NYC Lawmaker Wants Mental Health Evaluation Before Gun Purchases

The state of New York already requires every gun owner in the state to obtain a permit before they can even possess a pistol in their home, but now a lawmaker from the Bronx wants to add a host of new hoops to jump through in order for New Yorkers to purchase any firearm, including a mental health evaluation (paid for by the prospective buyer, of course). 

Assembly Bill A360 isn’t exactly new; similar legislation has been introduced in the legislature every session for the past five years, according to North Country This Week reporter Jeff Chudzinski, but with Democrats in Albany doubling down on their post-Bruen controls, Assembly member Chantel Jackson’s bill could easily become a top priority for lawmakers this session. 

Jackson’s bill includes a myriad of requirements to purchase a firearm, including a five-hour gun safety course and exam, passing a shooting range test with 90% accuracy, providing notarized proof of a passed drug test, a mental health evaluation, providing proof of purchase of firearm and ammunition safe storage depositories and passing a criminal background check, according to the bill.

Mental health issues that would disqualify an applicant include those who have had a guardian appointed for them pursuant to any provisions of state law based on the determination of “subnormal intelligence, mental illness, incompetency, incapacity, condition or disease, [he or she lacks] THEY LACK the mental capacity to contract or manage [his or her] THEIR own affairs,” the bills states.

Applicants must also submit to an investigation with law enforcement, including fingerprinting, to access records through the Office of the Department of Mental Hygiene to ensure no previous or present mental health conditions are present and would disqualify the applicant prior to a psychological examination, the bill states.

Purchases must also pass a shooting exam with 90% accuracy “using the type of firearm they anticipate purchasing, possessing or acquiring.”

Ever since the Supreme Court held in Bruen that “shall issue” licensing regimes were presumptively constitutional, anti-gun lawmakers across the country have been imposing new requirements on those trying to exercise their right to keep and bear arms, but Jackson’s bill is the most restrictive that I’ve seen to date. The live-fire mandate alone would greatly curtail the number of New York City residents who could buy a firearm, simply because of a lack of access to nearby ranges where they could prove their proficiency with the gun of their choosing. 

That’s no doubt a feature, not a bug, for Jackson and other backers of A360. And even for those New Yorkers who do have a nearby range, by requiring them to be 90% accurate shooting a firearm that they have little-to-no experience with, Jackson is clearly intending to make it as difficult as possible to exercise our Second Amendment rights. 

Critics have already called the measure “foolish” online, noting that first time purchasers are placed at a distinct disadvantage with the testing requirements due to a lack of experience.

Another major point of contention among hunters is language that would require those purchasing a hunting license to now provide proof they are not an “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance as defined in section 21 U.S.C 802 and has notarized proof of a passed drug test by a licensed physician.

Marijuana is legal both medically and recreationally in New York City, but the bill makes no exceptions for cannabis in the mandated drug test. In fact, it’s unclear whether prescription drugs like anti-depressants would disqualify an applicant, especially given the mandated psychological evaluation that would-be gun owners would have to pay for as part of their permit application. 

Under A360, applicants would have to “provide notarized proof of a passed mental health evaluation by a licensed physician”, but the legislation gives those doctors virtually unfettered discretion to decide whether someone should be able to own a gun. An applicant receiving treatment for depression or even someone who’s regularly seeing a therapist could be deemed unsuitable to possess a firearm under the broad language of Jackson’s bill, which would undoubtably steer some applicants away from seeking help because of the impact it would have on their Second Amendment rights. 

I’ve been open about the fact that I’ve been talking to a grief counselor since my wife died in January, but if I lived in New York and A360 was the law of the land there is no way I’d open myself up to being stripped of my 2A rights by working through my grief with a licensed therapist. This bill isn’t just blatantly unconstitutional. It’s downright dangerous, and only stigmatizes those who are proactive about addressing their mental health. 

The good news is that for now, anyway, A360 hasn’t seen any movement since it was introduced in late January. The bad news is that the Democrats could decide to prioritize Jackson’s bill at any time, and given their dominance of the statehouse in Albany, A360 could easily become law this session. If Gov. Kathy Hochul does sign the legislation it would face an immediate court challenge, of course, but there’s no guarantee that the law would be blocked before doing irreparable harm to the Second Amendment… and to those New Yorkers trying to exercise a fundamental civil right.