Evidence shows that even state and local handgun control laws work. For example, in 1974 Massachusetts passed the Bartley-Fox Law, which requires a special license to carry a handgun outside the home or business. The law is supported by a mandatory prison sentence. Studies by Glenn Pierce and William Bowers of Northeastern University documented that after the law was passed, handgun homicides in Massachusetts fell 50% and the number of armed robberies dropped 35%

Federal law requires federally licensed firearms dealers but not private sellers to initiate a background check on the purchaser prior to sale of a firearm.

Federal law provides states with the option of serving as a state "point of contact" and conducting their own background checks using state, as well as federal, records and databases, or having the checks performed by the FBI using only the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System NICS database. Note that state files are not always included in the federal database.

Massachusetts is not a point of contact state for the NICS. As a result, in Massachusetts, firearms dealers must initiate the background check required by federal law by contacting the FBI directly.

1 A state administrative regulation confirms this requirement.

2. Massachusetts also requires firearms owners to obtain a state license prior to purchase of a firearm, and the applicant for a license must undergo a background check before the license is issued. For more information about these licenses, see Licensing of Gun Owners or Purchasers below. Massachusetts requires firearms dealers to verify the validity of a potential transferee's license prior to transferring a firearm.

3. For licenses issued via the Massachusetts Instant Record Check System (MIRCS), the dealer must electronically submit:

The transferee's license number;

The licensing authority that issued the license;

The type of firearm being purchased; and

Whether or not the firearm is a large capacity weapon.

4. The dealer must then verify the transferee's identity and validity of his or her license by scanning the fingerprint or entering the personal identification number contained on the license.

5. If the license presented is expired, suspended or revoked, the dealer must notify the licensing authority and may take possession of it (in the latter case, the dealer must provide the holder with a receipt for the FID, permit or license, notify the holder of the need to renew the FID, permit or license, and forward it to the licensing authority).

6.Massachusetts does not allow private sellers (sellers who are not licensed dealers) to sell more than four guns a year.

7. Although Massachusetts does not explicitly require private sellers to conduct a background check of prospective purchasers, in 2014, Massachusetts enacted a law requiring the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services to develop a web portal through which private sellers of firearms must conduct a real-time check of the validity of the purchaser's Firearm Identification Card and other necessary licenses..

Two decades ago the Commonwealth of Massachusetts passed a sweeping set of new gun laws known as the Gun Control Act of 1998. It was passed on the heels of the Federal "Assault Weapons" ban in 1994. The Massachusetts' legislation is listed in the legislative records as Chapter 180 of the Acts of 1998 and is commonly referred to as "Chapter 180." The bill contained eighty sections of new gun law and was approved on July 23, 1998.

The following findings represent two decades of evidence after the passage of these new "gun control" laws. The report utilizes the latest available information at the time.

When determining the success, or failure, of gun laws it is vitally important to break it down into at least three major categories in order to determine the effectiveness. This is incredibly important, as different types of problems need different solutions. For instance, we would not try to solve a suicide issue the same way we would attempt to address a homicide issue. To rationally address a potential problem, success or failure

The three major categories are:

1.Firearm Safety, as measured by firearm related accidental deaths

2.Criminal Use of Firearms, as measured by firearm related murders

3. Suicides by means of firearms.

Quite often the proponents of gun control simply use the term "gun death rate" as they tout the successes of Chapter 180. This method does not accurately reflect the true story as proven in the following findings.

Firearm Safety (Accidental Deaths)

Massachusetts has historically enjoyed a very low accidental death rate with guns. This is due to law abiding gun owners taking the lead in making safety programs widely available to the general public. Gun Owners' Action League, and our local affiliates, have been providing firearm safety education for many decades. A parallel program is also provided nationally through the Hunter Education Program. Hunter Ed, as it is referred to, was established in 1970 and is funded through excise taxes on firearms. It should be noted that all of these gun safety programs are exclusively funded by gun owners themselves.

Historically and currently the government of the Commonwealth does not contribute any financial resources to gun safety programs. This is despite the millions of dollars in firearm licensing fees it collects on an annual basis. It is perhaps ironic at best that a state that supposedly prides itself on gun safety, actually takes no part in it.

