Burton v. Sills, A--942

• Decision Date: 09 January 1968
• Docket Number: No. A--942,A--942
• Parties: L. Arthur BURTON, Louis A. Benton, Edmond H. Shuler, Al L. Toth, Herman Treptow, George Schielke and Citizens Committee for Firearms Legislation, a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Arthur J. SILLS, Attorney General of the State of New Jersey, and ColonelDavid B. Kelly, Superintendent of State Police of New Jersey, Defendants-Respondents.
• Court: New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division

Page 459

99 N.J.Super. 459

240 A.2d 432

L. Arthur BURTON, Louis A. Benton, Edmond H. Shuler, Al L Toth, Herman Treptow, George Schielke and Citizens Committee for Firearms Legislation, a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Arthur J. SILLS, Attorney General of the State of New Jersey, and ColonelDavid B. Kelly, Superintendent of State Police of New Jersey Defendants-Respondents.

No. A--942.

Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division.

Argued Nov. 20, 1967.

Decided Jan. 9, 1968.

William E. Ozzard, Somerville, for appellants (Beekman, Ozzard & Mauro, Somerville, attorneys).

Arthur J. Sills, Atty. Gen., for respondents (Joseph A. Hoffman, Asst. Atty. Gen., of counsel, Stephen Skillman, Deputy Atty. Gen., on the brief).

Before Judges KILKENNY, CARTON and MALECH.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

KILKENNY, J.A.D.

Plaintiffs appeal from a summary judgment dismissing their complaint and upholding the constitutionality of the new 'Gun Control Law,' L.1966, c. 60.

We affirm the judgment substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Leahy in his opinion, 99 N.J.Super. 516, 240 A.2d 462. We add thereto the following brief supplement.

In Application of Marvin, 97 N.J.Super. 62, 234 A.2d 408 (App.Div.1967), we upheld the validity of that portion of the statute relating to issuance of firearms purchaser identification cards, which required the applicant to state, Inter alia, whether he had ever been a member of any organization advocating or approving the commission of acts of force and violence either to overthrow the government of the United States or of the State, or which sought to deny others their rights under the Constitutions of either the United States or of the State. That opinion speaks for itself.

The present appeal by sportsmen, gun dealers and a nonprofit sportsmen's organization represents a broader attack upon the constitutionality of the law. Plaintiffs contend that the act fails in its alleged public purpose and 'thus must fall under the weight of the private rights it infringes upon.' They further maintain that it violates the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and the rights of citizens of New Jersey provided for in Amendments I, IV, V, IX and XIV and Article I, Secs. 8 and 10 of the United States Constitution. They claim that the law's restraints and restrictions exceed the State's regulatory powers and constitute 'a partial abolition of a basic right.'

We are satisfied that this gun control law is a proper and reasonable exercise of the State's police powers. It was adopted for legitimate ends. Its wisdom and enforcement are matters within the domain of the Legislature and those charged with its administration. It is too early to stamp it as a failure. Its efficacy must await the test of time. Already more than 50,000 persons have been issued the necessary identification cards permitting them to purchase guns in New Jersey. Approximately 1000 applications have been rejected. The propriety of these rejections has not been challenged on this appeal. Some 5000 applications were pending at the time of oral argument. Thus, no law-abiding citizen, free from the statute's disqualifications, has been or will be precluded from purchasing, keeping or bearing arms.

Not even plaintiff gun enthusiasts plead for the unregulated right of habitual drunkards, narcotics addicts, criminals, mental cases, or proponents of force and violence who approve and advocate such means to...