SCOTUS Strikes Down NY’s “Proper Cause” Handgun Law That Put Its People in More Danger Than It Helped

0
160
Happy Lenses / shutterstock.com

New York is a state known for many things. From the beautiful rolling hills of the Appalachian Mountains to the roar of Niagara Falls, to the number of stars made on Broadway. One thing nobody ever talks about, though, is its moronic laws. They’ve already made any sort of semi-automatic rifle annoying to shoot through their insane ruling about making it impossible to enjoy the weapon.

Yet, their historic law about handguns and making people show “proper cause” to receive a license to conceal carry a pistol is rarely acknowledged by anyone outside of NY. This is also the same license that you need to even own one. So that means on top of the overinflated price, you are also paying to have a piece of paper to even buy one.

“Proper cause” is defined by the state as “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession”. Their base rules are centered around keeping it in the home, being a messenger for a banker, a shopkeeper, or for those who are working inside a correction facility. There is no real “self-defense” reason listed by NY state, and this has been a point of contention with its citizens for years.

The SCOTUS striking this law down finally with a 6-3 vote is a huge step forward for the people of NY, the second amendment, and gun advocates everywhere. With Justice Clarence Thomas writing the ruling, much of it focused on “an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.”

“We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense.”

“There 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…Like Heller, we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis of the full scope of the Second Amendment.”

Justice Thomas hit the nail on the head with this one. This ruling represents a victory for not just the people of NY, but the people of Hawaii, Delaware, Illinois, and many other overly restricted places.

The case originated with the NRA backing after two NY residents were denied unrestricted carry permits. This caused them to sue the licensing officials, and after losing in the lower courts, they filed what was an ultimately successful appeal with the Supreme Court.

However, the decision doesn’t just stop here. This could potentially throw a big wrench in the plans of liberals for these new gun laws. By Justice Thomas placing special emphasis on this story of the gun laws, and on the idea of needing special rules for a constitutionally guaranteed right, it puts these new laws squarely within the crosshairs.

These kinds of laws only make things harder for the law-abiding American people and do little to nothing to help prevent crime. The criminals know this, and they go around them. Hence why so many of their targeted attacks are in gun-free zones, and why there is so little done to stop them. Maybe this ruling will be our first step into a time with far fewer gun attacks.