Firearms Owners Against Crime
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Eight days after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down New York’s long-standing—and unconstitutional—requirement to prove “good cause” in order to get a concealed carry permit, Empire State lawmakers quickly created another bureaucratic hindrance to law-abiding citizens by adopting a requirement that permit applicants surrender access to their social media accounts “for a review of their ‘character and conduct’,” according to NPR.
While the Associated Press described the mandate as “a novel strategy to screen applicants for gun permits,” it has infuriated gun rights activists and New York Republicans, who contend it “not only violated the Second Amendment, but also privacy and free speech rights,” according to PBS.
The requirement smacks of something one might expect in the plot of the science fiction movie “Minority Report,” starring Tom Cruise 20 years ago. The purpose of the law, which takes effect in September, is supposed to give authorities a chance to determine whether someone applying for a carry permit has signaled ill intentions. In the Cruise film, authorities launched a project to foretell violent crimes and intervene.
But according to the NPR story, not everyone is on board, including Peter Kehoe, executive director of the New York Sheriff’s Association. He believes the requirement is Second Amendment infringement and more
“I think it would be a constitutional invasion of privacy,” he told NPR.
As explained by NPR, “Increasingly, young men have gone online to drop hints of what’s to come before executing a mass killing, including the gunman who killed 19 children and two teachers at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school.”
But in none of those cases did the murderers apply for a carry permit.
Still, NPR reported ominously, “Officials will scour social accounts for statements suggesting dangerous behavior.” How this “dangerous behavior” is defined is worrisome at best.
“Under the law,” NPR detailed, “applicants have to provide local officials with a list of current and former social media accounts from the previous three years. It will be up to local sheriff’s staff, judges or country clerks to scroll through those profiles as they check whether applicants have made statements suggesting dangerous behavior.
“The law also will require applicants to undergo hours of safety training, prove they’re proficient at shooting, provide four character references and sit for in-person interviews,” the report said.
This is almost certain to attract a federal court challenge. As PBS noted in its report, “But some Republican lawmakers, opposed to tighter restrictions, argued the law violated the constitutional right to bear arms. They predicted it too would end up being overturned.” In the meantime, however, New York gun owners are going to suffer the inconvenience and possible humiliation of having their social media accounts scoured.
And that could create a “slippery slope” environment threatening other rights. According to KPNX, Prof. Adam Scott Wandt, who teaches public policy at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York suggested “the New York law could set a precedent for mandatory disclosure of social media activity for people seeking other types of licenses from the state.”
“I think that what we might have done as a state here in New York is, we may have confirmed their worst fears — that a slippery slope will be created that will slowly reduce their rights to carry guns and allow a bureaucracy to decide, based on unclear criteria, who can have a gun and who cannot,” Wandt reportedly told the station. “Which is exactly what the Supreme Court was trying to avoid.”
But it may not be what anti-gunners are trying to avoid. The fact New York lawmakers scrambled to adopt the legislation, and Gov. Kathy Hochul quickly signed it, only reinforces concerns among gun owners that anti-gun politicians are only doubling down on their efforts to discourage people from exercising their newly-recovered right to bear arms.
That much became evident in neighboring New Jersey, where anti-gun Democrat Gov. Phil Murphy was all smiles when he signed seven gun control measures into law “and vowed to seek even more measures while the state navigates a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision loosening restrictions on carrying a concealed firearm,” according to NJ.com.
“These are not going to be our last words on gun safety,” he stated.
Under the new laws, applicants for a carry permit must receive training. There is also a ban on .50-caliber firearms, and lawsuits against gun makers and retailers may be easier, according to the report.
Murphy defended the legislation as “common-sense” and insisted they “live up to our Jersey values.”
These measures are also likely to face court challenges.
And in Massachusetts, a political dogfight has erupted after the state Attorney General and Executive Office of Public Safety issued a “Joint Advisory Regarding the Massachusetts Firearms Licensing System,” which the Massachusetts Gun Owners’ Action League immediately took to task.
Essentially, the gun rights battle was not settled by the Bruen ruling, but only inflamed as anti-gun-rights politicians furiously refuse to concede any authority to restrict gun owners’ rights.