The need for common-sense restrictions on the sale of firearms and ammunition, not intended for uses protected by the Second Amendment, seems self-evident. New Jersey has lived with some of the restrictions being proposed in Washington, D.C., and our sense of liberty and freedom has not declined.
But what appears to us as self-evident, is not received wisdom throughout the country. We understand that some citizens may be concerned that their interests in legitimate firearms ownership and usage may be compromised as the wider society attempts to reduce gun violence. Defining "assault weapons" that may be banned, or restricted to law enforcement, requires line drawing that some may disagree with as overly broad. Even if they agree that machine guns and 100-round clips are not appropriate for general ownership, some may think a seven-round limit for a clip (as in New York State) or a 10-round clip limit (as in proposed federal legislation) are too restrictive. How does legislation close the gun-show loophole, so that background checks on all commercial sales are mandatory, without intruding on intrafamily transfers? Just how would such a ban be integrated with a gun-trafficking law?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
