Real accountability on keeping guns safe

When a police officer is killed or injured, the shock reverberates well beyond the walls of the police station. A 2021 shooting that injured two NYPD officers while responding to a domestic violence incident involving a City University of New York (CUNY) peace officer was one of those moments.

This tragedy not only highlighted the dangers of domestic violence, but also raised the alarm about long-standing systemic failures in oversight of state-issued firearms to CUNY public safety employees, which prevailed until this incident five years ago, but which have since, fortunately, seen the imposition of much-needed reforms. Reforms that extend beyond CUNY campuses and extend to all New York State agencies and executive authorities.

The facts of the CUNY example are striking. A CUNY peace officer, who was carrying a state-issued firearm in the line of duty, used his personal weapon to shoot two NYPD officers who were responding to a domestic dispute at his home in Queens and was ultimately shot and killed. These NYPD officers – whose courage prevented an even greater tragedy – were doing exactly what the public expects: protecting a victim of domestic violence. However, they were greeted by gunfire.

Our investigation revealed that the CUNY officer’s behavior before the shooting raised several red flags: He had a documented history of domestic incidents and, contrary to regulations, he had previously taken his state-issued firearm home after work and, after a previous NYPD raid on his home, both his personal and CUNY-issued firearms were confiscated for a period of time. CUNY had a patchwork of policies for its armed employees that lacked both consistency and enforcement.

And while CUNY provides an excellent example – they were not alone – there is no model policy or consistent standard for New York State employees who carried firearms while performing their official state duties.

While the New York State Police and other police departments operated under well-defined internal gun policies, the same could not be said for many other agencies. The result is an unequal system where some employees with peace officer status are, rightly, subject to rigorous controls, while others operate in relative opacity.

State-issued weapons are an extension of public trust in the truest sense of the word. They confer the power to use deadly force in the service of public safety. This authority must be accompanied by the highest standards of accountability. Yet the rules governing who could transport, store, or access these weapons differed significantly between agencies.

Thanks to statewide leadership, that has changed.

All executive branch agencies are now required to promulgate and maintain a comprehensive written policy governing all aspects of firearms use, storage, and training. These policies, which must meet or exceed standards set by the Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) Office of Public Safety, must also be submitted annually to the DCJS for review.

It also ties in with the important work the state has done in recent years to identify and address domestic violence. Now, when a state employee is arrested for domestic violence or placed under a protective order, they must surrender their firearms. Last month’s passage of a law requiring police to remove guns from attackers represents another crucial step forward.

At the same time, agencies have strengthened the connection between employee well-being and public safety. Peace officers – like police officers, corrections and other law enforcement personnel – face unique stressors that can take a toll on their mental health. Ensuring that those who carry state-issued firearms have access to confidential counseling, routine health checks, and early intervention services is not only compassionate, but also essential to public safety.

The power to carry a firearm in the name of the state is not a right – it is an enormous responsibility. It is the responsibility of the state, in turn, to ensure that power is exercised safely, wisely and without ever again having such devastating consequences.

I am proud of the work New York has done to turn tragedy into action. We owe it to the officers who risk their lives while serving, to the families shattered by preventable violence, and to all New Yorkers who entrust their safety to those sworn to protect them.

Lang is the inspector general of New York State.