TELL US: Should Massachusetts Gun Control Laws be Loosened?

A Massachusetts gun owners group is lobbying for passage of a bill that would confer lifetime gun licenses — no renewals necessary.


Way too much red tape.

That's the complaint of the Gun Owners’ Action League of Massachusetts, a group that is urging passage of a law that would abolish the requirement of having to renew a gun permit every six years, according to the Boston Herald.

For comparison, Massachusetts vehicle drivers' licenses need to be renewed every five years.

But the league says local police cannot keep up with timely gun permit renewals, and legitimate gunowners go license-less until the cops get time to do the paperwork. 

The law now allows 40 days for turning around license applications.

In Boston, almost 1,000 people have applied for gun permits so far this year, with waits running about 10 weeks, the Herald quotes police spokeswoman Cheryl Fiandaca as saying.

The gun owners group is lobbying for a return to lifetime licenses; that a license gets pulled only if laws are broken, according to the Herald story. 

The six-year gun permitting is part of a law passed in 1998 that resulted in Massachusetts having among the strictest gun control laws in the U.S.

According to a gun control lobbying group, the Violence Policy Center, Massachusetts also has the lowest gun death rate in the nation.

But still, the law requires a 40-day turnaround. So what do you think is the right course of action: return to the days of life-long gun licenses and make life easier for both harried cops and law-abiding gunowners? Lengthen the license turnaround time and not hold the gunowner accountable if s/he uses the gun during that turnaround time? Keep the pressure on and keep things as they are, to stifle the easy use of guns? Tell us what you think in the comments section below.

