New York Can’t Even Keep Guns Out of Hands of Violent Law Enforcement Officers

New York state has become one of the most anti-gun states in the nation. They were never great about gun laws, but at least in the days before Bruen, there were areas where the laws weren’t completely awful. Their response to losing was to punish everyone, all in a supposed desire to keep people safe.

That’s what they say, of course, but is it true?

The argument is that keeping guns out of criminal hands is what gun control actually does, and that the laws in question do that. Of course, it’s nonsense.

In fact, a piece at the New York Daily News goes into an issue with a peace officer from the City University of New York and a couple of NYPD officers.

When a police officer is killed or wounded, the shock reverberates far beyond the precinct walls. A 2021 shootout that left two NYPD officers wounded when they responded to a domestic violence incident involving a City University of New York (CUNY) peace officer was one such moment.

That tragedy highlighted not only the dangers of domestic violence, but also raised an alarm about long-standing systemic failures in the oversight of state-issued firearms to public safety employees at CUNY that prevailed until that incident five years ago, but which has since mercifully seen the imposition of much needed reforms. Reforms which stretch beyond CUNY’s campuses to all New York State executive branch agencies and authorities.

The facts of the CUNY example are stark. A CUNY peace officer, who carried a state-issued firearm in the course of his duties, used his personal weapon to shoot two NYPD officers who were responding to a domestic disturbance at his home in Queens and was himself ultimately shot and killed. Those NYPD officers — whose bravery prevented an even greater tragedy — were doing exactly what the public expects: protecting a victim of domestic violence. Yet they were met with gunfire.

Our investigation found that the CUNY officer’s behavior prior to the shooting raised multiple red flags — he had a documented history of domestic incidents, and, contrary to regulations, previously brought his state-issued firearm home with him after work and, after a previous NYPD intervention at his home had his personal and CUNY-issued firearm taken for a period of time. CUNY had a patchwork of policies for its armed employees that were lacking in both consistency and enforcement.

And while CUNY provides a prime example — they were not alone — as there has existed no model policy or consistent standards for New York State employees who carried firearms in the course of their official state duties.

Now, let’s understand that “peace officers” is a category of law enforcement officers under New York state law that encompasses varying types of law enforcement officers, such as campus police, but also probation officers and DMV investigators, apparently. They’re cops, but with more limited responsibilities and authority.

Still, for all practical purposes, someone who can arrest a student for breaking some law is a law enforcement officer.

And New York didn’t recognize that one of their peace officers had a history of domestic violence, bringing home his state-issued duty weapon contrary to policy, and even lost access to that weapon for a time? They didn’t see a ticking time bomb in their ranks?

How are they going to keep guns out of the hands of bad people when they literally put a gun in the hands of someone with a concerning history in the first place?

I’m not saying that this should have precluded the individual from owning a firearm in his own right. There aren’t quite enough details to see if he was actually prohibited or not. 

But it sure looks like enough “red flags” to warrant him not having access to a gun issued by the state of New York.

Consider, if you will, that New York will take a gun away from someone who, hypothetically, goes off on the wrong kind of tirade at the Thanksgiving dinner table, but who would never hurt a fly, but they literally handed a gun to someone with a history of “domestic incidents.”

How can they keep criminals disarmed when they’re arming domestic abusers?

Editor’s Note: The radical left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.

Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.