Gun Control in New York

¶ … Gun Control in New York State:

The New York State law about gun registration before 1996 required an individual to apply for a handgun permit depending on various factors. This included residence or business permit, hunting and targeting shooting, unrestricted concealed carry, and employment concealed carry. As a result of these requirements, people with any kind of carry permit for gun registration could carry the permit for life until 1997. For several years, there were no reasons to consider changing the laws regarding concealed carry since there were few problems linked with permit holders. However, the need to change these laws and adopt gun control regulations started in earnest during the nineties following the murder of two police officers. This need was characterized by the emergence of various proposals towards gun control laws in New York State. As these proposals became law, gun owners were now required to re-apply for a 5-year permit that made the state to embrace mandatory gun confiscation (Mortellaro par, 11).

Gun Control Laws in America:

One of the major issue attracting huge debates and controversies in America is the relationship between gun legislations and violence or increased crime rates. This controversial issue is complicated by various factors such as urbanization levels, unemployment, alcohol and drug use, demographics, poverty, the extent of gun ownership, and organized crime ("Gun Control in the United States," p.4). The issue is also affected by social and educational policies as well as other criminal justice policies.

The impact of gun laws are usually felt slowly or after several years because these legislations are always phased in gradually. Notably, the gun control laws operate differently in different jurisdictions in the United States because of the variations in enforcement and implementation. The complications in the relationship between gun laws and gun violence may consist of a mutual impact that can be difficult to deconstruct. This is primarily because stricter gun legislations can lessen violence while high levels of gun violence necessitate the tightening of gun laws.

Gun Laws in New York:

While the New York State's Civil Rights Law includes the provision that people's right to keep and bear arms cannot be violated, the state does not have an actual constitutional provision regarding the right to carry arms (Garrett par, 1). Since New York is regarded as a may-issue state, authorities within the state are not obliged by law to provide concealed carry permits to qualified applicants. Therefore, the concealed carry permits are granted based on the discretion of the issuing officer in every county. As arbitrary denials for such permits can be reversed in court, the individual applying for the permit must prove the reason for the wrongful denial of the permit.

In the application for a concealed carry permit, there are several factors that are necessary for the applicant to meet. These factors that determine the qualifications for a permit include a minimum age of 21 years, having a clean criminal record, and being an individual of good moral character. The applicants are also required to show the reason they need to carry the permits such as target shooting, hunting, and self-defense. In addition to conducting a background check, the applicant may be required to successfully complete a handgun safety course in some counties (Garrett par, 3).

There are other differences in gun control laws in New York State including the difference in the cost for a concealed carry permit across counties to approximately $10. Furthermore, the validity of the permits varies across the counties such as New York City where they are valid for three years, five years in other counties, and for life in certain areas in rest of the state. While the New York State's concealed carry permits are honored by other states in America, the state does not honor carry permits from other states except its own.

Provisions of New York State Gun Laws:

Despite of the lack of a real constitutional provision regarding the right to bear arms, there are certain provisions in New York State gun legislation. The first provision is associated with purchase in which there is no requirement for a permit for the purchase of a shotgun or rifle except in New York City. However, a license to bear or own a pistol or revolver is needed to purchase a handgun ("NYS Gun Laws," par, 3). Businesses that sell shotguns, handguns, or rifles are required to sell, deliver, or transfer such guns to another individual with a gun locking device and label on safe storage.

With regards to possession, there is no state license requirement for the ownership of a rifle or shotgun unless the rifle contains barrel(s) exceeding 16 inches in length and the shotgun has barrel(s) beyond 18 inches in length. it's illegal for any individual convicted of felony and other serious crimes to possess a firearm. it's also unlawful for a person deemed as not suitable for a firearm to own a rifle or shotgun. However, a license is required to possess a handgun in a person's home or business place through an application to the county's or city's licensing officer where the individual resides or is employed.

Under the New York State gun laws, the license to own a handgun also acts as a license to carry the handgun unless restricted ("NYS Gun Laws," par, 22). On the contrary, a license to possess or carry a pistol or revolver is effective in the entire state since it's not restricted to the time or place of possession. Notably, an applicant for license to carry outside the residential place must show the actual cause for the provision of the carry license and the requirement for possession. The other important aspect of the New York State gun laws is that the state has few pro-gun provisions except laws that protect gun ranges. Furthermore, open carry of guns is prohibited to an extent that gun owners with carry permits are not allowed to carry loaded shotguns or rifles inside their vehicles (Garrett par, 8).