Iron Mike January 15, 2013 at 11:38 PM
Well what have we here? Based on the snarky tone, the misspelled words, and the inane personal attack, I’d say that ‘Binders Full O’Women’ is really well-known Patch-maggot Steven Cavaretta of Waltham.
x January 15, 2013 at 11:38 PM
Iron Mike, We are surrounded by an ragtag army of angry moonbats. Two of us, back-to-back, will do just fine because... "Liberals feel, conservatives think." I recognize this is confusing to many readers... the same ones that are wondering why their take-home pay is lower under the reign of The Chosen One. Reverend E. Raleigh Pimperton III
x January 16, 2013 at 12:14 AM
Naw... a sock puppet is defined as an Obama voter. The other 49 percent are not brain dead, entitled or dependent. Reverend E. Raleigh Pimperton III
Iron Mike January 16, 2013 at 12:32 AM
Back-to-back, or shoulder-to-shoulder, - always glad to have you there with me in the fight Rev! Incredible how quickly these MoonBats run out of logic – and resort to personal attacks. I’ve wondered many times: how many of them are sitting at home drawing disability from their state union jobs? How many finished high school? How many actually know their fathers? How many of them will dance in the streets when America declares bankruptcy, - then demand the Chinese fund their disability checks?
DAD January 16, 2013 at 01:58 AM
Could happen anywhere, Chelmsford had the trucker rapist pass through . Don't think you live in Pleasantville.
Charles January 17, 2013 at 09:02 PM
The common good is a fiction. We are living in a Constitutional Republic, not a collective being ruled by a Theocrat or and Oligarch, nor do we live in a democracy. Our laws apply to ALL, not the "common".
Charles January 17, 2013 at 09:19 PM
Yes, these laws are too restrictive and place responsible gun owner at risk for arrest, imprisonment, and permanent loss of gun rights, for victimless crimes. Example, you go to the shooting range and lose track of a 22 caliber bullet and it ends up on the floorboard of the back seat of your auto. You get stopped two weeks later and a police officer notices the shell when he looks in the back. You just got yourself arrested with all it entails. You now have a "gun violation" for "illegal" ammunition, and you lose gun rights permanently. Or your 17 year old daughter ends up driving said car and gets stopped etc. etc. In most states the police officer would not be able to charge anyone in this circumstance. The problems are not hard to see. I think these laws need to be nullified for the protection on MA citizens.
Nashoba Liberty January 18, 2013 at 06:55 PM
Newsflash for Dawn: Mass Gun Control Act of 1998 made safe storage mandatory. All guns not in use need to be secured with a tamper-resistant mechanical lock or secured in a locked container. This is prosecutable, and yes, I'm sure it's always for the CHILDREN. So rather than throw around anectodes with no citation, how about you educate yourself on the current laws that law-abiding gun owners in Mass. live with every day?
LCT January 19, 2013 at 11:42 AM
Makes no sense to me. It's just another way to financially punish legal, law-abiding gun owners. If someone steals my gun, I'm in no way responsible for what happens once that gun is out of my control, nor should I be. By existing law, I'm already responsible for any gun in my possession or how I use it. There are laws about where one can discharge a weapon, storage, transport, etc. Why is everyone so hell-bent on holding legal gun owners responsibile for the bad behavior of criminals, who by their very nature, DO NOT FOLLOW THE LAW? At least 20 yrs ago MA passed a mandatory 1-yr in jail for being in possession of an illegal firearm. Want to make a guess how many times that law has actually been used? How about some serious Federal laws, which means Federal time in a Federal prision, for anyone caught with illegal possession of any type of firearm? Say, manditory 5 yrs + no good time early release for possession & mandatory 10 yrs + no good time early release for the commission of any crime with an illegal firearm. MA has laws on top of laws for everything possible. What we don't have is enough mandatory sentencing, too much plea bargaining to lesser offenses & liberal judges. Plea bargains should not be allowed for felony gun offenses. Legal firearm owners are NOT the problem; CRIMINALS are the problem. How many criminals do you think have a gun permit? Zero, zip, nada.
LCT January 19, 2013 at 12:06 PM
Pat, in MA to obtain a gun permit we already are subjected to a background check. I understand your "truly universal, comprehensive & free background checks" but I'm curious what the government's idea of "universal, comprehensive" check would include? Will this include calling my doctor, checking to see what meds I might take, if I see a mental health professional, asking for a list of all persons living in my house & running a check on them too, etc? Obama wants a national data base for guns. Would this work as well as, say E-verify? The Feds screw up everything they touch. The ACLU screams bloody murder about a national voter registration (which I think is a good idea), about a national ID or the audacity of requiring illegals/non-citizens having some kind of paperwork on their person. Why should legal licensed gun owners find themselves on a national database with zero idea about the accuracy or know who has access to said data? I know it sounds paranoid but I don't relish a visit from someone coming to take my gun away during a national emergency like they did in New Orleans during Katrina. It's bad enough my town keeps close tabs on my gun. Are my fingerprints now in some database or were they destroyed as required after my initial background check? Until I can truly trust the government, which isn't going to happen, I don't want them to have any more info on me than they already have.
Robert January 20, 2013 at 01:49 PM
