New York governor calls for national gun control in eulogy for aide

[branford]

22. I, too, would have no general objections to national-level safety and training certifications.

However, on the flip-side, I would only agree to it on the condition that (i) it wasn't so onerous and/or expensive as to be a stealth means of making firearm ownership too costly or expensive for most people, rather than actually for safety, (ii) it was part of an objective "shall issue" instead of "may issue" permitting and carrying process, and (iii) if certification was national, then any license was national and thus applicable to all states and localities (i.e., full concealed carry reciprocity).

In fact, I would support most laws that actually have the realistic potential to improve firearm "safety." Sadly, most "safety" proposals have little to do with actual safety, and everything to do with control and ever-increasing incremental restrictions in the vain hope of eliminating "gun culture," and turning the USA into something closer to Japan or Australia. If the intent is social engineering or policies that have already proven useless like "assault weapon" bans and magazine limits, I will strongly oppose them.

https://archive.org/stream/NijGunPolicyMemo/nij-gun-policy-memo_djvu.txt

You also earlier stated that firearms "have no business being carried in populated areas without a darn good reason," but then also state, "obviously, some people are targets of criminals and predators, either because of their work, their life style, or they have been subjected to open threats or domestic abuse."

First, as a matter of law, there's no geographic or urban exception to the Second Amendment or any other constitutional rights.

Further, as you appear to acknowledge and crime statistics unequivocally prove, both the absolute and per capita number of "criminals and predators" are highest in denser urban areas. Therefore, the need to potentially defend oneself is greatest in the areas where you appear to want the most severe restrictions. This is all the more puzzling since the rate of crime of those who lawfully own firearms is demonstrably lower than the general population.

Going by the data, you should focus not on laws to restrict firearm ownership, whether urban or rural, on a segment of the population that is statistically law-abiding and peaceful, but rather on policies to reduce the number of illegal guns on the street or deter and punish those who use weapon illegally. I would first suggest actually enforcing the already existing laws prohibiting straw purchases and increasing sentences for crimes committed with firearms.