, or salesze, saleszi, saleszire (?), David Hogg, and some red shirted commie mommies.  As reported by the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs (ANJRPC), the Murph signed into law quite a bit of his anti-gun agenda, which has been mostly stalled in the state legislature over the past year or so.


July 5, 2022.  Today, Gov. Murphy signed 7 bills from his infamous gun ban package into law.  All of the bills target the rights of law-abiding gun owners, and none of them provide for the severe punishment of gun criminals or impact mental health issues related to firearms ownership.  ANJRPC is analyzing the final versions of these measures in light of the recent Supreme Court Bruen ruling.

The 7 bills signed into law today are:

A-1302 – ammunition registration.
A-1765 – the “industry-killer bill.
A-4368 – microstamping
A-4370 – ban on gun ownership without training
S-1204 – registration double-standard for new residents
S-2846 – 10 years in jail for previously-legal kit guns
S-2905  – Bans .50 BMG firearms

This was close to the complete package of restrictions that tyrant Murphy wanted to come across his desk. Luckily a few other really awful bills did not make it past the finish line and we can hope that an immediate suit will force these laws into being stayed. Let us remember, in a post-Bruen world, it’s the responsibility of the government to prove they’re not infringing on rights, rather than us peasants proving that the tyrants are. This might be a very rude awakening for all the pinkos out there.

In that same vein, it’s hard to tell if these provisions will last, given the history, text, tradition test any offending law is going to have to face. At the time of the founding, would these things have been considered normal? Are these infringements. The answer to those questions are quite simple. Not normal to regulate the way the Murph wants to, and yes, these are infringements.


So subtlety stated, ANJRPC had that remark on the very same subject, noted again.

ANJRPC is analyzing the final versions of these measures in light of the recent Supreme Court Bruen ruling.

I had not checked in with ANJRPC’s leadership on that, but it seems pretty self-explanatory. That is, the hope is a brandy new bottle of litigation is about to be popped open, and fizz over on Murphy’s, “The Bill of Rights is above my paygrade”, hubris attitude.

We’re also playing in the big leagues now. The question I want answered on an academic level is “are these civil rights violations?” Between you and I, hell yeah they are. But would they be considered so in the eyes of the law?

Last week when I wrote every single member of the New Jersey legislature, I did mention that none of these bills should survive scrutiny under NYSRPA v. Bruen. I used simple terms, ideas, and words like “unconstitutional” and “think”.  From my correspondence to the viper pit:

If you have not familiarized yourself with the opinion, you should. In short, laws that would be considered constitutional or not have to meet the following test: Would this be considered an infringement on someone’s right to keep and bear arms at the time of the founding? That’s a simplified version of some of what you’re going to have to know about this case. Now is not the time to be voting on a package of bills that will create more litigation, but rather a time to learn about your limitations on what bills can or cannot be consisted constitutional.

The opinion can be found here:

As a lawmaker, voting for any of these bills would be in direct violation of NYSRPA v. Bruen, the Second Amendment, and the Heller decision. You’ll be knowingly going against Supreme Court orders. Should any of these bills become law, they will be challenged, and the probability of them being overturned is quite high. Regardless of what you feel, or think, or know, about guns, firearms, gun stuff, etc. does not matter anymore. What matters is if you’re going to knowingly vote against established precedent less than a week after orders were delivered? Are you going to waste tax payer’s money by having the state tied up in litigation over any of these bills?


You can go on back and read the entire message I sent them in full, but you get the idea. They were put on notice. Someone did tell them, very publicly and individually, that these bills are things they aught to think about before voting on, because it’s likely they’ll be deemed a violation of our rights.

As more information on these laws comes out, as well as any litigation announcements, we’ll be sure to pass that along. In the mean time, the Garden State’s Independence Day celebration is clearly over, but we do have NYSRPA to blanket us, and keep us a warm.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member