One only needs to compare the accidental death rates with motor vehicles. In 1998 there were approximately 4.5 million licensed drivers in the Commonwealth resulting in 473 fatalities in motor vehicle accidents. Compare this to 1.5 million licensed gun owners (at the time) and only 2 accidental fatalities. Statistically there is no comparison in the safety factor.

As for accidental gun fatalities, since Chapter 180 was passed there has been no decrease in firearm related accidental deaths. Perhaps that is because statistically there never was a problem. That statement is always hard to accept in a society when it is often said "if it only saves one life". But the harsh realty is that in 2015 Massachusetts lost 1,751 to overdoses/poisons, 732 to falls and 416 people to transportation related accidents. Only one person was killed that year in a gun accident and the data does not reflect if that may have been as a result of criminal activity. The evidence clearly shows that Massachusetts gun control laws, including mandatory gun storage laws, have had no effect on accidental deaths.

?

Criminal Use of Firearms (Homicides)

When originally passed into law, Chapter 180 was promoted to the general public as an attempt at "leading the nation in common sense gun control" as a means in reducing gun violence. That being the case, very specific data needs to be looked at to assess any success or failure of said laws.

Massachusetts' gun control advocates often herald that the state maintains the second to the lowest "gun death rate" in the country. However, when the data is separated out to reflect gun related homicides that claim does not stand up.

The new 2017 FBI crime report recently released shows that Massachusetts actually ranks 12th in the United States for gun related homicides. For years, so-called gun control advocates touted Massachusetts' gun laws as a great success story in reducing gun homicides while harshly criticizing our northern New England neighbors for having supposed weak gun laws. The 2017 FBI crime report statistics paints a far different picture. In fact, since the infamous passage of the 1998 Gun Control Act, the Commonwealth's gun related murder rate has increased from 1.06 (per hundred thousand) to 1.45. Where is the success?

In the graph below, we examined the FBI Uniform Crime reports in 1998, 2011, 2014 and 2017. From this data it is easy to determine that Massachusetts is not the second to the lowest when it comes to gun related homicide rates. In fact in 2011, a particularly bad year in the Commonwealth, Massachusetts was actually ranked number seventeen in the nation. (Firearm Related Murder Rate by State, Per 100,000 2011 FBI Crime Report) What the data actually shows is that the three northern New England states have consistently lower murder rates (per 100,000) than Massachusetts. In only one of the years represented (2014) did Vermont exceed Massachusetts.

According to the report, New Hampshire has the 2nd lowest gun related murder rate with a 0.5 per 100,000, nearly one-third that of Massachusetts, which is 1.45 (per 100,000). Maine comes in 6th place with a 0.9 (per 100,000) and Vermont in 8th place with a 0.96 (per 100,000). The facts are clear that those states that are often blamed for "weak gun laws" are, in fact, much safer places to live.

If one takes into consideration all types of murder, the 2017 FBI crime report, shows Massachusetts drops to 13th place with a 2.49 per 100,000 rating. No surprise, New Hampshire continues to rank as the safest state in the nation with a rating of 1.04 per 100,000. Maine and Vermont also beat the Commonwealth again ranking 5th and 8th places, respectively.

?

Perhaps the true assessment in any gun laws passed in the Commonwealth is to compare the state to itself from the point at which the law was enacted. With nearly two decades of data to review, it should be easy to determine success or failure.

Within the Massachusetts Department of Public Health there is a program called the Injury Surveillance Program (ISP). This program tracks injuries and deaths throughout the state in several different categories and manners.

For the purposes of assessing the 1998 Gun Control Act's effect at reducing gun deaths from violence we can look directly at the data collected By the FBI Crime Reports and the State's ISP Reports regarding gun related homicides.

According to ISP reports, in the four years preceding Chapter 180, there was a drastic decrease in gun related homicides in Massachusetts. Immediately following the passage of Chapter 180, gun related homicides began to rise. At one point the number of firearm related murders more than doubled. In 2011 and 2012 there was a decline mirroring the national decline that began in 2007. It is important to note that the State's decline was years behind the national trend. Even with this, the numbers were still not an improvement from 1998 and the numbers are rising again.