SCOTUS shoots down New York gun restrictions
On Thursday, June 23, 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that New York state cannot restrict the Second Amendment right to carry a handgun. While the decision is a victory for Constitutional rights, a larger question is still on the table: How did gun regulations come to such a pass that a law-abiding citizen's right to carry a gun was so restricted in the first place?
In an effort to stop mass shootings, New York had created draconian rules about who could carry a handgun. Applicants for a carry permit had to show "proper cause," a nebulous term that was never clearly defined. Stating that one wished to protect oneself or one's property was not proper cause. Nor was living and/or working in a high crime area proper cause. People could state that they had a special need for self-protection, but since the term "special need" was not defined either, the authorities had complete discretion over whether or not they would award a carry permit. New York also attempted to use the "sensitive place" doctrine to restrict carry permits, meaning that it was not necessary for people in crowded areas to carry guns because law enforcement was supposed to be available.
Image: United States Supreme Court collage made using a photo by Jesse Collins. CC BY 3.0.
In writing the Court's opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas said, "[T]here is no historical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a 'sensitive place' simply because it is crowded and protected generally by the New York City Police Department." Justice Samuel Alito also pointed out in a concurring opinion that New York's restrictions had not prevented mass shootings such as the one on May 14, 2022 in Buffalo.
The Court's opinion also clarified that Second Amendment rights should not be held to a different standard than other constitutional rights. No one must demonstrate a proper cause or a special need to exercise free speech, to take the Fifth Amendment, or to freely practice their religion. In short, the ruling recognizes the fact that it is criminal behavior, rather than the tool that a criminal uses that is responsible for murders. Trying to stop shootings by taking away guns is like trying to stop drunk driving by taking away cars.
Pandra Selivanov is the author of The Pardon, a story of forgiveness based on the thief on the cross in the Bible.
Ad Free / Commenting Login
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- Trump-O-Phobia Drives Some Americans to Questionable Greener Pastures Overseas
- A Businessman and a Brilliant Strategist
- A Remarkable Headline for a Fascinating Story
- Democrats Unmask Themselves
- How Mexico Became China’s Trojan Horse in U.S. Trade
- Covid Redux: The Bird Flu Scare
- A Taste of the Swamp
- Do We Have 677 Unelected Presidents?
- Global Relations beyond the Prime Directive
- The Democrat Party: The Enemy Within?
Blog Posts
- Hills to Die On: Democrats know how to pick 'em
- Near-death experiences, reliance on oil, and more cataclysmic failures—it’s all just part and parcel of ‘green’ energy
- So where'd America's obesity epidemic come from? Chef Andrew Gruel has a theory ...
- Trump just fired a huge warning shot over Iran’s bow
- Markets respond: Trumpian peace in Russo-Ukrainian war is in the bag
- The time of the hoax
- New York Times goes bipolar on Trump’s border control success
- Mark Kelly decides to offload his Tesla to protest Elon Musk
- The half-million dollar American
- Three things for the U.S. to understand about the Middle East
- Speaker Mike Johnson reveals why the Autopen scandal is a big deal
- The CDC website really needs to update its COVID protocols
- Hands in your back pocket
- Birthright citizenship: The facts
- ‘She’s my little Musk coupe’