Stricter Gun Control in New York State:

The New York State has adopted stricter gun control measures through the gun control laws in attempts to lessen gun violence and reduce crime rates. These measures have also been coupled with gun bans since the New York has established a ban on assault weapons. In addition, the state prohibits all magazines with the ability of holding over 10 rounds of ammunition that have been produced since September 1994. This is based on the federal requirement that the manufacturing date be stamped on every large-capacity magazine ended with the 2004 Assault Weapons Ban. However, the ban on large-capacity magazine in New York is difficult to execute because of the difficulty in proving the manufacture of the magazines (Garrett par, 9).

As part of implementing stricter gun control measures and policies, New York is a state that essentially duplicated or copied the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban law. Under the Assault Weapon Ban, the state prohibits possessing, manufacturing, and shipping, transporting, disposing of, and intentionally ruining an assault weapon or a large-capacity ammunition device ("Banning Assault Weapons," p.37). Similar to Massachusetts, the New York State enacted the prohibitions on assault weapon following the adoption of a federal ban on the production and possession of semi-automatic assault weapons. This is unlike other states like California that has fostered its prohibition through the inclusion of extra provisions that are tougher than the federal legislation.

The stricter gun control policies and measures in the New York State have also been evident through particular state cases. For instance, the 2nd United States Court of Appeals in New York discarded a challenge from various residents in Westchester and the Second Amendment Foundation against New York's handgun licensing measures (Baynes, Evans & Eastham, par, 1). The lawsuit was filed because the New York State continues to require residents requiring a concealed handgun in public to apply for a special license.

In this lawsuit, four state court judges, who act as licensing officers were sued by five people who were denied permits on the basis that the handgun licensing scheme in New York violated their right to bear arms based on the Second Amendment of the American Constitution. In their decision, the state licensing officers i.e. The four state court judges denied their applications on the basis that they had failed to prove special need for self-protection (Baynes, Evans & Eastham, par, 7). However, the 2nd Circuit court upheld the decision by the state's licensing law through a unanimous decision by a three-judge panel. They stated that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms for self-protection at home but does not extend to a right for carrying handguns in public.

Through this case, the federal court moved to block efforts by the advocates of the Second Amendment in New York and San Francisco to thwart the state and local government from enforcing restrictive laws on firearms owners (Nimmo par, 1). The feds have used the ruling in the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reaffirm restrictive gun laws since the Second Amendment was not infringed by a law that requires firearm owners to demonstrate proper cause (Nimmo par, 2).

The unanimous decision by the three-judge panel was regarded as a victory for the New York State law, the American constitution, and families throughout New York who are appropriately concerned regarding the plight of gun violence that is a major problem to all communities. There are various groups in the gun industry such as the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Rifle Association have been filing cases against cities and states throughout the country on the basis of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The ruling re-affirming restrictive gun control laws has followed the significant increase in the number of the sale of guns.

Gun Control Laws in Other States:

Generally, crime rates associated with gun violence have increased unusually in the United States unlike other high-income countries. The significant increase in these rates is mainly attributed to the high rate of firearm homicide rate in America to an extent that it's twenty-times higher than those of other high-income nations. Furthermore, this problem is also attributed to the increased prevalence of gun ownership and less restrictive gun legislations (Webster, p.2).

With regards to gun control policies in other states, there has been an emergence of numerous debates that are always geared towards overall arguments regarding the probability of guns to make people safer or less safe. The current gun control laws in various states do not disarm law-abiding citizens aged 21 years but focus on other objectives. The current gun control laws are geared towards defining the conditions that ban individuals from firearm possession and implement laws to ban prohibited individuals from firearm possessions. The other objectives are limiting the carrying of concealed weapons in public and regulating the design of guns to improve personal and public safety.

This trend in gun control laws have also been fueled by the recent decisions by the Supreme Court to overturn laws that prohibit the possession of firearms in Chicago and the District of Columbia (Webster, p.2). In the District of Columbia, the United States Supreme Court made a groundbreaking ruling in the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case. This ruling acted as a model for other courts of appeals in the Second Amendment challenges and lawsuits until the Supreme Court provides further directions.

