Lawmakers push for fairness and equal treatment of law abiding citizens in gun control legislation rejected by Assembly Democrats

TRENTON, N.J. –  While legislation banning armor-piercing bullets and expanding background checks received large bipartisan support, Republican lawmakers questioned the specifics of a number of other Democratic proposals Monday.

Assemblyman Kevin Rooney took exception to one bill that would ban firearm magazines that hold more than ten rounds, and holds all those liable who do not surrender that gun within 180 days.

“The way I read the bill it only allows fixed magazines to become compliant,” said Rooney (R-Bergen). “It doesn’t allow the majority of gun owners’ guns to be altered to conform to this new legislation.”

The Assembly Appropriations Committee amended the bill (A2761) on Thursday to allow legal gun owners to keep previously purchased 15 round fixed-capacity magazines if they are registered with law enforcement, but did not include more widely used unfixed magazines.

Rooney’s Assembly floor amendment would allow owners who legally purchased unmodifiable 15 round magazines to also register with law enforcement and remove the $50 registration fee.  It was voted down along party lines 49 to 26.

“I have heard people say today that we need to be more reasonable in our gun approach. This bill goes way beyond that. This bill does not accomplish what we are trying to achieve,” concluded Rooney.

Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll questioned another bill’s aim to take private property that was legally obtained without compensation. The bill (A1181) would mandate law enforcement to seize a person’s guns under the recommendation of mental health professionals.

“I have no problem with the proposal as a whole,” said Carroll (R-Morris).  “But we should not be treating patients as criminals.”

Carroll also took issue with the bill’s forfeiture provisions.

“Applying the punitive forfeiture provisions against lawful property which has never been misused represents a fundamental violation of both of our state and federal constitutions, as well as a great injury to a totally innocent person,” argued Carroll.

Carroll explained that civil forfeitures must involve some allegations of criminal conduct to pass constitutional muster.

“That malevolent intent is utterly absent in cases that would arise under this proposal,” said Carroll.

Assemblyman Jay Webber defended second amendment rights for those who already have a difficult time getting a permit to carry a handgun in New Jersey.  He criticized a bill (A2758) that would require a justifiable need for self-protection to simply acquire a permit to carry.

“This bill takes what is a nearly impossible standard to meet and makes it impossible,” said Webber.  “The law in New Jersey today is very reasonable and difficult to meet to get a permit.”

Webber explained that to get a permit to carry a handgun one must detail the urgent necessity for protection evidenced by serious and specific threats.

“That’s not good enough for the sponsors of this bill,” said Webber.  “Why would we take the ability away from someone that is law abiding if they can prove that they are facing a serious threat that they can’t avoid by another other reasonable means?  It makes no sense.”