State and local policy frameworks and implementation

Government - Policy

GUN CONTROL in NEW YORK CITY Introduction:

Gun control has been a very controversial issue in American society since the enactment of state and local restrictions against gun ownership by private citizens.

According to proponents of private gun ownership, the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution specifically guarantees the rights of citizens to bear arms.

Conversely, gun control regulation advocates maintain that the only right granted by the Second Amendment is the right of individual states to maintain armed militias, such as state national guards and police forces.

That particular argument suggests that the original motivation for the proposal of the Second Amendment related to the concerns of the anti-federalists during the constitutional ratification period of American history. Those concerns were primarily that the individual states never be disarmed by the federal government and not the rights of individual citizens to possess firearms. Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a potentially pivotal decision in the Heller case, striking down the prohibition in the District of Columbia against private firearm ownership. The implications of Heller include likely challenges in other states like New York, particularly in the New York City, where private gun ownership has been effectively prohibited since 1976.

Gun Control in New York City: Prior to 1976 private citizens in New York City were required to register guns with the city. In 1976, New York City stopped registering guns for private citizens, enacting very stringent requirements instead that operate in fact, if not in law, as an outright ban against guns for New York City residents. At that time, New York City was plagued with one of the highest crime rates in the country with one of the highest rates of violent crime, crimes effected through the use of firearms, and shootings of police officers.

As a result, the Koch administration enjoyed considerable support for restrictions on firearm ownership in the community. Traditionally, New York City has been considered a liberal city on the spectrum of political orientation, which likely accounted for the relative lack of opposition to gun control measures at the time. By contrast, similar proposals in traditionally more conservative states would have inspired considerably more opposition by virtue of social norms that pertained to gun ownership.

The combination of high crime and lack of a traditional emphasis on gun ownership in New York as compared with other American States both contributed to the relative ease with which New York City enacted the administrative codes of 1976 that, in effect, banned gun ownership by private citizens throughout all five counties of New York City.

Specifically, those administrative codes replaced the former registration requirements by a mandatory gun license application. However, the procedure for complying with those new requirements were so stringent and difficult to satisfy that legal gun ownership became all but impossible for New York City residents. Since 1976, New York City residents who wish to obtain a gun license must apply in person at NYPD headquarters Licensing Division in lower Manhattan and furnish a non-refundable fee of $340. That license must be renewed at the same cost every three years. More importantly, the application process requires extensive background checks and personal interviews that go far beyond the reasonable degree of detail in comparison with the requirements of obtaining a firearm license in other states. Ultimately, gun license applications are virtually always denied in new York City, even to private citizens with no criminal history who are perfectly eligible to own firearms under the laws of other states.

Generally, it is common knowledge in New York City that applying for a handgun permit is futile except for highly politically connected individuals, those whose occupations involve regularly transporting large amounts of cash or valuables (such as jewelers and owners of cash businesses),.and high profile individuals with a history of documented threats against their personal safety. Last week, the Supreme Court decision in Heller may have framed a challenge to these administrative laws that, in practice, operate as a ban on private gun ownership.

Implications of Heller:

The Heller case ruled that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does indeed grant a right to private citizens, rather than just to organized state militias, to own firearms. He Court acknowledged the right of states to require compliance with reasonable administrative policies limiting who may legally possess a firearm, but ruled that outright bans, such as those in the District of Columbia that prohibited gun ownership outright indeed violate the Second Amendment.