Skip to main contentSkip to main content
You have permission to edit this article.
Edit
In honor of Independence Day, Napa Valley Register is providing unlimited access to all of our content from June 28th-July 4th! Presented by Pearson's Appliance
AP

NY leaders vow new gun limits after Supreme Court ruling

  • Updated
  • 0

NEW YORK (AP) — New York's Democratic leaders aim to preserve as many restrictions as possible on carrying a handgun in public after the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down key portions of the state's gun-licensing law.

State and New York City officials are zeroing in on specifying “sensitive locations” where concealed weapons could be forbidden, including a concept that would essentially extend those zones to the entire metropolis. Other options under consideration include adding new conditions to get a handgun permit, such as requiring weapons training.

Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, vowed to call the Democrat-led Legislature back for a special session to pass new rules.

“We have a whole lot of ideas," said Hochul, who said she discussed policy options Thursday with the mayors of the state's six largest cities.

New York City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams, also a Democrat, said state lawmakers should ban people from carrying handguns in any place containing more than 10,000 people per square mile (259 hectares), or anywhere within 1,000 feet of mass transit systems, hospitals, parks, government buildings, schools, churches, cemeteries, banks, theaters bars, libraries, homeless shelters and courts. That would effectively include the whole city.

While it's not yet clear what might come of the discussions, what was clear was the sense of urgency that New York's Democratic leadership feels about retaining some curbs on guns in public places. The officials argue that such restrictions are life-saving: Statistics show the state, and its biggest city, consistently have among the nation’s lowest firearm death rates.

“We are prepared to set an example that will lead the country as to: how do we fight back on this decision?” said New York Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat and a former police officer and gun owner.

“We cannot allow New York to become the Wild West,” he said.

New York, like many other U.S. cities, has contended with rising concern about violent crime, though New York City police statistics show shootings have declined about 12% and murders 13% so far this year, compared with the same period last year. But murders remain at their second-highest level since 2012.

The high court opinion comes shortly after New York state tightened semi-automatic rifle regulations following a May 14 shooting in Buffalo, where a white gunman with such a weapon killed 10 Black people in a racist attack. Officials said the gun was purchased legally, but New York doesn’t allow sales of the ammunition magazines that were used.

As state leaders reacted to Thursday's ruling, Republican Chairman Nick Langworthy said it was “disgusting yet highly predictable” that Hochul and other Democrats "are trying to gin up fear and division over a legal gun owner’s right to protect themselves and their family.”

Rep. Lee Zeldin, a Republican candidate for governor, tweeted that Hochul “better not make her next move on this another assault on law-abiding NYers.”

New York state’s law dates to 1913. It requires people to demonstrate “proper cause” — an actual need to carry the weapon — to get a license to carry a handgun outside their homes.

There are similar standards in a handful of other states, including California, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland and Hawaii.

New York's law did not define what proper cause meant, and it gave local authorities — often police — discretion on whether to issue a license. In practice, that meant most applicants had to show a need that went beyond routine public safety concerns, such as being in a profession that put them at special risk.

In New York City, few people beyond retired law enforcement officers and armed guards could get such a license.

In Thursday's ruling, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, a Supreme Court majority said the New York rules prevented “law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public."

In a concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted that the decision didn't bar states from imposing handgun licensing requirements, such as fingerprinting, mental health records checks, firearms training or prohibitions on carrying the weapons in sensitive places, such as schools and government buildings.

But the majority opinion suggested there were limits to how sweeping the place-based restrictions could be: “There is no historical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a ‘sensitive place’ simply because it is crowded” and policed, Thomas wrote.

Brooklyn Law School professor Bill Araiza said the court “seemed to suggest that it’s certainly OK for governments to restrict carrying guns in sensitive places,” but “poured cold water" on the idea of expansive gun-free zones.

New York City officials insisted that nothing would change immediately, noting that the high court sent the case back to a lower court for further proceedings that could iron out implementation details.

