Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf
Page Number: 72

Cite as:  597 U. S. ____ (2022) 

3 

ALITO, J., concurring 

this case.  How many of the cases involving the use of a gun
in  a  domestic  dispute  occur  outside  the  home,  and  how
many are prevented by laws like New York’s? 

The  dissent  cites  statistics  on  children  and  adolescents 
killed by guns, see post, at 1, 4, but what does this have to 
do  with  the  question  whether  an  adult  who  is  licensed  to 
possess a handgun may be prohibited from carrying it out-
side the home?  Our decision, as noted, does not expand the 
categories of people who may lawfully possess a gun, and 
federal law generally forbids the possession of a handgun 
by  a  person  who  is  under  the  age  of  18,  18  U. S. C. 
§§922(x)(2)–(5), and bars the sale of a handgun to anyone
under the age of 21, §§922(b)(1), (c)(1).1 

The  dissent  cites  the  large  number  of  guns  in  private
hands—nearly  400  million—but  it  does  not  explain  what
this statistic has to do with the question whether a person 
who already has the right to keep a gun in the home for self-

—————— 

1 The dissent makes no effort to explain the relevance of most of the
incidents  and  statistics  cited  in  its  introductory  section  (post,  at  1–8) 
(opinion of BREYER, J.).  Instead, it points to studies (summarized later
in its opinion) regarding the effects of “shall issue” licensing regimes on
rates of homicide and other violent crimes.  I note only that the dissent’s 
presentation  of  such  studies  is  one-sided.  See  RAND  Corporation,  Ef-
fects  of  Concealed-Carry  Laws  on  Violent  Crime 
(Apr.  22, 
2022), https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/concealed-
carry/violent-crime-html;  see  also  Brief  for  William  English  et  al.  as 
Amici Curiae 3 (“The overwhelming weight of statistical analysis on the 
effects of [right-to-carry] laws on violent crime concludes that RTC laws
do  not  result  in  any  statistically  significant  increase  in  violent  crime 
rates”);  Brief  for  Arizona  et al.  as  Amici  Curiae  12  (“[P]opulation-level
data on licensed carry is extensive, and the weight of the evidence con-
firms that objective, non-discriminatory licensed-carry laws have two re-
sults:  (1)  statistically  significant  reductions  in  some  types  of  violent 
crime, or (2) no statistically significant effect on overall violent crime”); 
Brief for Law Enforcement Groups et al. as Amici Curiae 12 (“[O]ver the
period 1991–2019 the inventory of firearms more than doubled; the num-
ber of concealed carry permits increased by at least sevenfold,” but “mur-
der rates fell by almost half, from 9.8 per 100,000 people in 1991 to 5.0 
per 100,000 in 2019” and “[v]iolent crimes plummeted by over half ”).