> "Nowhere else in America, save for NJ, IL, and DC, is it unusual for someone walking down the streets to be in possession of a firearm." Right, so we've esta

> "Nowhere else in America, save for NJ, IL, and DC, is it unusual for someone walking down the streets to be in possession of a firearm." Right, so we've established that legal firearm ownership is vastly outnumbered by illegal firearm ownership in the above places, and that seeing a legal firearm on the street is in fact extremely rare. So... you live in an area where there is a substantial known presence of illegal guns, that isn't balanced by a substantial ownership of legal guns. When you see a gun, how is it not at all suspicious? I do not see your conclusion as a logical extension of constitutional principles, it seems more informed by your own stance re: gun ownership. The constitution grants the right to search upon reasonable suspicion - I'm unsure how a gun's appearance in a place where there are almost no legal ones fails that bar. Whether or not NY should have such strict gun laws is an entirely separate debate - as it stands it seems perfectly reasonable for the presence of a gun to be suspicious.