New Jersey Assembly Bill A3389

New Jersey 2022-2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/7/22
• Refer: 3/7/22

Caption

"The 10-20-Life Law."

Impact

The bill significantly alters existing state laws concerning firearm use during the commission of crimes. It specifically targets violent crimes such as murder, robbery, and aggravated assault, where the presence and use of a firearm increase the seriousness of the offense and the penalties incurred. By imposing consecutive sentences for firearm-related offenses, the law seeks to create a more substantial deterrent effect on potential offenders. This heightened level of punitive action emphasizes the state's commitment to tackling gun violence and enhancing public safety by ensuring that those who misuse firearms are kept off the streets longer.

Summary

Assembly Bill A3389, known as the '10-20-Life Law', introduces significant enhancements to penalties for certain firearms-related crimes in New Jersey. The bill mandates that individuals convicted of possessing a firearm for unlawful purposes will face a mandatory minimum of 10 additional years in prison. Those who intentionally fire a firearm at or near another person face an additional 20 years, and individuals who cause serious bodily injury or death through reckless discharge of a firearm face sentences of 25 years to life. This law aims to impose stricter penalties to deter criminal behavior involving firearms, drawing on frameworks established in similar laws enacted in Florida and California.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding AB A3389 include concerns regarding the potential for disproportionate sentencing outcomes, particularly for non-violent offenders or those without prior convictions. Critics argue that the bill may lead to overcrowding in prisons without sufficiently addressing the root causes of gun violence. Additionally, the bill allocates $500,000 for public education campaigns to inform the community about its provisions, prompting discussions about the allocation of funds towards education versus other methods of crime prevention and public safety initiatives. Proponents of the bill maintain that stronger penalties can effectively deter crime, while opponents raise concerns about over-criminalization and its broader social implications.