New Jersey's AR-15 Ban Struck Down

A federal judge in New Jersey has ruled that a key provision of the state’s oppressive "assault weapon" ban is unconstitutional. This decision comes as a testament to the strength of the Supreme Court's precedents, which continue to compel judges to uphold the constitutional rights of Americans, even when their personal biases lean toward restrictive gun control measures.

New Jersey's Assault Firearms Law, enacted in 1990 as a knee-jerk reaction to a tragic mass shooting, sought to ban specific rifle models, including the widely used and highly popular AR-15. The state’s draconian approach labeled semi-automatic rifles with certain features as illegal, subjecting law-abiding citizens to potential imprisonment for possessing firearms that millions of Americans use for self-defense and sport.

In the case of ANJRPC v. Platkin, U.S. District Judge Peter Sheridan was faced with the task of examining the constitutionality of the AR-15 ban. Despite his evident reluctance, Sheridan's ruling recognized the undeniable truth that the AR-15 is a firearm "in common use" for lawful purposes, a status that places it squarely under the protection of the Second Amendment.

Sheridan expressed discomfort with having to uphold the Supreme Court’s decisions, lamenting that some firearms policy choices are "off the table." Yet, the reality is that these "choices" infringe upon the fundamental rights of Americans to protect themselves and their families. The AR-15’s design, including its lightweight build, mild recoil, and adaptability for shooters of all sizes, makes it an ideal tool for self-defense.

The state’s argument that handguns are sufficient for self-defense falls flat in light of the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. This landmark ruling made it clear that bans on commonly used firearms for self-defense, such as the AR-15, are unconstitutional. The Second Amendment does not permit government overreach to dictate which firearms citizens may use to protect themselves.

While Judge Sheridan's decision rightly dismantled New Jersey's AR-15 ban, he disappointingly upheld the state's restriction on "large capacity magazines" (LCMs). This misguided regulation, based on a flawed interpretation of historical firearm laws, ignores the reality that such magazines are integral to self-defense scenarios, especially when faced with multiple threats.

The judge's reliance on dubious claims about the role of LCMs in mass shootings overlooks the fundamental right to be prepared for self-defense in any situation. Restricting magazine capacity is a superficial solution that does little to address the root causes of violence and instead punishes responsible gun owners.

The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs (ANJRPC) have announced plans to appeal the LCM ruling. FPC President Brandon Combs emphasized, "Bans on so-called 'assault weapons' are immoral and unconstitutional. FPC will continue to fight forward until all of these bans are eliminated throughout the United States."

This decision marks a significant victory for gun rights advocates and the millions of Americans who refuse to be stripped of their right to bear arms. The battle for the Second Amendment is far from over, but this ruling is a powerful reminder that constitutional rights will prevail over personal bias and misguided legislation. It's time for New Jersey, and every state in the union, to respect the fundamental freedoms enshrined in our Constitution.