I hope they are fighting against ALL of the nj sensitive places and not just the vampire law. The SC or 3rd circuit needs to designate what a sensitive place is and leave no ambiguity for the state to weave a work around that we have to fight again. “an active court room where sufficient capable armed guards are present” no other place can be deemed sensitive in respect to the 2A.
2 Likes
Yeah imo a ptc holder should be able to carry everywhere. Only exception is for places deemed sensitive that have a security checkpoint. If a criminal can carry into a place its not sensitive. A sign or a policy cannot make a place safe.
1 Like
Related to this, I would love to see them put an end to having to unholster and unload a handgun before storing it. Seems like it would be a lot safer being able to remove the holster with the gun intact and store it that way, eliminating the need for unnecessary administrative handing, and also removing the issue of keeping track of rounds that have been chambered and unchambered.
But I suppose this is way down on the list of priorities.
1 Like
Don’t bring logic into this! This is NJ after all.
1 Like
I’m cool with it being a gun free zone if they have controlled access and armed security. Beyond that, it’s bullshit security theater that makes it more dangerous, not less.
in addition any government agency at any level, state county or local that makes a location a sensitive place shall be held financially and criminally liable for any harm that may have otherwise been prevented by an armed citizen and shall lose any and all qualified immunity..
I know that in Florida, a non-governmental facility like a store that says it is a gun-free zone is just making a request. There is no criminal penalty for carrying on that property. The most they can do is ask you to leave. Anyone know if that’s true in NJ?
PA does this also. GFZ signs hold no weight legally unless it’s law. Pretty sure Jersey is the same for now.
I’m slammed at work but can’t let this stay out there. I believe that in NJ with the official “No Guns Allowed” sign it’s an actual crime.
If property doesn’t have the “official” sign, but still has a no guns policy, then it’s a trespass charge.
EDIT - Researched and I’m wrong - No special significance to the NJOAG-provided signs/decals, but the presence of a “No Firearms” sign itself, instead of just a policy not backed up by a sign, does turn possession into a crime.
Im curious, what NJ state statute says this?
Last updated on August 12, 2026
Signs and written policies are common in malls, big-box stores, bars, and medical offices. When a property is open to the public, the state’s sensitive-places statute (N.J.S.A. 2C:58-4.6) no longer imposes a blanket “no carry without express consent” rule because of the Third Circuit’s injunction, but posted rules from the owner are effective notice under the trespass law.
1 Like
So the business owner would have to press charges and you would be arrested. I wonder how many times that has happened in New Jersey. I would think you’d be asked to leave first but, this is New Jersey.
I just dont understand how these marxist states get away with allowing privately owned businesses to decide what constitutional rights are allowed on their property by posting a sign. If a business owner posted a sign that said " blacks prohibited" , “no jews beyond this point” “no religious symbols or jewelry allowed either openly or concealed” those businesses would be sued into oblivion by the government yet for some reason its ok to discriminate against the 2a.
3 Likes
Excellent point. Has it ever been challenged? If not, maybe it’s time to.
What about the owner’s rights? Not that I agree with any business open to the public posting a GFZ sign but that’s their prerogative as is mine not to shop there.
Banning race or religion is completely different under the law and are legally protected classes under civil rights laws because you cannot separate a person from who they are. Carrying a firearm is an action and a choice of equipment, not an inherent human characteristic. A business can ban shoes, shirts, or firearms but they cannot ban human beings based on how they were born.
Ultimately, the market handles it. Owners have the right to set rules, and we have the right to vote with our wallets and take our business elsewhere.
if they ban the jewelry part, " no religious jewelry open or concealed" that should be enough to spark a fight. and the 2A is as much a civil right as any other.
I don’t think they’ll recognize your 1911 being a holy symbol of the Church of John Moses Browning 
2 Likes
The thing that bothers me about this is it has no standards as far as I could tell. I went into one restaurant, and they had a sign. That was small, and mixed in on the same board with the health inspection notice and some other paperwork. It was also only visible on the way out unless you happened to turn around and look behind you on the way in.