SAF LAWSUIT CHALLENGESUNDER 21 HANDGUN BAN IN NEW JERSEY

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Modification Basis (SAF), joined by New Jersey Firearms House owners Syndicate (NJFOS), have filed a lawsuit in district court docket difficult New Jersey’s ban on adults below the age of 21 from buying, proudly owning or carrying handguns and handgun ammunition. 

New Jersey’s statutory regime bans adults below 21 from buying, possessing and carrying a handgun for self-defense, in addition to buying handgun ammunition. This new case makes clear the Structure and the Supreme Court docket acknowledge each peaceful grownup has the proper to accumulate, possess and carry a handgun for his or her self-defense. Adults below 21 aren’t any completely different as they’re a part of “the Individuals.”

“There’s not, and by no means has been, a constitutionally grounded foundation for depriving adults below 21 from proudly owning or possessing handguns, interval,” mentioned SAF Govt Director Adam Kraut. “Adults 18-20-years-old are a part of ‘the Individuals’ and may train their full Second Modification rights. Sadly, residents of this age group dwelling in New Jersey are being selectively discriminated in opposition to solely based mostly on their age, and we goal to rectify that.”   

Within the case, Hague v. Murphy, SAF is joined by NJFOS and Lily Hague, for whom the case is known as. They’re represented by Raymond M. DiGuiseppe of The DiGuiseppe Legislation Agency and Shannon Garrahan of the Legislation Places of work of Shannon Garrahan. 

As famous within the criticism, “Merely no historic analogue exists for prohibiting adults below 21 from buying, buying, possessing, or carrying handguns nor for banning in any other case lawful commerce between sellers and adults below 21.” 

“New Jersey’s handgun and ammunition ban completely infringes on the Second Modification rights of all resident adults below 21 within the state,” mentioned SAF founder and Govt Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Every of our age-based lawsuits across the nation have the identical objective – restoring the rights of adults below 21 who’ve been disenfranchised by those that assume they will trample on their Second Modification rights purely based mostly on their age.”