What Does The Proposed New York Anti-Second Amendment Mental Health Bill Say?

Opinion
Part Four

Red Flag Mental Health Watch List Mass Murder iStock-1050228748
What Does The Proposed New York Anti-Second Amendment Mental Health Bill Say? iStock-1050228748

New York – -(AmmoLand.com)- The merger of the New York Senate and Assembly bills (S7065) (A01589) , if enacted, would amend several sections of the Consolidated Laws of New York.

Preeminent among the amendments is proposed Section 898 of the General Business Law of New York.

A new proposed subsection of the General Business Law, subsection “1-A” of Section 898 reads:

“Before any sale, exchange, or disposal pursuant to this article, a purchaser of any firearm, rifle, or shotgun shall submit to a mental health evaluation and provide the seller with proof of his or her approval to purchase such firearm, rifle or shotgun pursuant to subdivision (M) of Section 7.09 of the Mental Hygiene Law.”

Proposed Section “2-A” would apply the same standard to anyone who wishes to sell, exchange, or dispose of a firearm, rifle, or shotgun.

Proposed Section 7.09 (M) of New York’s Mental Hygiene Law sets forth the framework for a mental health evaluation:

“The Commissioner shall establish within the Office of Mental Health and administrative process for the mental health evaluation of any individual prior to such individual’s purchase of any firearm, rifle or shotgun. The Commissioner shall promulgate regulations to establish the mental health evaluation process which shall include but not limited to provision relation to: (1) the mental health professionals approved to perform such evaluation, (2) the process for evaluation by such mental health professionals and (3) the development of a standardized form to be used by the Mental Health Professional performing such evaluation to approve or deny an individual for purchase of a firearm, rifle or shotgun. The denial of an individual for purchase of any firearm, rifle or shotgun may be reviewed de novo pursuant to the proceedings under Article Seventy-Eight of the Civil Practice Law and Rules.”

For context, keep in mind that Federal law already addresses the mental health issue relevant to firearms ownership and possession. Federal Penal Code, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), says:

“It shall be unlawful for any person who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.”

Since federal law has long since established mental health criteria apropos of firearms’ ownership and possession, Cuomo’s present New York law mental health reporting requirement is not only unnecessary, it is in conflict with Federal statute.

Moreover, under Article 6, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution, referred to as the “Supremacy Clause,” the “Constitution, and the Laws of the United States . . . shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” This means that the Federal government, when exercising any of powers enumerated in the Constitution, prevails over and preempts any conflicting or inconsistent state exercise of power.

Federal law places clear and very strict parameters around the use of mental health criteria, related to gun ownership and possession, and does so for very important and obvious reasons.

  • First, the diagnosis of mental health conditions is often highly subjective, as much an art as a science, and deciphering the line between serious and non-serious mental health conditions is not and never has been clear-cut. There is a large, amorphous gray area.
  • Second, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, a right that shall not be infringed, as expressly codified the Second Amendment, is a fundamental, immutable, unalienable, and natural right, intrinsic to man’s very being. This means that the Government shall respect the right as sacred and inviolate. The infringement of the Second Amendment’s core is forbidden.

Careful circumspection of Governmental action against it is essential and must be maintained if Governmental intrusion on the exercise of the right of the people to keep and bear arms is to pass rigorous, strict Constitutional scrutiny. The NY Safe mental health reporting requirement and the proposed mental health evaluation bill impermissibly infringe upon the rights and liberties of the American people and also violates the Supremacy Clause of Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution.

To understand how pernicious both the NY Safe mental health reporting requirement and the proposed mental health evaluation bill are, we will drill down into the critical mental health area of both the reporting requirement of the NY Safe Act that has been enacted into law—Section 9.46, Subsection (b) of Article 9 of the Mental Health Law of the Consolidated Laws of New York—and the proposed mental health evaluation requirement, Proposed Section 7.09 (M) of New York’s Mental Hygiene Law. You will come to understand why it is and how it is that the mental health reporting requirement of the NY Safe Act is bad enough, and how it is that, as bad as that reporting requirement is, the proposed addition to the Mental Hygiene Law is substantially worse.

You will see how the proposed bill builds upon the present mental health law affecting New Yorkers who simply wish to exercise their Second Amendment right, tightening the noose on those New Yorkers; for it is in New York’s Mental Hygiene Law that things become both interesting and dire.


Arbalest Quarrel

About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

For more information, visit: www.arbalestquarrel.com.

10 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Heed the Call-up
Heed the Call-up (@daveeckartverizon-net)
1 year ago

So, I gather based on this commentary that police are not exempt? If that is so, they will not legally be allowed to seize firearms from criminals, crime scenes, and the citizenry, without first getting that mental health check. Neither could they seize the arms without forcing criminals and the citizenry to obtain said check also. At crime scenes, since there is no owner present, they would be required to leave the firearms where they were found or be in violation of the law. The most ludicrous part is that the SCOTUS has ruled that under the 5th amendment a… Read more »

Rock
Rock (@rock)
1 year ago

It says Cuomo has to go.

RJL
RJL (@robert-j-lucas)
1 year ago

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
Thomas Jefferson

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
Thomas Jefferson

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
Thomas Jefferson

The other Jim
The other Jim (@the-other-jim)
1 year ago

Agreed. Anyone over 70 who can’t hear or see perfect, the psychologist will say is psychologically unfit to own a gun. If one is on certain medication the psychologist will say is unfit. If you drink a few beers after work the psychologist will say your unfit to own a gun. When the psychologist asks the reason you want to own a gun, the psychologists will write you up as unfit. The list goes on and on; and odds are that psychologist that is judging you will be more fried than you are.

Arizona Don
Arizona Don (@arizona-don)
1 year ago
Reply to  The other Jim

Correct these kind of laws are always abused by people wishing to restrict guns out of existence here in the US or register and then confiscate them. That is no secret to gun owners at least. None gun owners are, for the most part, indifferent about such laws because they, the laws, do not pertain to them. At least for now. Keep one thing in mind however, the goal here is a fundamental transformation into SOCIALISM. Just because Obama is no longer in office do not think for one minute the fundamental transformation promise is dead. It is not! Although… Read more »

CourageousLion
CourageousLion (@wizardkiller)
1 year ago
Reply to  The other Jim

The number one profession in the “medical” field with the most mental issues and suicides…Doctors which includes those in the psychiatric side of the profession.

Finnky
Finnky (@finnks)
1 year ago

What cautious phycologist would ever find anyone fit? If anyone they approved ever commits a crime at any point following the exam – the phycologist would be blamed. Thus they will deny anyone on any pretext. Of course desiring to own a gun is a sign of mental instability and violent tendencies.

StreetSweeper
StreetSweeper (@streetsweeper)
1 year ago

You know it will turn into, “If you want to own a gun you must be mentally defective”.

HoundDogDave
HoundDogDave (@hounddogdave)
1 year ago
Reply to  StreetSweeper

You :”Hey Doc, I just went to buy a gun and they sent me to talk to you first” Doc : “Well it is the law, so let me ask you a few questions and we’ll have you back at the gun shop with your new permission slip.” You : “Okay. Shoot…” Doc :(taking notes #1 seems obsessed with shooting.) “What is your primary reason to want to purchase this gun?” You : “Well I have several reasons, but self defense I guess would be #1 I would have to say..” Doc :(taking notes #2 Paranoia.) “Are you a current… Read more »

CourageousLion
CourageousLion (@wizardkiller)
1 year ago
Reply to  HoundDogDave

Me… well Doc…meet Lucille, she’s not a gun, but she has lots of fun.