John Deloca, owner of Seneca Sporting Range, prepares to load...

John Deloca, owner of Seneca Sporting Range, prepares to load bullets in his 9mm semiautomatic handgun for a shooting demonstration at his gun range, Thursday, in New York.  Credit: AP/Bebeto Matthews

Reactions to ruling on NY gun law

I find it both disturbing and hypocritical that the same people who benefit by armed protection are so adamant about denying that right to the rest of us [“Supreme Court strikes down NY gun law,” News, June 24].

New York City Mayor Eric Adams, a retired police officer, continues to enjoy his “privilege” of unrestricted concealed carry. Gov. Kathy Hochul can easily obtain an unrestricted concealed carry license. And both are protected by several folks carrying guns.

The inconvenient and largely ignored truth regarding the Supreme Court decision is that nothing has changed regarding concealed carry licensing requirements. The vetting is on par with that of a police candidate.

Candidates are screened for mental health issues, drug abuse, criminal history, moral character and good behavior. Even family members are questioned and screened.

I am confident that we will not see an increase in gun violence caused by people who have gone through such a stringent vetting process.

It’s time for these political hypocrites to stop speculating on what they think might happen, and focus on reducing crime that has risen out of control since they and their predecessors have been in charge.

 — Vincent Cristiano, Ronkonkoma


The decision by the Supreme Court allows honest gun owners to carry a gun. It would not impact anything other than their protecting themselves. The illegal guns will be carried regardless of how many laws change. To say that New York will be more unsafe is far from the truth, especially since they would be getting the proper permits to carry it.

 — Karl Wilhelm, West BabyLon

So what we have already known has now become official. The Supreme Court has joined Congress as a useful tool for the National Rifle Association.

 — Jerry Giammatteo, Sayville

The statement by Justice Stephen Breyer that the new ruling “ignores significant dangers” and is a “leading cause of death” suggests he is not applying the law as written. Does he realize armed law-abiding citizens could prevent those dangers and deaths? Activism from the bench is noble but wrong. Let me defend myself.

 — Anthony Bordano,  Middle Village

WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO JOIN OUR DAILY CONVERSATION. Email your opinion on the issues of the day to Submissions should be no more than 200 words. Please provide your full name, hometown, phone numbers and any relevant expertise or affiliation. Include the headline and date of the article you are responding to. Letters become the property of Newsday and are edited for all media. Due to volume, readers are limited to one letter in print every 45 days. Published letters reflect the ratio received on each topic.