MORE Guns on the Streets: Supreme Court strikes down New York City’s 109-year-old Concealed Carry Law

MORE Guns on the Streets: Supreme Court strikes down New York City’s 109-year-old Concealed Carry Law
MORE Guns on the Streets: Supreme Court strikes down New York City’s 109-year-old Concealed Carry Law

The ruling could also affect other states with similar permitting regimes, including California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island.

In a move that could lead to more guns on the streets, on Thursday, June 23, the Supreme Court struck down New York’s 109-year-old statute limiting the carrying of concealed firearms. This was the first major second amendment decision in over a decade. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the 6-3 majority Thursday, said the law would require New Yorkers who want a permit to carry a firearm in public to show “adequate reason” that the gun is specifically needed to self-defense “violates” . the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public.”

The decision affects New York law, but could affect other states with similar permitting regimes, including California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island. In a separate statement agreeing with Thomas, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts said the ruling violated state and local restrictions on gun ownership by criminals and the mentally ill or laws that prohibit the carrying of firearms in “sensitive places”. , not excluding schools and government buildings.


“Properly interpreted, the Second Amendment allows for a ‘variety’ of gun regulations,” Roberts and Kavanaugh wrote. They noted that states can continue to allow gun license applicants “to undergo fingerprinting, a background check, a mental health check, and training in firearms handling and use of force laws, among other possible requirements. At a news conference with New York Police Commissioner Keechant Sewell, Mayor Eric Adams said “nothing changes today” as a result of the ruling. The decision, he said, was remanded to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals for reconsideration of its earlier decision to uphold state law.

Read More :   Adhan android app for remembrance of obligatory prayers for muslims

The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association and two men from upstate challenged the Sullivan Act, claiming it violated their Second Amendment rights. The law, which went into effect in 1911, required New Yorkers to have licenses for firearms small enough to conceal. Paul Clement, the attorney representing the association, previously said his clients “are not looking for anything more than what their fellow citizens in 43 other states already enjoy.” “Carrying a firearm outside the home is a basic constitutional right. It is not an extraordinary action that requires an extraordinary test of necessity,” Clement had said. Thomas agreed, saying, “Nothing in the text of the Second Amendment distinguishes between the home and the public in relation to the right to keep and bear arms.”

Gov. Kathy Hochul described the court’s decision as “not just reckless,” but “reprehensible” and “terrible in scope.” “The Supreme Court is setting us back in how we deal with gun violence,” she said at a news conference in Manhattan. In a tweet, she wrote: “It is outrageous that at a time of national reckoning over gun violence, the Supreme Court ruthlessly struck down a New York law that restricted those who can carry concealed weapons.”

Mayor Eric Adams said in a separate statement that the ruling “will expose New Yorkers to increased risk of gun violence.” “We have prepared for this decision and will continue to do what we can to work with our federal, state and local partners to protect our city,” Adams said. “This effort includes a comprehensive review of our approach to defining ‘sensitive locations’ where it is prohibited to carry a weapon and a review of our application process to ensure that only fully qualified individuals can obtain a license to carry… we cannot allow Let New York do this. “become the Wild West.”

Read More :   Xiaomi 12S, 12S Pro, 12S Ultra officially debut with Leica camera

In a statement, President Joe Biden said he was “deeply disappointed” by the ruling, saying it “contradicts both common sense and the Constitution and should concern us all deeply.” He tweeted: “I am deeply disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruens. This decision is contrary to common sense and the Constitution and should deeply concern us all. I will continue to do everything in my power to reduce gun violence.”

Vice President Kamala Harris also commented against the ruling: “Today’s Supreme Court decision on guns is deeply troubling because it runs contrary to common sense and the Constitution. There are lives at stake communities”. US Senator Elizabeth Warren wrote: “After the horrific gun violence in Buffalo and Uvalde, the radical conservative majority on the Supreme Court has pushed us back even further and unilaterally weakened gun safety laws across the country. Countless American lives are at risk from this decision, including in Massachusetts.”

Social media condemned the ruling, with one user writing: “What the hell is wrong with the Supreme Court? Anyone can carry a gun but want protection? Oh”. Another user said: “Ladies and gentlemen, we have a Supreme Court that has ruled that New Yorkers need more freedom to use their guns. Another sad day in America.” “How disgusting is it when New York legislates for safe smart guns and the Supreme Court challenges that effort?” one user said.

Read More :   Best Forex VPS for 24x7 Trading

“Is the Supreme Court also on the NRA payroll? Taking down a New York City concealed carry law that has been on the books for a century is counterproductive to America’s alarming gun violence! One user wrote, while another said: “The US Supreme Court has relaxed US gun laws, because the victims of mass shootings were living, breathing people with families, not fetuses.” ”. “Only the United States could relax gun laws shortly after the mass shooting of 19 children. The Supreme Court has once again shown that they are a handpicked bunch of worthless shit,” one user wrote.

The Supreme Court ruling came amid an ongoing debate over ways to curb gun violence following the Uvalde school shooting. On May 24, a deadly massacre occurred at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde when 18-year-old Salvador Ramos barricaded himself in a classroom and massacred 19 students and two teachers. The police faced harsh criticism for allegedly not stopping the shooting quickly enough and arriving in time to rescue the victims. Ramos was shot and killed by an off-duty Customs and Border Protection agent from an elite tactical unit.