Acting Superintendent Steven Nigrelli, speaks during a New York State Police graduation ceremony at the Empire State Plaza Convention Center on Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2022, in Albany, N.Y. The 211th basic school session graduated 218 new troopers. (AP Photo/Hans Pennink)
Previous Post
Next Post

A narrow set of exceptions has been written into New York’s new gun control law, which would allow churches to hire professional armed security. But this is a costly solution, and likely to leave many people still at risk in an attack. More to the point, it does not respect the individual right codified in the Second Amendment—which is the right to defend ourselves, not to be guarded by others.

Apart from licensed guards, the law primarily makes exceptions for current and former police officers, active-duty military, and other government employees to carry guns on religious premises. This is an elitist inversion of the Second Amendment, transforming “the right of the people” into a privilege earned by serving the state.

New York’s “sensitive places” law also ignores—or perhaps intentionally defies—the kind of history and precedent that the Supreme Court declared as decisive in the Bruen ruling.

Far from banning firearms in places of worship, several colonial-era statutes actually required that guns be brought to church. Taking this history as an indication of the Constitution’s original and authentic meaning, it is tough to argue that a total ban on this practice has any legal legitimacy based on historical precedent.

Thankfully, several challenges to New York’s gun control regime are now making their way through the courts—including a lawsuit by the New York State Jewish Gun Club, whose founder says the ban on firearms in places of worship is “unconstitutional on so many levels.” With religious freedom, property rights, and self-defense all at stake, he’s absolutely right.

— Benjamin Mann in New York’s Latest No-good Gun Law

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. New York if ruled against by the court will just tweak the laws. You will be required to get a special permit to carry a gun in the restricted places and they will make the cost very high and take a year or more to process it making the average person give up even trying to get a permit. And they will deny the special permit for the most asinine of reasons.

    New York is an old hand at not obeying the spirit of a law while pretending to honor it.

    • Or states like NY will just ignore SCOTUS. Will the Justice Department under a Democrat president enforce any ruling stemming from Bruen?? Doubtful. Then what??

      • To Johnny

        Good post as that is probably what will happen. The court has no authority to send in storm troopers to New York and if the President refuses to act and send in troops then New York will simply give the finger to the court.

        More than likely New York will just play games tweaking their laws that will go on for years. If more liberal judges are appointed New York then knows that they will never have to obey the court ruling as the new court will just overturn the prior rulings proving the court has now become both a political body and an organization that has zero credibility with the American people.

        The Roe v/s Wade outrageous overturn destroyed all credibility of the court and they just gave the finger to the American people, even when polls proved the overwhelming majority of American people, including most conservatives, believed in a woman’s right to choose and not be a demeaned sex slave like the German Nazi’s did to women under Hitler with their baby farms.

        • Roe v Wade was the Outrageous Decision. The Burger Court created a “right” where none existed, and even the top Liberal Law Scholars called it a bad decision that wouldn’t stand up to review (including Liberal Patron Saint Ruth Bader-Ginsburg).
          Democrats had 50 years, and multiple opportunities to codify Roe into Law. Instead, they ignored the warnings that Roe was a bad decision,, and f**ked around with their other BS agenda, never believing SCOTUS would overturn Roe.
          When you look at the polls, you’ll find that a slight majority of Americans support the Right to an Abortion. It varies depending on the Poll, but roughly somewhere between 48 to 60% support Abortion (just as there’s anywhere from 12 to 28% who have no opinion. The polls get really interesting when the questions asked if abortion is OK up to and including birth. Then the numbers change, once again somewhere between 56 to 68% oppose Late Term Abortion. That’s not a slight majority, it’s a large majority of Americans that are not OK with Late Term Abortions. In a perverse way, Leftards did this to themselves. How? Although Roe did not set a limit, most Abortions across the country were limited to the First Trimester, by Medical consensus at the time of Roe’s decisions. Liberals weren’t happy with that and kept pushing the limits back to the point of zero restrictions, and most Americans (per the polls) aren’t OK with that.
          Abortion, except in the case of Rape, Incest or threat to the mother’s life, is Infantcide, period.

      • Then the rest of the country has precedent to ignore any unconstitutional laws as they are even less binding than the supreme court. NY is playing with fire and will quite likely get played.

    • Washington DC did this. Th courts ruled against them, they made minor changes, the courts ruled against them, etc. it was just so much theater with the intent that the courts and the opposition would just get tired of the whole thing.

    • dacian, The DUNDERHEAD, If NYS loses? they have already lost. Courts don’t issue temporary injunctions when the issue is in doubt.
      If NYS tries to “tweak” the law, they will meet with similar lawsuits. You see SCOTUS issued the Bruen Decision. It is pretty specific as to the permit system that NYS set up. The current law is even more unconstitutional than the first and will be at best gutted in this round. You see, issuing a “special permit” will still deny people the right to self defense. And Bruen was very specific on that point.
      As to sending “stormtroopers”, that won’t be necessary. You see there is this thing called US Marshall’s Service and although they are an arm of the US DOJ, the Federal Courts have used them quite liberally to enforce court decision.
      Even if the Leftists gain a foot hold in the lower courts, there is still SCOTUS.

