Gun legislation has been a hot political topic for several years, and with the recent shooting in Las Vegas and act of terror in New York City, Massachusetts leaders are taking action.
A team of researchers at Northeastern University published a report Friday analyzing the implementation of a bill signed into law in August 2014 designed to reduce gun violence, An Act Relative to the Reduction of Gun Violence.
Despite concerns that legislation targeting gun violence restrict constitutional freedoms, the report found the state law did not affect the ability of law-abiding citizens to obtain firearms.
The findings suggest tougher gun laws, at least in Massachusetts, did not lead to a significant increase in gun license denials, according to the report. Only about two to four percent of those who applied for gun licenses were denied them.
That means 97 percent of people who applied for a license since the law passed were granted one, according to the report.
Still, the authors of the report “recommend a continued assessment … of the new gun law in order to ensure that the provisions continue to direct efforts towards the reduction of gun violence in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,” according to the report, and the state is continuing to crack down on gun violence.
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey along with 16 other attorney generals, signed a letter Oct. 22 challenging a federal proposal which would strengthen interstate concealed firearm policies.
The proposal, called the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, would make it easier for “qualified” individuals to carry concealed handguns from state to state.
The attorneys general argue the legislation harms residents who have been safely policed under varying state laws by allowing “potentially dangerous or irresponsible non-residents with concealed weapons in the states, cities and towns across America that have made local judgments that certain regulations on the carrying of such weapons are necessary to protect public safety,” the letter states.
Mike Gildesgame, a member of the Massachusetts Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence, wrote in an email that the legislation, if passed, could cause an increase in gun deaths throughout the country.
“I agree with the [attorney general] on this issue as do many in the law enforcement community,” Gildesgame wrote. “The proposed legislation will in no way help to limit gun deaths; on the contrary, it has the strong potential to increase homicides and suicides with the proliferation of guns the legislation could allow.”
Gildesgame wrote the language of the bill would overshadow local and state regulations on firearms, such as those in Massachusetts.
“The proposal doesn’t really strengthen or weaken the second amendment’s language about the right to bear arms but it would appear to abrogate certain state laws restricting the ownership and use of firearms,” Gildesgame wrote.
The letter came days after a Boston University study associated more lenient concealed handgun permits to higher rates of homicide, The Daily Free Press reported.
Jeffrey Berry, a professor of American politics and political behavior at Tufts University, said he’s not optimistic the law will have a positive impact on the nation.
“It’s not going to going to fix the problem of gun violence, which is too pervasive,” Berry said. “Even if you solve it in Massachusetts, it’s still going to go on in 49 states.”
Several Boston residents said they agree with Healey’s decision to challenge the bill.
Laura Peters, 24, of Allston, said the emotional well-being of society is of the utmost importance and therefore guns overall shouldn’t be permitted to residents.
“I don’t think anybody should have guns,” Peters said. “I think it’s unnecessary, it’s dangerous and it’s scary. People don’t understand the importance of mental health, especially right now.”
Latoya Rogers, 41, of Allston, said she moved to Allston due to the prominence of gun violence in her former neighborhood of Dorchester.
“With all the gun violence that happening here, I’d be opposed to [the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act],” Rogers said. “There are many guns on the street now…That’s why I moved out of Dorchester and into Allston — I have a 16-year-old son, so I didn’t want him in that environment with all of that going on.”
Amber Watson, 22, of Allston, said she thinks people in the United States shouldn’t be able to carry firearms to begin with.
“This doesn’t make any sense at all,” she said. “It’s not 1775 anymore – there’s no reason for certain gun laws to be in place. There’s no reason to have automatic or concealed weapons.”
