Is New York Gun Law More Restrictive Than Necessary?

Gun violence constitutes a public health crisis. By the core principles of federalism, states, New York, retain the power to deal with the crisis. The gun regulations enacted by New York have a real and substantial relation to mitigating gun violence endemic.

The requirement for proper cause asking any license applicant to show a ‘nonspeculative’ need to carry a weapon is not unreasonable or more restrictive than any ordinary public safety law meant to mitigate a crisis.

A license for concealed carry serves the same purpose as the Covid-19 Vaccination Certificate.

Already New York has granted concealed carry licenses to a significant number of applicants who have a proper cause of needing enhanced protection if they personally face a nonspeculative special or unique level of danger.

The state policing system can adequately provide safety and security to residents who have no anomalous need for self-defense without requiring them to carry a deadly weapon. Bearing a gun in public, whether concealed or open carry, puts everyone at risk.

It is only fair that parents and other public members carry on activities without dreading the emergence of a potential active shooter with a concealed weapon hoping to exploit a gathering moment.

Through the substantive due process, New York can prove that Sullivan’s gun law has had a legitimate purpose in ensuring public safety by reducing gun violence.

Sullivan Act is fair and reasonable in all manners of any legitimate institution wishing to protect those who have entrusted their safety to it.

The deprivation of unnecessary or overly exercise of bearing deadly concealed weapons by individuals accessing public places has real and substantial relations in guaranteeing the (ordinary) safety and security that the state can provide.

Besides, there is significant evidence of state granting license where it believes that state policing system might find it difficult to adequately protect high-risk persons (nonspeculative) due to restraint on resources.

It would be costly for the state to assign personal security officers to individuals who face more than average speculated threats of ordinary public members.

Should the Supreme Court strike down the century-old gun law, the court would de facto cripple the state policing system from guaranteeing public safety in most places in New York, which have the most populous locations in the U.S. Most states suffering from gun violence endemic will be left at the mercy of active shooters. This would also put law enforcement officers at risk of being killed or injured in the course of carrying out their duties.

Scientifically Backed Sources That Could Be Relied Upon

American Public Health Association has already shown that the trauma-informed approach is the most effective in understating the root causes of gun violence in society. Rather than blaming gun violence on bad guys, it points out that gun violence results from exposure to numerous risk factors.

This calls for Western societies to stop veering off from formulating policies in accordance with scientific knowledge in social sciences.

This increasing public distrust in science will be costly to average Americans and innocent children who will have to face the consequences of a society encumbered with conspiracies.

Should guns be allowed to proliferate in a society laden with a mental health crisis, extremist views, preference for violent video games, racism, transphobia, homophobia, inculpable dangerous ideologies, and radical partisanship?

If you would like any writing or research assistance, feel free to contact me at

Thank you for reading.



Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Samson Writing

Samson Writing

Passions: Data Science, Writing, Photography & Poetry. Offering writing services. Find me at