The state of New York knew that Bruen was going to go against them. Everyone knew, really.
So, they did what you’d expect them to do. They created new laws that they figured would create new restrictions but skirt Bruen’s ruling.
Yet this measure was rushed. They didn’t think all the way through what they were doing. How do we know this? Because, apparently, they didn’t know what constituted Times Square.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s strikedown of New York state’s concealed carry law in late June unleashed an immediate fury of fiercely divided reactions. Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul signed, in short order, a state law to preserve some firearms limits, especially in “sensitive areas,” in the wake of that ruling. Times Square quickly emerged as a hot button of the debate.
More than two months later, it very much remains a focus in New York City.
Should the entirety of the Crossroads of the World be considered a “sensitive area,” meaning it could have special concealed carry rules, under the new law? That’s what the language indicated in Hochul’s bill. But it begs another question. If all of Times Square is “a sensitive area,” what exactly is Times Square? Defining the borders becomes a critical task from a legal perspective in the gun control fight, and that’s the topic that headlined a New York City Council meeting on Tuesday.
Now, Cam touched on the City Council’s discussion already, and I’m not about to get into that.
However, the fact that lawmakers apparently didn’t know what exactly made up one of the most famous landmarks in their state is particularly telling to me.
You see, state legislators knew good and well that they were going to lose the case, as I’ve already said, so they panicked. They figured they had to create a law immediately, otherwise people might just start being able to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
You know New York couldn’t allow that to happen.
So, they cobbled together what they figured they could and rushed it through, but with vague definitions of somewhere like Times Square or banning pretty much all carry in an entire town.
It’s easy to say that they meant to do this, and to some extent, you’re right. However, I don’t think they meant to be this slapdash about it. After all, some of this oversights may well be enough to get the new carry law struck down on its own.
As a result, the law will go into effect on Thursday and the evidence of how little care was given in crafting this law will be plain for all to see.
New York was determined not to let people exercise their gun rights in any way, so they’ve done as much as they could to restrict it, yet in so doing they failed to actually make a law that’s sound even by the preferred metrics of the average anti-gunner.
On the upside, the dumber they write the laws, the more the future court decisions will cover when they’re overturned.