Despite the Supreme Court’s rulings in Heller, McDonald, and Bruen (and the plain text of the Second Amendment), New Jersey continues to treat the right to keep and bear arms as a privilege doled out by the state, and a new bill introduced by a Democrat Assemblywoman doubles down on that mindset. 

Bill A5210, introduced by Burlington County Assemblywoman Carol Murphy, requires every member of a household to undergo a background check when someone purchases or acquires a firearm, even if they have no plans of touching or using the gun in question. 

The legislation, which would take effect immediately upon passage, defines a “household member” as any person over the age of 18 who resides with the applicant.

Reasons for disqualification include criminal convictions, a history of mental health issues, or substance abuse problems.

The law is also vague on marijuana use. While marijuana use is a federal crime, it is legal in New Jersey. During the background check, it will ask if you or anyone in your family uses marijuana. If anyone does, they will be rejected during the federal background check. 

Shore News Network, which was the first to report on Murphy’s bill, claims that “if you omit a household member’s marijuana usage, you will be committing a federal crime and could lose your right to bear arms,” but there’s nothing on the Form 4473 that would require you to report a household member’s marijuana use. In fact, there’s no space on the federal background check form to report a household member’s use of cannabis (either medicinally or recreationally) if you wanted to. 

While omitting a household member’s marijuana consumption isn’t a federal crime, it does appear to run afoul of Murphy’s draconian legislation, which not only mandates that every household member must undergo a criminal background check before a permit to purchase a handgun or a firearms purchaser identification card is issued, but requires them to submit their fingerprints to their local police department as well. 

Under Murphy’s proposal, if any household member is unable to lawfully possess a firearm, no household member can get the Second Amendment permission slip need to legally acquire a handgun or long gun. And keep in mind, New Jersey doesn’t just prohibit convicted felons or those adjudicated as mental defectives from possessing a firearm. There’s a long list of exclusionary factors, including “any person who suffers from a physical defect or disease which would make it unsafe for that person to handle firearms.” 

It’s unclear how the state determine what “defects” or diseases make it unsafe for someone to handle firearms, but it’s easy to imagine Murphy’s proposed law prohibiting the spouses or adult children of ALS or Alzheimer’s patients from legally possessing a gun, as utterly insane as that would be. 

New Jersey law also bars anyone “found to be lacking the essential character of temperament necessary to be entrusted with a firearm” from acquiring a permit to purchase a handgun or a firearms purchaser identification card. That broad language is already in direct conflict with the Bruen decision by giving licensing authorities unfettered discretion in determining if someone is worthy of exercising their Second Amendment rights, but Murphy’s legislation would go even further by allowing those same authorities the power to deny a permit so long as they believe anyone in the household has questionable character or temperment. 

I’m used to awful bills coming out of the Garden State, but this is truly one of the most egregious abuses of our Second Amendment rights that I’ve ever seen. A5210 should be consigned to the dustbin of history, but given the anti-gun majorities in Trenton, it stands a disturbingly good chance of becoming Murphy’s law.