If a law denies a fundamental right based on the subjective whim of those unaffected by that law, can it really be considered “just”? And if, as Americans, we recognize that a law is unjust, are we not obligated to stand against it?
Michael Tumminelli. We have served the people of New Jersey and the Nation for many, many years.
The case of Michael Tumminelli. Michael is a Army War Veteran that has served the United States of America for many years, he also has had multiple deployments to the middle east and other parts of the World over the years and is currently employed now as a Government Defense Employee. Mr. Tumminelli applied in the same County as Mr. Almeida for a carry license due to a security breach of his personal information by a terrorist organization (ISIS), and later confirmed by the U.S Department of Justice, including that the personal information of these veterans have been compromised and they are or a (ISIS TARGET list). The State of NJ denied Mr. Michael Tumminelli his carry license, denied him his right to self dense due to not meeting the :justifiable need" standard in NJ.
It is time to make a stand, and I have decided to fight this in federal court. The "justifiable need" statute is unconstitutional and outdated, and has failed the law-abiding firearm owner time and time again since its inception in 1925. We in New Jersey have watched other states move forward and take their rights back, while we go backwards and fall victim to the reckless antics of our elected officials. With this case, we now have an opportunity to possibly dismantle this age old problem for all of Law abiding, good people that want this right respected in NJ, that has put New Jersey law abiding citizens in jeopardy.
Our lawyers, who we had to bring in from out of State, believe in this case and want to help New Jersey get out from beneath the decades of anti-Second Amendment laws that have vexed us for too long. These are the same attorneys who are taking on the Department of Justice’s arbitrary application of the machinegun ban (18 USC sec. 922(o)) and argued in early April 2016 in the Third Circuit (which includes New Jersey) and the Fifth Circuit that machineguns are protected by the Second Amendment, and have had success in the 9th circuit court with carry laws, Baker v Kealoha . In June of 2016, they will travel to our state to visit with the people affected by this unconstitutional and unobtainable standard, and will talk to New Jerseyans about what is to come and how they can help. These men believe that the Second Amendment says what it means and means what it says. “Shall not be infringed” means something to them, and they are taking the fight to the people that intend to strip us of our Second Amendment rights.
Additionally, a Federal Court just ruled, that Washington D.C's carry requirement, which is very similar to NJ's, is unconstitutional and the Washington D.C must be a "shall issue". see Matthew Grace/Pink Pistols v. District of Columbia on May 17th, 2016
We invite you to join us. We need your help and cannot do this without you. Every dollar helps but, if you are not in a position to contribute financially, then we ask for your prayers and for you to spread the word about our challenge.
New Jersey is worth fighting for. Our right to be able to defend ourselves and our families while outside our homes is worth fighting for. Join us.