A New York City council member has a new demand for the few gun shops operating inside the five boroughs: posting signs warning customers of the “dangers” of exercising their Second Amendment rights. 

Tomorrow we’re doing something that’s never been done, but will hopefully one day be done everywhere: introducing legislation requiring gun stores to display graphic imagery, in addition to warning signage, that conveys the health dangers of firearm ownership. pic.twitter.com/ZY6Mgm2huX

— Council Member Erik Bottcher (@CMErikBottcher) September 11, 2024

Honestly, my first thought when I saw Bottcher’s tweet was “New York City has gun stores?” I knew about the high end Beretta Gallery on Madison Avenue in midtown Manhattan, but that’s not exactly like popping into your small independent shop or even a Bass Pro or Cabelas. 

As it turns out, there are a few gun shops that haven’t been forced out of doing business in the Big Apple, though not nearly enough for a city with more than 8 million residents. And if Bottcher, who describes himself on the NYC Council website as a “dedicated public servant and activist who has devoted his life to progressive causes”, gets his way, shops like DF Brothers Sports Center in Brooklyn and Olinville Arms in the Bronx will soon be forced to post signage meant to scare customers away. 

Adjacent to a written warning sign, firearm sellers would be required to display a graphic image, which would be designed by @nycHealthy. The graphics could depict scenarios such as a young child reaching for a handgun in an accessible drawer.

— Council Member Erik Bottcher (@CMErikBottcher) September 11, 2024

Now, there are a couple of big differences between the warning labels and graphic images on packs of cigarettes and the signs that Bottcher and anti-gun activists like Cameron Kasky want to impose on FFLs in New York City. Using tobacco products isn’t an enumerated civil right, unlike the right to keep and bear arms. And while there is no positive benefit to using tobacco, there are benefits (as well as risks) that come with owning a firearm. 

But Bottcher and the anti-gunners aren’t interested in helping folks weigh the pros and cons of gun ownership. Their goal is to reduce gun ownership altogether, and if the maze of red tape that would-be gun buyers have to navigate and the exorbitant fees they have to pay aren’t doing the trick then they don’t mind adding a little emotional manipulation to the mix. 

The example that Bottcher gave, by the way, would be a violation of existing New York gun laws, which require gun owners to store their firearms in a safe or use a locking device when they’re not under the owner’s “immediate control”. There’s no exception for those who live alone or adults who don’t have any kids in the home; just a one-size-fits-all policy that every gun owner in the state is supposed to comply with. 

Given the makeup of the New York City Council, I’d say Bottcher’s proposal stands a pretty good chance of being enacted into law (and also subjected to a legal challenge). Will it do anything to reduce crime or save lives in the Big Apple? Not at all. If Bottcher and his colleagues really want to improve public safety, plastering gun shops with graphic images isn’t going to help. Instead, they should be focused on those who are violating New York’s gun laws and pulling the trigger on their illegally-acquired firearms. Going after criminals, not guns, isn’t very “progressive”, however, especially when the real target of these politicians is our fundamental right to keep and bear arms.