SCOTUS denies cert in carry case Drake v. Jerejian

Status
Not open for further replies.
"A-72-12 IMO the Application for a New Jersey Permit to Carry a Handgun by Richard Pantano (072329)
Does the statutory requirement that an applicant for a permit to carry a handgun demonstrate “a justifiable need to carry a handgun,” N.J.S.A. 2C:58-4(d), violate the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution?
Certification granted 7/19/13
Posted: 7/19/13
Argued:
Decided:"

I believe he was a landscaper that carried a lot of cash. Denied permit for lack of "justifiable need"

I found an amicus brief from NJ2AS that has some good info on the history of NJ carry law (http://www.nj2as.com/Resources/PDF/pantano.pdf)

1905 - first law making a permit required for concealed carry, no permit needed for open carry
1922 - "good cause" added as a requirement without a definition
1924 - good cause changed to "need" also without definition
1966 - required permit for any form of possession in the public (misdemeanor for violation)
1968 - upgraded to high misdemeanor
1978 - changed need to "justifiable need" again without definition
- upgraded to Crime (felony in NJ legal terms) and
- expanded to the current status of possession forbidden outside limited exemptions (Home, range, hunting)
1991 - Codified the current definition of "justifiable need" - heightened need for urgent protection based on current threats or prior attacks

Talk about incremental creep / slippery slope!
Click to expand...


This is better than Drake v. Jerejian because it pertains to the carrying of "arms", not just handguns specifically, right?
 
I wonder if the NSA is being used to intimidate the Supremes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top