This is the most absurd thing I ever heard, first off, most LEGAL gun owners are not terrorizing neighborhoods. Yes Massachusetts has a low gun violence rate. it is not because of gun control. gun control does nothing in the eyes of a criminal. look at cities in Chicago, Massachusetts is not poverty stricken like a lot of states with high gun violence. and as far as Laura Peters, 24, of Allston, “said the emotional well-being of society is of the utmost importance and therefore guns overall shouldn’t be permitted to residents”. is the exact reason I have a weapons permit! and this person Latoya Rogers, 41, of Allston, “said she moved to Allston due to the prominence of gun violence in her former neighborhood of Dorchester
“With all the gun violence that happening here, I’d be opposed to [the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act],” Rogers said. “There are many guns on the street now…That’s why I moved out of Dorchester and into Allston — I have a 16-year-old son, so I didn’t want him in that environment with all of that going on.”
so you’re telling me that you moved away from your home to avoid the violence? what do you do when traveling? do you look up gun violence stats in the cities you’re going to travel thru and avoid them? instead of avoiding and complaining about it. get off you but and do something about it. gun control is not the answer, I am sure that most criminals in Dorchester did not go thru legal means to obtain firearms.
Amber Watson, 22, of Allston, said she thinks people in the United States shouldn’t be able to carry firearms to begin with.
“This doesn’t make any sense at all,” she said. “It’s not 1775 anymore – there’s no reason for certain gun laws to be in place. There’s no reason to have automatic or concealed weapons.”
tell that to the families of the people who have been killed in movie theaters or night clubs and other gun free zones! all these tragedies could have been diminished if not stopped all together is a legal gun owner was there to shoot back. I am certain that the nut jobs who plan these acts are worried about obtaining a firearm legally. use your head and think about what you’re saying, your right it is not 1775, it is 2017 and politicians like Mora Healy continue to ignore the real problems, like mental health and poverty stricken places. lack of prosecution and enforcement of the laws we already have. more gun control is not the answer. all that does is allow for more victims because we have no way of defending our self.
At the end of the day we cannot argue with 2,000 plus defensive gun uses each day. These are women, men, young and elderly that are protecting themselves or others. Concealed carry or the type of firearm does not create criminals. Criminals use guns, knifes, autos, fists, baseball bats, etc. Most citizenry don’t accept this premise but do embrace that firearms are subject to regulation, as has been put forward for most their lives. Still, protection of ones life is an inalienable right. Laws to take away areas where firearms can be carried or types of guns are elimination programs. Otherwise, our law makers could easily make laws prohibiting WHERE a firearm can be fired. Regardless, criminals will ignore either. The former only takes away a good person’s ability to protect themselves without being labeled a criminal by statute.
The study published by the Northeastern University team has a number of design and bias problems. The study ignores the impact of the licensing process in preventing people from even engaging with the process. If voter registration required taking at least two days off of work to visit the registration office during their limited business hours, this student body would be marching in the streets protesting the impact on the poor and disadvantaged who can’t take time off from work to even participate. It ignores the study the Massachusetts Auditor that police departments routinely ignore the legal deadlines for processing licenses (http://www.mass.gov/auditor/docs/audits/2017/201608573s.pdf). The study ignores the tendency of police departments to issue licenses limited to target practice or hunting when unrestricted licenses are requested; imagine the outcry if a prospective voter was told they could only vote in their local election for six years just because that was the policy this town had implemented, while the town next door issued unrestricted voter licenses. The article then goes on to worry about national reciprocity, threatening that unlicensed people would somehow be able to acquire firearms out of state. That’s not what national reciprocity is about, the Federal laws that govern firearm purchases don’t change. Rather than rebut all the errors and misdirections in this article in this space, I encourage you to read an opposing viewpoint at https://drgo.us/legal-access-to-firearms-vs-homicide-rates/.
You want to restrict law abiding citizens from owning firearms. It not the law abiding owners that are the problem. Its all the illegal firearm that the problem and closing the mental health hospitals. And now with
all the diversity baloney. Enforce the existing gun laws there are plenty out there. So why penalize the Law
abiding citizen. Look at the events in NY this week with the home depot truck.
The expense and difficulty of obtaining or renewing a gun permit in Massachusetts caused a marked drop in applicants. While some tout the State’s reduced firearms homicide rates, MA has the odd distinction of having a larger share of homicides by bludgeoning than other states. Dead is dead.
http://archive.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/08/12/gun_permits_drop_25_in_bay_state/
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2015/12/amid_national_debate_on_guns_n.html