Home » Archives for December 2012
In
a unanimous decision, the Second Circuit held that it is not unconstitutional
for New York to require applicant seeking a gun permit to show proper cause or
a heightened need for special protection in comparison to the general public.
In Kachalsky, et al. v. Cacace, et al., five residents from
Westchester County were denied gun permits because they failed to meet this
“heightened need” standard.
The Second Amendment right to
bear arms is not an unlimited right.
The Supreme Court reaffirmed this notion in District
of Columbia v. Heller where it confined one’s possession right to the home.
Gun possession outside of the home, however, is a completely different matter.
The Second Circuit’s unanimous
decision in this case emphasized the public safety concerns New York’s
heightened-need standard is meant to protect. Residents are not prevented from
obtaining a handgun – one may still obtain a permit for hunting purposes. The
only caveat is that those who wish to carry a handgun in public must demonstrate their need for self-protection.
While states may not outright
ban possession of a concealed weapon, it is not unconstitutional to regulate
use when it is clear that public safety considerations clearly outweigh one’s
subjective need for self-defense.
Residents
in California, New Jersey, and Maryland are also challenging licensing laws,
respectively. It should be interesting to see how the Courts rule, and if the
Supreme Court grants certiorari on any of these cases. It does seem that there is broad support for
such laws, as criminal justice advocates and law enforcement officials both
advocate for more restrictive gun laws.
However, many criminal lawyers in NYC are not supportive of laws
that will criminalize what they feel are reasonable attempts to possess a
weapon. Some criminal lawyers in Queens and other high-crime boroughs are further discouraged that such restrictive
laws only push individuals who desire to own a weapon to turn to the black
market for their purchase.
