Hundreds of Frustrated Ocean County Residents Questioning Gun-Carry Permit Process, New Restrictions

Hundreds of local residents who have submitted CCW applications are becoming increasingly frustrated, and have questions.

As previously reported on TLS, hundreds from around Lakewood, Jackson, Toms River and beyond have submitted CCW applications following the Supreme Court “shall issue” ruling which removed the justifiable need. Most of those applicants are still waiting for approval.

To date, several dozen local residents have received their permits, but then things changed.

The ones who received their CCW permits in Ocean County prior to approximately August 23, were from the luckier ones who received a non-restricted permit, which is what a CCW in New Jersey should look like post Supreme Court ruling.

However, things then quickly changed.

Recently, applicants have received a permit looking a lot different than the initial ones issued by the same Ocean County Court.

While initial permits were issued non-restricted, it appears many recent applicants have received a CCW permit with a list of restrictions.

The following are the restrictions listed on some permits:

…..ORDERED that the applicant for permission to carry said hand gun referenced above, be and hereby is approved by permitting the said applicant to carry said weapon(s) subject to the following list of “sensitive places” at which the carry permit shall be deemed invalid:

1. Schools/Educational Institutions:
2 Government buildings;
3 Legislative assemblies;
4. Polling places;
5. Courthouses;
6. Shopping malls (if restricted by the private entity);
7. Private property/businesses (if restricted by the private entity);
8. Bars and nightclubs;
9. Any location where alcohol is served or any facility with a license for on-premises cannabis consumption;
10. Any place or time that a permit holder is ingesting any intoxicating substance regardless of whether the permit holder is actually intoxicated, impaired, or under the influence;
11. Also, no permit holder who is operating or riding in or on a motor vehicle may carry a firearm (with regard to motor vehicles, any firearms must be stored in the trunk and unloaded pursuant to N.J.S.A.2C:39-6(g));
12. Any place where carrying a firearm is prohibited by federal law; and it is further
ORDERED, that in the event an applicant is employed at a “sensitive place” and his employer requires that person to be armed, then during hours of employment the applicant shall not be prohibited from carrying the firearm; and it is further ORDERED, that the applicant shall carry THE PERMIT AND A COPY OF THIS ORDER, at all times that the applicant is carrying the hand guy for which this/approval has been granted. HON. ROCHELLE GIZINSKI, J.S.C.

Ocean County Sheriff Michael Mastronardy tells TLS he has been receiving many complaints about this, and is seeking answers.

“Our office has been made aware of concerns that various counties are issuing carry permits with restrictions,” Mastronardy stated to TLS. “It is my opinion that all licenses, hunting, boating etc regulated by the state should be universal in their enforcement …to do otherwise is confusing both to law enforcement and our residents.”

And then there are those who have submitted their CCW applications over 60 days ago, but have still not received a response. However, the 60 day deadline is reportedly only on the local police department’s end, but not on the judge’s end.

But are the restrictions in compliance with the Supreme Court ruling?

Why the holdup?

Can a restricted permit be amended to unrestricted?

Those are some of the questions hundreds have been asking the last couple of weeks.

TLS has reached out to attorneys and 2A activists for answers, and we’ll provide additional information as we receive it.

In the meantime, WeShoot owner Mark Abady confirms to TLS that lawsuits have already been filed against the court.

This content, and any other content on TLS, may not be republished or reproduced without prior permission from TLS. Copying or reproducing our content is both against the law and against Halacha. To inquire about using our content, including videos or photos, email us at [email protected].

Stay up to date with our news alerts by following us on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

**Click here to join over 15,000 receiving our Whatsapp Status updates!**

**Click here to join the official TLS WhatsApp Community!**

Got a news tip? Email us at [email protected], Text 415-857-2667, or WhatsApp 609-661-8668.


  1. Thanks for posting this!
    My permit was submitted 80 days ago to the Lakewood Police Department and it was only sent to the judge 40 days ago, still no response no permit no nothing!
    A friend of mine submitted the same time as me at the Toms River Police Department and has received his non restricted permit.
    It definitely seems like things are being held up in the courthouse and these added on restrictions are ridiculous!
    Hopefully these lawsuits pass quick enough through the system or that the Supreme Court sees the power trip these judges are having and shuts this down.
    Will definitely be apealling any restrictions on the carry permit I receive that isn’t already a constitutional “sensitive area”.

    Also the inconsistencies of this judge Gizinski has got to get her act together!

