NYC Uses Recent Subway Shooting to Push For Mass-scale Gun Surveillance

"Surveillance" by Jonathan McIntosh

After the mass shooting that happened on the NYC subway system in April, the city’s officials started considering the implementation of gun detectors on subway entrances, meaning legal gun owners would be prohibited from using the service.

This seems to be the standard liberal procedure when it comes to regulating armaments.

They’re more than willing to infringe on everyone’s Second Amendment rights before actually prosecuting the criminals behind these heinous acts.

“Firearms Prohibited” by mike

Liberal policy invades 2nd Amendment rights

The plan was originally proposed by NYC Mayor Eric Adams, who’s slated to fall in the eyes of the few Republican figures who saw potential in him, due to his past as a police officer.

Unfortunately, while stopping deadly attacks like the recent shootings in NYC is everyone’s top priority, installing and managing these gun detectors is a logistical nightmare in the city.

NYC is already struggling to deal with a lack of police.

Every gun detector requires a human operator to prevent those carrying a firearm from entering the subway system; a lot of the city’s police officers are already tied up in solving and fighting actual crime.

The city already has hundreds of subway stations.

A bare minimum of one detector and one officer at each one of them would cause major disruptions to both the police force and the subway system’s passenger flow.

Out of the fire, into the frying pan

Adams still seems adamant about implementing the devices though, presenting an idea of pop-up “gun control stations.”

This would make it so the subway’s users don’t actually know it’s there, which doesn’t actually do much in the scope of preventing violent crimes.

Aside from being hilariously ineffective, it poses an ethical issue as well.

The moment the city is allowed to screen its citizens for weapons at random, it’s only a matter of time before further invasion of privacy is pushed under the guise of “maintaining safety.”

This kind of argument is commonly used largely due to the fact it’s “well-intentioned.” If left-leaning officials decide your FJB shirt is a threat to public safety, there won’t be much you’ll be able to do about it.

Naturally, this is an extreme example, but not an unlikely one. We’ve seen the left employ ridiculous policies in the name of protection and safety. As their power grows, the line between helpful and abusive has blurred accordingly.

The fact is this: the right to bear arms is protected by the 2nd Amendment.

If anything, it actually enforces safety, rather than putting it at risk, as it’s most commonly illegal gun owners committing these acts of violence.

The world is a dangerous place by nature. If the government kept doing everything in its power to make sure its citizens are safe at all times, we’d all be under lockdown 24/7, for the rest of our lives.