But the decision instantly raised fears among supporters of New York's handgun limits, saying that loosening the rules could create a marketplace for handguns that now barely exists in the state.

New York has among the nation’s lowest rates of firearm deaths, including from suicides: 3.9 deaths per 100,000 people in 2019 and 5.3 deaths per 100,000 people in 2020.

Manhattan, a symbol of urban America, had the lowest rate of gun deaths in the state with 1.7 deaths per 100,000 in 2019, according to the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions.

Columbia Law School professor Jeffrey Fagan, an expert on gun laws, said research indicates that the firearms homicide rate immediately rises in places where restrictions are lifted.

Adams raised the specter of everyday disputes turning into shootouts in New York’s crowded streets and subways. He suggested that police officers would face greater danger, as well as a greater burden of distinguishing between legal and illegal guns in public places.

Some business groups are also concerned. Andrew Rigie of the New York City Hospitality Alliance, a restaurant and nightclub owners’ group, said small businesses should be able to decide what is allowed in their establishments.


Associated Press writers Michelle L. Price, Michael Hill and Jennifer Peltz contributed to this report.

Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

0 Comments

Build your health & fitness knowledge

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Related to this story

Most Popular

The pandemic-era federal aid that made school meals available for free to all public school students — regardless of family income levels — is ending, raising fears about the effects in the upcoming school year for families already struggling with rising food and fuel costs. A bill signed by President Joe Biden over the weekend is intended to allow summer meal distributions to remain widely available for students. It also gives higher reimbursement for meals to schools while providing some flexibilities to help them deal with increasing food prices and supply chain issues. Several states have taken it upon themselves to keep school meals free for all.

California is the first state to guarantee free health care for all low-income immigrants who are living in the country illegally. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a $307.9 billion operating budget on Thursday. It makes all low-income adults eligible for the state's Medicaid program regardless of their immigration status. The move will provide coverage for an additional 714,000 people. It will cost taxpayers about $2.6 billion per year once fully implemented. The Newsom administration has indicated it will take until 2024 to implement the expansion.

The fall of Roe v. Wade shifted the battleground over abortion to courthouses around the country, as abortion foes looked to quickly enact statewide bans and the other side sought to buy more time. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Friday to end constitutional protections for abortion opened the gates for litigation from all sides. Much of Monday's court activity focused on “trigger laws” that were designed to go into effect when Roe v. Wade was overturned. On Monday, judges in Louisiana and Utah issued orders blocking trigger laws from going into effect. In South Carolina, a federal court ruled that a ban on abortions after six weeks of pregnancy can take effect immediately.

The California Assembly has approved a controversial bill allowing Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco to set up places where opioid users could legally inject drugs in supervised settings. The move Thursday follows months of debate. Proponents say it would save lives, while detractors say it would enable drug addiction. The Assembly’s approval sends the bill back to the state Senate for final consideration. The idea is to give people who would use drugs anyway a location to inject them while trained staff are available to help if they suffer accidental overdoses. The move comes amid a national opioid crisis and spike in overdose deaths.

Desperate families of migrants from Mexico and Central America are seeking word of their loved ones as authorities begin identifying 51 people who died after being abandoned in a tractor-trailer without air conditioning in the sweltering Texas heat. It was the deadliest tragedy to claim the lives of migrants smuggled across the border from Mexico. U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas told The Associated Press that the driver of the truck and two other people were arrested. The bodies were discovered Monday afternoon on the outskirts of San Antonio when a city worker heard a cry for help from a truck parked on a lonely back road.

The U.S. Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that had provided a constitutional right to abortion. The June 24 ruling is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states. In anticipation of the decision, several states led by Democrats have taken steps to protect abortion access. The decision also sets up the potential for legal fights between the states over whether providers and those who help women obtain abortions can be sued or prosecuted.

Listen now and subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts | Spotify | RSS Feed | Omny Studio

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.

Topics

News Alerts

Breaking News