In the lawsuit, the defendant, Heller, challenged the federal firearms regulations on the basis that the laws violate the Second Amendment. However, the defendant did not adopt a standard of evaluation or establish a mechanism for evaluating Second Amendment lawsuits. In its ruling, the Supreme Court stated that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to carry arms in home for self-protection (Zonar, p.1). Since the ruling overturned regulations that limit the carrying of firearms in public, the District of Columbia has similar gun control policies to the New York State.

The ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in McDonald v. Chicago case complicated the challenges experienced by the local governments in California in attempts to deal with the issue of gun violence in their communities. In this lawsuit, McDonald challenged the firearms registration regulation in Chicago on the grounds of the Second Amendment arguing that the regulation resulted in a total prohibition of firearm possession in the home for self-protection (Weaver, p.2). In its ruling, the court held that the Second Amendment safeguards the right for individuals to possess and carry firearms in the home for self-protection. Therefore, the court stated that a law that bans possession of firearms in the home violates this Second Amendment right (Weaver, p.1).

One of the states with stricter gun control laws is California that strengthened is assault weapons ban by including extra provisions that are stronger than federal legislations. There are other states with different gun control laws from those of the New York State such as Washington where handguns are prohibited. Virginia has enacted a law safeguarding several sales of handguns i.e. A person cannot buy more than a single handgun per month from licensed dealers ("Gun Control in the United States," p.5).

The other notable differences in gun control laws across states are the minimum age for purchase or possession of firearms. While the federal law states that the minimum age for possession of handguns is 18 years, New York State is among states with lower minimum age requirements. Similar to Georgia, Vermont, and Alaska, the minimum age for the possession of a handgun in this state is 16 years while Montana is age 14. On the other hand, there are other states with no regulatory minimum age for possession of a handgun such as Maine, Alabama, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Texas, and Louisiana. In summary, New York is among six states with moderate gun laws while Massachusetts and Hawaii are the two highest-ranking states with stronger gun control laws.

Gun-Free Zones:

The other aspect of gun control laws is the establishment of gun-free zones that are usually known as magnets for mass murder shooters (Kenny par, 1). These zones were established in order to keep criminals with guns but have not served their purpose since they keep law-abiding citizens from themselves in them. While these zones were established on grounds of a lone gunman's shooting storm in Newton's Sandy Hook elementary school, they are invitations to mass murder (Kenny par, 1).

Legislations that establish gun-free zones usually provide a sense of safety to people involved in magical thinking while murderers are not stopped by these zones from a practical view. This is mainly because honest people tend to obey the law and do not need the establishment of these zones. The inability of gun-free zones to keep criminals with guns out originates from the fact that the vulnerability makes certain individuals to feel uncomfortable.

The gun-free zones are based on wrong idea that killers will follow rules and individuals are a greater danger to those around them than the murderers (Reynolds par, 7). In addition to being an insult to honest and law-abiding citizens, the gun-free zones tend to be a deadly measure in fighting crime. The wrong premise for the gun-free zones is evident in the fact that more guns do not necessarily mean more crime. Actually, while gun ownership across the country has increased in the past decade, the rate of crime has generally reduced.

Effect of Stricter Gun Controls on Crime Rates:

The premise with which stricter gun control laws are developed and enforced is that restricting access to firearms would contribute to a decrease in criminal offenses, particularly violent crime. However, other people believe that such attempts have little to no effect on the rates of crime and violate the rights of American citizens to possess guns. This has contributed to the various anecdotal and empirical analyses in this area to either establish or discredit the possibility of a link between the stricter gun control laws and crime rates (Gius, p.1687). The analyses have also been carried out because 66% of murder cases are usually related to firearms, which contribute to concerns on the effect of gun ownership rates on homicide rates.

Generally, gun control laws are usually for the purpose of controlling the kind of firearms that may be purchased and designating qualifications for people who purchase and possess firearm, and limit the safe storage and use of these weapons. Based on this perspective, there is an assumption that fewer guns result in lesser crime and less crime rates (Moorhouse & Wanner, p. 103). There is a two-step link between gun control and the rate of crimes including the effect of gun control on the availability and accessibility of these weapons, especially handguns. The second link is the impact of the prevalence of guns on the occurrence of crimes.