The Recent Supreme Court Decision on the New York State Gun Law - Saul Roth

Image Credit: Pixabay

By Saul Roth

The Recent Supreme Court Decision on the New York State Gun Law – Saul Roth

The U.S Supreme Court just struck down a New York State law which placed strict limits on carrying guns outside the home, effectively giving all Americans access to concealed carry anywhere they wish within their borders. This has set off an intense debate over whether this will lead towards more violence or less crime rates in different regions across the country.

With this decision, five states are expected to face lawsuits that seek to loosen existing state and federal restrictions. The result will be a wave of new laws in these places as they rewrite their own legislation following suit from the rest who have already decided upon change.

The Second Amendment is clear – it protects the right of Americans to own guns. The court found that this includes handguns for self-defense outside your home, but states can still prohibit them in some locations like schools and government buildings.

Gun rights advocates were thrilled on after a federal appeals court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own guns outside their home. The decision affirms what many believe about how necessary firearm ownership is for self-defense and other purposes.

The case had to do with two men denied the licenses they sought in New York State because, as outlined by state law and according to these individuals’s attorneys “ordinary law-abiding citizens are unable to obtain a license.”

The government cannot force you to justify your actions or why they are legitimate, Justice Thomas wrote.

Gun control has always been an issue that sparks heated debate, but the majority opinion announced a new general standard for restrictions on gun rights. Courts must now rely heavily upon historical assessments when deciding if certain laws are constitutional or not; this means they will take into account what factors were present during periods where those types of regulations existed.

“The court does not say which of these places are or aren’t subject to the First Amendment,” said Justice Breyer in his dissenting opinion. “What about subways, nightclubs and movie theaters? The majority’s decision is inadequate because it fails to address this broader question.”

The Supreme Court has shown willingness to hear cases related the Second Amendment in recent years, but this was not always true.

One of the more interesting things about Supreme Court cases is how they can change based on who sits on the court.

For years, the Second Amendment has been a point of debate among those who believe in its importance and others that say it’s not worth discussing because guns don’t kill people; instead they point fingers at other factors like mental health or gun control laws.