The Supreme Court and New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett.
In the 2021 term, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case of New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett. This is a Second Amendment case that could have far reaching consequences on carrying guns in America.
The case basically revolves around the right, under the Second Amendment, to carry guns in public for self-defense. Two people who applied for an unrestricted license, in New York state, were denied a license and sued.
Now the Justices will determine whether or not the rights under the Second Amendment can be restricted. The Court’s decision could be very bad for America. Should the Court rule that plaintiff’s rights have been violated, it would potentially affect every gun law in the country. You can bet that the lawsuits will begin flying should this happen. The gun nuts will be frothing at the mouth to get to carry concealed guns in public.
Let’s consider this some. Many times in the aftermath of a mass shooting, someone spouts off about if only someone would have been armed, they could have intervened and stopped the massacre. I’m not buying that line of thought. Look at the Boulder, Colorado, shooting. Ten people died, including a veteran police officer. The large majority of people walking the streets are going to confront the triple F choices in a shooting incident of this type. Flight, fight, or freeze are those choices. Most untrained people will do the last, freeze. That’s perfectly understandable too. The shock of a situation like the Boulder shooting will freeze you while your brain is trying to process what’s happening. In Boulder, police were in a sustained gunfight with the shooter and could not take him down. Police officers are trained to confront violence, to overcome any fear and take action. Yet, the shooter was able to keep up the fight until deciding to peacefully surrender to the police.
Now, imagine yourself inside that store, carrying a concealed firearm. The only training you have is shooting at paper targets, that don’t shoot back. If you overcome your fear and break out of the freeze mode, you pull your gun and do what? Are you going to pull a John Wayne and have a high noon shootout with the bad guy? If you do, consider yourself dead. Are your going to tactically advance on the shooter and take him out? Do you even know how to do that from training, not watching television to give you your “training?” Somehow you get to where you see the bad guy and open fire. Have you considered who you might be endangering with your gunfire? If you miss, who might be hit and possibly killed? What about the bad guy shooting back at you, in which you might get hit and possibly killed by that fire? Think it through, you know the truth. Remember, your adrenaline is going to be pumping my friend.
Now, one BIG question. How are the police going to know YOU aren’t a bad guy and shoot you, possibly killing you? Do you expect the police to politely ask you who you are? Nope, likely you’ll likely be in a situation where police bullets are flying your way too. In dangerous situations the police are trained that everyone is a possible bad guy until proven otherwise, unless they are uniformed police. That’s for their own safety. So, still think you can take down a shooter John Q?
But, let’s look beyond a mass shooting incident to just plain everyday life. The Governor of Tennessee recently signed a bill into law allowing the carrying of concealed firearms without needing a license (Texas is working on the same type of law too). Now, your a police officer on patrol and make contact with a driver and passenger in a traffic stop. You know anyone can now carry a concealed weapon, so how are you going to approach the vehicle? The police I knew and worked with will do so with their gun in their hand. A police officer will be potentially dealing with a gun carrying citizen in any contact with members of the public. Can you blame them? I would pray that those citizens don’t make any move that a police officer would interpret as an act of reaching for a weapon, because you’d likely get a bullet or more for your movement.
Then, I consider having an armed public out there. How many hotheads will decide to handle their anger by pulling out and using their gun to settle disputes? Do you potentially want to die over a parking spot argument, or some other inane issue?
The hardcore Second Amendment believers want just what the Court may decide. They don’t believe in any laws “infringing” on their Second Amendment rights, most of them being of the Republican persuasion. Hopefully you know they’re lying right? They don’t want convicted violent felons to have guns, even if that felon has completed his/her sentence and paid “their debt to society.” Also, they don’t want those who are mentally ill from carrying guns either. After all, they are not in their right minds. Well, unrepentant felons don’t care about laws do they? If they want to they will go armed. As for the mentally ill, since they are not in their right minds they don’t know that they shouldn’t, or can’t, carrying a gun. Plus, if there is no licensing requirement, no one will put them on the radar to stop them from going around armed.
Do these type of laws guarantee our protection? No, they don’t. But, they can cause law-abiding citizens to refrain from unlawful activity. There are no absolute guarantees. Heck, the Boulder shooter was supposedly known to the FBI prior to him killing ten people. Yet, he was legally able to purchase the firearm he used to murder ten people.
I’m a gun owner and I support the Second Amendment. I just do support the belief that the Second Amendment prevents implementing reasonable gun laws, like concealed carry permits for instance.
You shouldn’t believe it either.
Until next time