New York City has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world. In a nation that has the Second Amendment, that’s saying something. Yet, it’s true.

None of that appears to have been enough to prevent a horrible tragedy in a New York subway station on Tuesday, however.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams, however, thinks we need a national response to his local issue.

Democratic New York City Mayor Eric Adams called for a national response on gun control Tuesday following a shooting in a Brooklyn subway station.

…

“Every day I wake up to protect this city, and they have trusted me as their mayor,” Adams told CNN host Alisyn Camerota following the shooting.

“And I have trust in the professionals that are carrying out the job of ensuring that our city is safe. And they’re doing that every day. They’re putting their lives on the line to remove dangerous people off our streets and dangerous weapons off our streets, and we know we’re going to get crime under control,” Adams continued.

Adams went on to say that “the problem we’re facing is a problem that is hitting our entire nation right now,” which he said merits “a national response” on the issue of gun violence.

Do we, though?

Look, right now, all we have is someone identified as a suspect. We don’t know much about his background other than what he’s admitted to on YouTube. We don’t know how he got a gun. We don’t know a lot of things.

As such, it seems a little premature to try to have “a national response” after a situation that happened in the most gun-controlled city in the nation until we have some actual answers.

Then again, answers may not benefit the anti-Second Amendment agenda Adams may hope to advance. After all, if gun control in New York City failed, people might start to recognize that gun control doesn’t actually work.

Restrictions like you find in the Big Apple are touted as absolutely essential to preventing crime, yet the attacks on Tuesday illustrate they really can’t.

Instead, all they manage to do is inhibit law-abiding New Yorkers, keeping them from being armed at a time when it might have been pretty damn handy for them to have been so.

But maybe I’m wrong. It does kind of look like this is just the springboard Adams is using to address the broader issue of so-called gun violence in the city. Of course, if that’s the case, my other point stands. Gun control is the norm there and still violent crime is soaring.

The truth of the matter is that there’s no need for any national response regarding firearms. Is something needed? Yes. No one can look at the murder rate shooting up over the last couple of years and think anything else. It’s quite obvious that something has gone seriously wrong and that most definitely needs to be addressed.

Yet restricting the right to keep and bear arms sure ain’t it.