Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich joined with 23 of his counterparts across the country on Tuesday to argue to the U.S. Supreme Court that allowing law-abiding citizens to carry firearms in self-defense outside the home respects their fundamental rights and deters violent crime.
The amici curiae brief co-written by Brnovich’s office and the Missouri Attorney General’s Office asks the Justices are asked to grant review of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Corlett in order “to restore the original public meaning of the Second Amendment.”
A separate amici curiae brief was filed by a number of firearms rights groups and law enforcement organization including the National Association of Chiefs of Police and the Western States Sheriffs’ Association.
Arizona is one of 42 states which utilize objective-issue permitting, also known as “Shall Issue” permitting, in which specific, objective criteria is involved in determining whether an applicant is issued certain firearm permits. The criteria can include items such as background check, mental health records check, fingerprinting, knowledge of applicable laws, and firearms training.
However, New York utilizes a more restrictive permitting process known as subjective-issue, in which an applicant must not only meet certain objective criteria but also “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.”
The amici brief argues that New York’s permitting process infringes on a citizen’s Second Amendment right to bear arms in self-defense outside the home. The brief also cites empirical evidence from the U.S. Department of Justice Department which demonstrates subjective-issue permitting decreases safety and deprives citizens of means to defend themselves from crime.
“Our constitution recognizes self-defense as a fundamental right and respects the essential role firearms can play in keeping ourselves and our families safe,” Brnovich said in announcing the brief. “We hope the Supreme Court will hear this case and clarify the extent to which law-abiding citizens may exercise their right to keep and bear arms outside of their homes.”
Among the empirical evidence cited in the brief is that holders of concealed carry permits are less likely to commit criminal offenses than other citizens. And that victims of crime who resist with a gun “are less likely to suffer serious injury than victims who either resist in other ways or offer no resistance at all.”
“The safety advantage of carrying a firearm is even more pronounced for women: Women are 2.5 times more likely to suffer a serious injury if they offer no resistance to a criminal attacker (as compared to women who resist with a gun), and 4 times more likely to suffer injury if they resist without a gun,” according to the brief.
The amicus brief was filed on behalf of the states of Arizona, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia.