    • There are many on-line articles, written by experts,
      discussing the pros and cons of the .22 caliber platform for self-defense. Suffice it to say that it would be wise to ignore the comment by Mr. Hey, above, and understand that advancing technology has made the .22 a viable option for the average person looking to purchase their first firearm, either handgun or rifle.

      • Addendum: I am only very new to firearms ownership, but I’ve done my due diligence in researching .22 caliber rifles. For those who are interested, the Mossberg 702 semi-automatic is an inexpensive alternative to the VERY popular (but pricier) Ruger 10/22. The Mossberg goes for around $150 and has very good reviews. A more expensive choice is the Smith&Wesson M&P 15-22 at a bit over $500. This particular model is a look-alike of the more powerful AR-15 style rifle, but chambered for .22lr rather than the latter’s NATO 5.56 cartridge. I bought both of my .22s locally from WeShoot.

        I personally believe that Yidden should be defensively armed during these perilous and threatening times, no less so than the Jews of Shushan were, with the weapons technology of their day. Happy shopping.

    • You have the right to carry because the constitution says so.

      You don’t need permission to carry a concealed weapon just like you don’t need permission to plead the 5th

      (In NJ, King Murphy requires you to get permission to carry)

    • How are you going to carry a rifle?
      I have a variety of guns for different needs.
      1. Mossberg 500 12ga
      pump shotgun
      2. Glock 17 9mm with 17rd
      3. Ruger SR9c 9mm compact
      with 10 & 17rd mags
      4. Colt AR-15 5.56 with 30 &
      40rd mags.
      I think I’m pretty well covered.

  2. Issuing permits is an executive function. The judiciary should have no hand in this. Additionally, if it restricts carrying in a vehicle, and a permitted person goes on an errand run that involves 3 stores, the person is required by the judge to load up the firearms and holster it in PUBLIC for the whole world to see at each stop. This is clearly the judge trying to prevent people from exercising their rights, which opens her up to civil lawsuits, which she deserves.

  3. The inconsistencies that this judge is creating is out of control.
    Pre Aug 23rd anyone who received their permit, received it with zero restrictions.
    Anyone after have received it with.
    That means my neighbor can carry in his car and I cannot.

    This is coming from this one judge for Monmouth and Ocean County which means the next county over is giving out non restricted permits.

    The inconsistentcies are what make this extremely dangerous (besides the fact that there shouldn’t be any restrictions other than what is federally restricted) the policing of these restrictions are going to cause alot of dangerous situations.
    One person can be pulled over and legally allowed to carry in his vehicle and the next person will be a felon.

    The legal verbiage of these restrictions are extremely lose and can be interpreted wrongly by the police and by anyone, which will just make legal law abiding citizens who have had to shell out money and wait months and months to go through this legal process and go through all the background checks…. A FELON.

    The verbiage “if restricted by the private entity” is not an explained legal term.
    Does the private entity have to have a sign posted about carrying Firearms on their premises? How big does the sign have to be? Where does it need to be? Can the private entity restrict you verbally? Can they say after the fact that you were not allowed to be in their property with a firearm. And now you’re a felon?

    “any location where alcohol is served” does that mean at a friend’s wedding? Does that mean at any event where there’s alcohol even if I am not drinking?

    The “no permit holder riding in or operating a motor vehicle”
    This one takes the cake!
    If I want to get a ride in my friends car I have to go to the back admin unload and then when we get to our destination reload. Putting the magazine in the firearm clocking the slide and putting it in the holster….. In Public!
    If that were to happen at any place and the police were called this would not be a simple mix up of he said she said…

    The loose verbiage and the ridiculous restrictions are going to cause many more issues than we had prior and this judge needs to be sued personally for the potential harm she is causing on top of the legality of her unlawful court orders not backed by legislation.

  4. Hey all, our organization has retained lawyers to sue the judge personally. We realize this is costly and have raised the funds so far needed.

    We are personally naming Judge Rochelle Gizinski.

    The lawsuit basis is grounded in that Judge Gizinski loses qualfied immunity by directly and knowingly going against the SCOTUS Bruen decision


    • At a previous Lakewood seminar I was persuaded to pay the annual fee for US LawShield membership, which will cover my legal expenses in the event that I must ever use one of my firearms in self-defense. It also pays to remember that every time you use a weapon which you’ve been trained in AND is legally justified, you may wind up saving the life or limb of yourself, a family member or a neighbor. Now…smoke on your pipe and put that in!

  5. we all see the problem, as sheriff mastronardy states .. there has to be uniformity .. you cannot travel the state wondering if it’s ok in bergen , but not in ocean or monmouth.

Comments are closed.