From page 27 of the PDF linked
19 C. In Imposing the Transport Ban, New York City Failed to Consider Unloaded and Secured Transport, Which is Widely Employed by Other Jurisdictions, and Which Could Have Been Readily Implemented
Like this Court did in McCullen, we look to other potential regulatory means of addressing the Citys claimed interest. The transport ban is ostensibly designed to promote public safety by limiting the presence of handguns on city streets. Yet, a variety of jurisdictions, including some of the most restrictive ones in the nation, address this problem, not by banning transport entirely, but by imposing requirements to transport guns unloaded and in a secure location, like a locked box. Importantly, whether or not these alternative means are themselves valid and constitutional approaches under the Second Amendment, the fact that the City did not even consider them as potential alternatives says all the Court needs to know about the transportation bans failure under any form of heightened scrutiny. We now consider some of the alternatives that the City did not. ...
They go on to cite California, New Jersey, and Maryland state laws, none of which ccould be considered remotely
gun-friendly and
all of which allow transport of guns as described.
Once again, prohibitionists cite exaggerated or non-existant 'dangers' as reasons for their desired bans- much like the
fetus fetishists:
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/05/wendy-vitter-abortion
Trump Judge Who Endorsed Theory Abortion Causes Cancer Confirmed By Senate