The Supreme Court said this, some time ago, although the federal courts conveniently overlooked this for decades, in order make it appear that disarming the public was legal and constitutional.
It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearing arms constitute the reserved military force or reserve militia of the United States as well as of the states, and, in view of this prerogative of the general government, as well as of its general powers, the states cannot, even laying the constitutional provision in question [2nd amendment] out of view, prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms, so as to deprive the United States of their rightful resource for maintaining the public security, and disable the people from performing their duty to the general government. But, as already stated, we think it clear that the sections under consideration [State of Illinois parade permit laws] do not have this effect.Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 (1886)
That said, I doubt that any court would view a may issue legal regime as a prohibition, even if it was a prohibition for all practical purposes.
When it comes to the RKBA, the courts are intellectually corrupt. I view the decisions as illogical and self contradictory. The decisions do not merit respect, they merit contempt. That said, the decisions are what they are, and goons with guns will put you in jail for acting out any disagreement with the tyrants in robes.
And nothing in the New Jersey law prevents a person from keeping a firearm in his or her home. The Heller decision upheld that. But Heller also admitted that some degree of control by the states on where firearms could be carried and by whom was constitutional.