New York state is never going to be confused with being a pro-gun state. They don’t like guns and if you ask people about it, they’ll tell you their issue is really with gun crime. Yet it seems that doesn’t apply when you start talking about bail.
See, over the last year or so, there have been lots of different reforms passed in various states that seek to address the criminal justice system. Among those have been bail reform.
But guns are still bad in New York, right?
Well, it seems that they were only bad when good guys want them.
Sen. Elijah Reichlin-Melnick, D-New City, has introduced S.7259 in the Senate. It adds to the list of bail-qualifying offense instances where someone is charged with a crime that involves the use of a machine gun, firearm silencer, firearm, rifle, shotgun, disguised gun, ghost gun or assault weapon for felony court.
“The legislature recently enacted a series of changes to the bail reform measures that were enacted in 2019,” Reichlin-Melnick said in his legislative justification. “The changes were reasonable measures designed to maintain the core components of reform while recognizing the need to provide at least some flexibility when certain criminal violations are at issue. This bill builds on those efforts by adding certain firearm offenses to the list of offenses that qualify for bail.”
Lastly, S.7259 would allow someone to be charged and turned over to the county sheriff if a judge has reasonable cause to believe someone committed a crime that involved the use of a gun.
Now, this article assumes you closely followed New York state laws, which it really shouldn’t. Even if people live in New York their whole lives, they probably don’t pay that much attention to state laws unless there’s a reason for them to believe it’ll impact them.
My understanding is that under previous bail reform, these violation of these gun laws allowed violators to be put right back out on the streets. This in an era when the lawmakers who passed that also treat gun ownership as the greatest scourge imaginable.
Honestly, I find it laughable.
It seems New York found that putting people right back out on the streets who committed a “gun crime” may not necessarily reduce violent crime and might, in fact, make it worse. Why the anti-gun brain trust in Albany didn’t see this coming is beyond me. You’d think they’d have made sure violators with guns would get extra punishment or something.
However, that’s not the leanings these days. California, for example, is trying to remove sentencing enhancements for “gun crimes” while also treating law-abiding citizens who want to own guns as if they’re criminals. New York was doing the same thing.
Don’t get me wrong, a violent crime is a violent crime and it isn’t somehow better to have a loved one stabbed to death versus them being shot to death, so the crimes shouldn’t be treated differently.
Yet these lawmakers don’t believe that. We know that based on their stances on gun control. They think guns are worse, and yet they’ve gone and made it easier for the criminals who use them while also trying to continue to make it difficult for law-abiding citizens.
Consistency isn’t their strong point, is it?