Let’s be frank here. If a security guard who deals with protecting large cash transfers supposedly lacks a “justifiable need” to carry a gun, the rank and file individual is slap out of luck. There’s absolutely no way you’re getting a permit unless you have a documented death threat against you.Even then, though, I wouldn’t hold your breath.This really highlights the problems you see with states that have added a “need” component to its carry process. It becomes harder and harder to demonstrate a need in the minds of people who are generally well protected themselves. They can’t fathom why you would need to protect your life in an instant, so they assume the police will do so.

Source: NJ Judge Figures Movie Theater Security Guards Don’t Need Guns

# – # – # – # – #

Let’s face it; there is no Second Amendment in the Pepuls Republik of Nu Jerzee.

I don’t understand why it’s up to gun owners to defend the Constitution?

Pure and simple, after “gun control” comes genocide.

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? . . .” — Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Perhaps Gun Owners Foundation can get a class action suit going?

— 30 —