WASHINGTON–The United States Supreme Court says you do not have to demonstrate a specific threat to your person to carry a gun for self defense.
The 6-3 ruling may affect laws in eight states that give the government a right to determine who can and who can’t carry a gun.
“In this case, petitioners and respondents agree that ordinary, law-abiding citizens have a similar right to carry handguns publicly for their self-defense. We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home,” said Justice Clarence Thomas in the Court’s opinion.
“Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State’s licensing regime violates the Constitution,” he said.
Indiana gun rights attorney Guy Relford called the ruling on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, a win for gun rights advocates.
“The Supreme Court has struck that down (the permit discretion), saying we have a Constitutionally-protected right to bear arms outside the home. That’s the first time they’ve ruled directly on that point,” he said. “They did it by inference in a 2008 decision. But, here they’re being very specific about it.”
Relford said the decision essentially says you do not have to demonstrate a need to exercise a Constitutionally-protected freedom.
“So, they struck down this New York law. There are eight states that have these similar what we call ‘may-issue’ systems of licenses where they can ponder whether you have a particularized need above the general population. Those are all gonna fall by virtue of this opinion,” said Relford on WIBC’s Kendall and Casey Show.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams, at a press conference Thursday afternoon, said he believes the decision makes all New Yorkers less safe.
“The decision ignore the shocking crisis of gun violence…engulfing not only New York, but engulfing our entire country,” he said.
Adams, a former cop, noted that the decision does not change anything immediately, but said when changes do happen his city will work with federal authorities to find ways to continue to keep people safe.
“The opinion claims to be based on the nation’s historical past, but does not account for the reality of today. It ignores the presence and it endangers our future,” he said.
No laws in Indiana are expected to change because of the ruling.
