Despite SCOTUS Ruling, New York Aims to Restrict Gun Carrying

Despite SCOTUS Ruling, New York Aims to Restrict Gun Carrying

When they were told that the law governing firearms in homes outside New York violates the U.S. Constitution Legislators from New York’s Empire State are responding with protest.

On June 23rd on June 23, on June 23, U.S. Supreme Court struck the down of an New York law requiring that residents prove “proper reason” for the right to carry concealed firearms when they are in public. In a special session that was extraordinary the following week but lawmakers in the New York Legislature passed a measure that included broad provisions to limit the effect of the ruling.

“We’re not moving backwards,” Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat spoke before putting the legislation into law. “They may think that they could transform our lives at the flick of a pen. However, there’s a pen, too.”

Five states include California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Jersey each have similar laws. Four states are either following the New York model or contemplating this. This Supreme Court ruling doesn’t immediately invalidate these state laws. they simply state they’re unconstitutional and need to be changed.

The New York’s New Law

The prompt action of New York to amend its laws makes clear that legislators there aren’t planning to roll over. The law that was passed in the state of New York sets out the exact requirements for those seeking a concealed-carry permit. This includes the requirement of 16 hours of training in a classroom as well as four reference numbers, as well as a list of accounts on social media. The law also requires regular inspections of permits for guns and strict requirements for storage, as well as the establishment of a database for recording the selling of ammunition.

The largest aspect of the new law however, is the lengthy listing of locations that handguns remain restricted. This list of locations is basically in response to Justice Clarence Thomas, who stated in his major decision that the state misused the notion of “sensitive locations” to support the state’s “proper reason” requirements for public firearms. In essence, he wrote, this meant that the whole state of the state is considered to be a sensitive location and is not a sufficient an interpretation.

The lawmaker suggested that areas that are sensitive should be defined better and New York’s legislators took on his words. The law now provides definitions of many of them — with detailed details.

This is just an example:

  • All government buildings, including the courts
  • Every place of worship
  • Libraries, playgrounds for children as well as public parks and Zoos
  • The campus and the buildings of an educational establishment
  • All vehicles used to transport passengers on public transit and at any public transit station
  • A licensed establishment that permits on-premises drinking alcohol
  • Every place that is used for the performance of art, entertainment, or sports occasions.
  • Anyone who want to exercise their “constitutional rights to protest , or to assemble”
  • Places to vote
  • Times Square

As expected there are some Republicans who are part of the Democrat-controlled New York Legislature are pushing back. The law’s opponents argue that it is not constitutional, Senator. Daniel Stec argues that the law’s “sensitive locations” definitions will make the 700,000-acre Catskill Park off-limits for guns.

It is clear that the law will be challenged constitutionally within the months or weeks in the months to come.

Interventions taken by Other States

For now, let’s take a look about what other similar located states are doing

  • California changed the law in place in order to make it mandatory for applicants seeking concealed-carry permits to be 21 years of age and not committed any criminal acts. They are required to complete a course , and submit three references. The law also extends the zones that prohibit weapons, like school zones or transport hubs.
  • In Hawaii legislators are currently discussing laws that could impose various limitations on applicants for concealed carry.
  • For Maryland, Republican Gov. Larry Hogan told state law enforcement officials that “proper reason” is no longer utilized in determining who can get the concealed carry permit. Hogan said that it is “unconstitutional to keep enforcing the law.”
  • In Massachusetts the Attorney General Maura Healey gave guidance for law enforcement officials that “proper causes” cannot be an element. She also stated the possibility of law enforcement continuing to restrict firearms through a myriad of methods including strict licensing , and the enforcers of “prohibited individuals” as well as “suitability” laws in the current laws governing guns in the state.
  • The governor of New Jersey, Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy ordered law enforcement to abide by the Supreme Court’s decision, however, he also said the governor plans to collaborate with legislators to draft an identical bill as New York’s.

There are more guns everywhere

The gun rights movement has increased their influence within state legislatures since Florida adopted its right to carry laws in 1987. The current state of affairs is 43 “shall issue” states. That means police officers can issue licenses, without having applicants to provide a just basis in the event that they’re not convicted of being a felon or mentally incapacitated.

States like New York, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Jersey were once the commonplace. They are now fighting to stay alive.