Why New York's new gun law favors the wealthy over the poor

AP Photo/ Rick Bowmer

Democrats like New York Gov. Kathy Hochul often like to frame themselves as champions of the poor. They’ve framed themselves this way for a while and use their support of welfare programs to justify it.

However, a lot of their policies–particularly gun laws–have long favored the wealthy and connected over those with neither money nor relationships with the powerful.

Look at the old permitting system, for example. But that’s over. It’s not an issue anymore, right?

Well, it is for now, at least.

You see, with the new gun laws on the books, guns aren’t allowed inside churches no matter how the church feels about it. Well, sort of.

Federal judge Glenn Suddaby blocked large portions of the law last week, including requirements for licensing and restrictions on where guns can be carried in areas deemed to be sensitive. The injunction takes effect in several days and state officials are appealing. However, Hochul continues to fight, saying on Friday that the law will be upheld despite a legal challenge to the measure.

“The Supreme Court said we could identify sensitive places,” Hochul said during a press conference last week. “One of them has to be a church. They left in place the ability to restrict guns in churches except for a situation where an individual is a hired security guard to protect the individuals in that congregation.”

See, the problem here is that hired security guards are authorized to carry a firearm, but pretty much no one else.

Armed security tends to be expensive, so many churches in many other places have long used volunteers to handle things. Volunteers are free, after all, and so churches with small or poor congregations have been able to protect themselves.

But New York’s law only allows those drawing a paycheck to carry a firearm inside the church.

That costs, you know, money. It means those who cannot afford to pay someone will be without any kind of protection, and small churches are at as much risk as larger or wealthier churches.

Or has everyone forgotten that Sutherland Springs wasn’t exactly a megachurch?

Yet again, gun laws favor wealth over those who don’t have it.

And while this is being addressed in a lawsuit, these rules extend well past the borders of New York. Other states are looking at following their lead with regard to their list of “sensitive” places. That would mean churches throughout the nation may well be made vulnerable through such gun laws.

Poor churches, in particular.

For all their talk of championing the poor, anti-gun lawmakers routinely turn their back on them whenever it’s convenient. They can’t fathom someone wanting to protect their church with volunteers. What good would that do, right?

I mean, White Settlement, TX totally didn’t happen or anything. That was a volunteer security guard who took out a shooter quickly and efficiently.

And in New York, that would have been the scene of a horrific mass shooting because of current gun laws.

But the wealthier churches in places like New York City? They don’t have an issue. They can hire armed security and never even notice it.

Yet why are churches for the Fifth Avenue crowd, such as those of that crowd who attend services, somehow more deserving of protection than those in the rural parts of the state with far less money?

They’re not. Plain and simple.