    • Authority and the responsibility that goes with it is the point – but only if it is exercised rightly and properly.

  2. They have to give LE/Mil carve outs or they lose that support for the gun control legislation. Makes me think of when the NY SAFE law was rammed through, I think it wasn’t clear LE or especially retired LE were exempt from the 7rd mag limit, they had to clarify and get that patched quickly. NY police couldn’t believe they would face the same restrictions as the common civilians!

    • Same thing happens in California. Police officers, prison guards, retired police officers, etc are exempted by the law or a fast amendment to the law. This is to assure support from the police and corrections officer’s unions, unions that hold inordinate sway in California politics. Then again, San Francisco has a mag limit of ten rounds that is applicable to non-duty police officer owned firearms, only allowing large capacity (17 round) mags for duty weapons and only while on duty. I remember talking to a retired police officer who, due to exemptions, was allowed to own and carry 10+ mags, and his comment was that no police officer in San Francisco would ever arrest him for having such mags in his possession while visiting there. [He also felt that he should be exempted from the law prohibiting importation of 10+ mags so that he could get a gun from his out of state son that held more than 10 in the mag. I told him that an ffl could transfer the gun to him, but not the mag, and he was in disbelief.]

  3. In the end, there we will be presented with 2 options. The liberals have pushed us to the point where we are going to have to go with either no, None, zero, gun control laws on almost anyone, anytime, for any reason whatsoever.

    or full gun ban.

    The left is just going to craft endless, knowingly fully unconstitutional, gun control laws and let lawfare be their weapon of choice.

    I’m not sure I like zero gun laws (convicted murderers buying guns for example), but if my choice is that or the “oh, you can buy a gun, as long as its on this pre-approved list, only works on every 3rd tuesday, with a remote off-switch under the control of the police, and social activists, that fires 1 bullet that costs 10,000.00 each and can only be purchased in Provo Utah 3 times a year if its raining”.

    Cause if the left could, they absolutely would want that. For the children.

    • Why would convicted murderers ever be free and able to purchase anything let alone a gun? Yes yes I know why but lets not pretend that isn’t a recent issue.

      • It is a recent issue. Until the latter half of the 20th Century (I don’t recall the year) there were no restrictions on ex-felons obtaining firearms.

        • Was more referring to letting murderers out of prison alive but this is a good point as well and probably only off by a decade or three in when it started.

  4. Surprisingly my daughter was issued her NY permit, premises only (for now), within 6 weeks of filing, despite having filed it days after Bruen and the Govt response left everyone not knowing what to do. One 16 hour class and a few more weeks from full carry. Now, the BAD part was that she had to wait 14 months for an appointment with the County Sheriff to submit the application and be finger-printed. We came close to filing a lawsuit—her daddy is a lawyer, after all—but as a lawyer I also know not to piss in your own bathtub. Anyway, I hoping some of the other SCOTUS cases sink in and that on the next opportunity they hand my State a beat-down, in the mean time we just have to not get frustrated by the hurdles they put before us.

    • If it wasn’t one of the following counties that isn’t too surprising: Albany, Schenectady, Saratoga, Suffolk, Rensselaer and NYC proper. For the normal/less populated areas of NY and oddly enough Buffalo area premise permits go through quickly and often ended up as unrestricted to begin with (judge dependent). Note that some of the above do give unrestricted generally they are just really backed up on applications from Covid let alone our new laws.

  5. Daughter has “ full carry “ in Erie county , ( Buffalo ) my county Monroe has 70k carriers and nobody applies for premise only . Just like nobody follows these new laws or so I’ve been told .

  6. In recent years, New York has become known as the state with the strictest gun control laws in the United States. This is only natural due to its large population and proximity to Washington D.C. Need to check this and get more things for construction.However, the unusual aspect of this gun control legislation is that it was introduced by the state’s elite, who are also some of its wealthiest citizens. It is no secret that politicians have always favored special treatment for themselves and their friends, but this goes even further than one might expect.

  7. It seems to me that any elected politician who knowingly votes to pass a law they know is illegal should be held accountable. Citizens should be able to file charges and it should be treated as a criminal act.

    Given the clarity of the Bruen decision it would seem to me all these Government agencies that are passing laws they know are illegal to circumvent that decision should be held criminally liable.

  8. It was done in Washington, DC. They lost in court, made some little adjustments, lost again, etc. It was all simply a show, and the judges and the other side were supposed to get sick of it.

Comments are closed.