Yesterday, the Dominion Post in Morgantown ran an opinion on the recent Supreme Court's decision on New York's gun permitting process. They got it wrong because they did not know the New York permitting process as it is now. The article said that it was not enough for gun owners to just take their guns to the range to shoot, they wanted unlimited carry. Sorry but that was the issue because without the conceal/carry a New Yorker cannot own or take a gun anywhere. New York has two permits: a home permit which when granted allows the person to purchase a handgun and take it to their home or place of business but they cannot carry the gun anywhere else and a conceal/carry permit. With the home permit they are not allowed to take the gun to a range to fire it or even take it between home and work. The gun has to stay at the named place. The conceal/carry permit allows the person to buy and carry a concealed handgun anywhere except New York City unless the permit was issued within the city.
You may ask why I know this, and the reason is simple. I have had a New York carry/conceal pistol permit since I was eighteen years old. The last NY sheriff I talked to to remove some gun registrations told me that my permit was not valid since I did not live in NY anymore. I still have the permit and it probably is not valid since they recalled the issued permits and re-issued them according to my cousin who still lives in NY. My permit grants permission to carry and conceal a handgun in New York except New York City. I would have had to get permission from the NYC Police Commissioner for carry and conceal in the city. I never tried to do this and never had a reason to take a gun to the city. To get my permit I had to submit four character references, five pictures and five sets of fingerprints to the county judge. The reasons for asking for the permit were gun collection, target and hunting. The permit was issued in about one month. Eight years later I ran over my wallet with a lawn mower and chopped up the permit. I asked to have it duplicated and was told that I would have to re-submit an application which I did as for the first one. Again, I was given the new permit which I still have. The second permit still had the NYC restriction.
Apparently, NY has since required a reason of real need of protection to get a permit and just wanting to hunt or shoot at a range is not sufficient. That was what the court case was about. They found that NY was inhibiting citizens from exercising their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms as given in the second amendment. The court did not tell NY that they could not permit gunowners to purchase and carry handguns or do extensive background checks. The opinion piece gave the opinion that you could purchase a handgun in NY but could not conceal it. That is not true. Possession of a handgun in NY without a permit is punishable by fine and imprisonment and the only way a handgun may be purchased legally in NY is with a slip from the Sheriff's office and a valid pistol permit either for home or carry/conceal.
The most interesting thing about this court case is that it took this action to force a state to not prohibit a Constitutional right while at the same time the court removed an abortion right which the Constitution does not grant in any form or amendment. The right to kill is not granted. It is a shame that many are more interested in their personal wishes than trying to abide by our laws and the way in which they can be changed. When a court creates new law without Congressional approval, we have become less of a democracy and more of an autocratic state. It is hopeful and promising that the Supreme Court of the United States of America has returned to the duties they were chosen for. They have started to interpret the Constitution again and not try to add to it or subtract from it,
(30)