in re application of justin blasko for the return of firearms - EVAN F ...

specific statutory enumerations, the issuance of the permit or
[FPIC] card would nonetheless be contrary to the public
interest.'" Osworth, supra, 365 N.J. Super. at 79 (quoting
Burton, supra, 53 N.J. at 91). In this matter, the only
individual who had access to Blasko's apartment was the building
superintendent, who typically did not enter without giving prior
notice. No evidence suggests such limited third-party access
would result in a public safety issue. Despite a preference for
the safe storage of weapons with safety locks, we conclude a law
abiding adult, living alone without children, who openly leaves
weapons in a locked apartment, insufficiently supports a finding
of conduct contrary to the interest of the public health, safety
or welfare pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3c(5). See Heller, supra,
554 U.S. at 635, 128 S. Ct. at 2822, 171 L. Ed. 2d at 683
(holding "the District's ban on handgun possession in the home
violates the Second Amendment").
On this record, we conclude the trial judge erred as a
matter of law in concluding "it would violate public health,
safety and welfare if Blasko possessed firearms because . . . he
stored his fire arms in a negligent manner." The State has
failed to carry its burden to establish necessary facts to
conclude the return of Blasko's firearms and FPIC would be
contrary to the interest of the public health, safety or
16
A-3848-10T2