Where the hell did they find this judge? Judge Joseph Rea of New jersey made on of the most bizarre rulings in the history of juries prudence. He rejected the application for a gun permit for a man named Arthur Vinogradsky , based solely on his wife filing a restraining order in 2013, which she later withdrew. His ruling was that the local law revoking someone’s Second Amendment rights was enforceable simply based on the Supreme Court ruling that the Second Amendment was subject to reasonable restraints. At the time of the restraining order, Vinogradsky also had high volume magazines and hollow point bullets.
This was the third bizarre ruling by judges in New Jersey denying permits to residents. The previous two as reported by The Daily Caller:
Judge Joseph Rea rejected Rahman Keith Idlett’s gun permit application saying that granting a carry permit “was against the interest of the public health, safety and welfare.”
“Having a driving record this atrocious consistently, over a long period of time, says a lot about a person and their respect for the law and their ability to comport themselves appropriately within legal boundaries,” Rea said in his opinion.
Another man, NJ Radio reported, was rejected a carry permit by a judge last week because he could not show “justifiable need” to have one — even though the man is a U.S. Army soldier who works at a military base that has been under the threat of terrorist attacks.