One thing the Liberals do know is they can't let this gun debate be primarily about mental illness. Because then we'll all look back at the timeline and be reminded of how the radical Lefties closed all the state mental hospitals and left the families to try and control the volatile patients. I thought the Progressive Libs were all about spending our money on social wellness programs. Until it comes to imprisoned criminals and dangerous mental defectives. Then the Libs think it's wrong to remove them from society and they should be set free to live amonst us.
Robert January 20, 2013 at 03:10 PM
Steve C: Your reply is exactly that sort of cute, smarmy,stand off-ish, wise guy comment that I get most often from Liberals regardless of the issue. Instead of conversing and seeing just what a persons perspective is and where there might be a common belief, you choose to be inflamitory and destructive. Question: What about people who want to own cars with huge engines that could propel a car down a public street at several times faster than the posted speed limit, thus endangering you, me, our loved ones. Then allowing that very car to be owned and operated by a 17 yr old. Do you want bans to prevent that situation. After all we see cases of youth + speed equaling death to innocent youths multiple times a month in this state alone per year. I say no. You can't ban everything that may pose a danger to society and still call America free. And owning a car and driving isn't even protected in the Constitution. And semi auto hand guns Steve?? So your saying revolvers are ok in your book?
Iron Mike January 20, 2013 at 03:33 PM
Well stated and accurately historically grounded Robert! In my adult lifetime the liberal mantra has gone from 'setting them free to live their lives' – to 'mainstreaming the special needs population'. The EVIL embedded in their cause is including the dangerous and demented in with all the absolutely harmless special needs kids and adults. AND insisting that all medical records be KEPT private - even after an Aurora or a Sandy Hook. Today schools and communities don't have a clue about which 'special needs' kids are harmless, and which ones are ticking time bombs. The left wingers have a solution – disarm ALL Americans. Under their 'leadership' that will work about as well as propping up the Post Office, bringing down our National Debt, eliminating voter fraud, or returning wholesome family friendly shows to TV.
Phil January 20, 2013 at 04:46 PM
Massachusetts is filled with hypocrites. Take a look at where the majority of domestic gun production occurs. Massachusetts politicians don't mind selling guns all over the country. See how they vote if the legislation means lay offs at Massachusetts gun makers.
Anna Bucciarelli January 20, 2013 at 05:42 PM
It's so simple guys ... having the ability to defend yourself is your right under the constitution. That guns get into the wrong hands resulting in multiple deaths is a sad fact and were it not guns, it would be another device that would cause devastation. When someone wants to harm, they will find a way. Planes on 9/11, a bomb in Tulsa, examples. I cannot and will not ever agree to changing our 2nd amendment, placed there for valid reasons by good and caring men who understood better than we ever will the danger of giving in to tyrants and the will of those who would wish our nation harm. One thing I know for sure is that history speaks volumes to us if we take the time to study it and learn. I understand fully that there are all sorts of divisions among us, we cannot all agree all the time, we are not living in a utopian world. But we can and should, at the very least, all work to preserve and defend our constitutional rights.
Robert January 20, 2013 at 09:04 PM
Geez Steve I went back and checked my post because I didn't think I was amped up when I wrote it. Sure enough I saw no exclamation points. But I did detect a thinly veiled apology...and I except. :) Even though, again, you just couldn't make your point without resorting to smarmy..."perhaps you are just to dim to participate in calm discourse with an educated individual.".....That's OK Steve, I know you'll work on it. After all your educated. Peace
Robert January 20, 2013 at 09:07 PM
Well put Anna.
Robert January 20, 2013 at 11:40 PM
Haha...that's not quite the definition I had in mind Steve, but you gave me a chuckle. I was more thinking along these definitions. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=smarmy http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smarmy Steve, as for .223, it is a common round for marksman as far as I see at our club. Yes, they are usually shooting it 1 shot at a time and check their results and adjust before the next shot. In this application 30 round mags are of no use. In another part of the clubs property certain members enjoy iron site field shooting at steel targets. They often use 30 round mags but even in this application I prefer to stop and reevaluate long before I'd have blown through 30 shots. I don't own a 30 mag or a rifle that shoots .223. I have a 1953 Russian rifle that shoots 10 shots and I enjoy it for it's patina and history. But still I refuse to buy into the national excuse that a 30 round mag and a semi auto rifle is the issue and not the nations failings with the metal illness situation. As for semi auto pistols. There are semi pistols that shoot 22 cal ammo commonly used by competition shooting teams and their very responsible teachers and shooters. Also competition teams that shoot .45 cal in their events.
Robert January 21, 2013 at 01:02 AM
Boy it's tough being civil with you Steve. OK so explain to me why MY 1953 Russian rifle with a fixed 10 round magazine does not shoot 10 rounds and why a 223 round which is capable of 3000fps and thousand yard pin point accuracy is not a marksmanship round. This should be good....or are you just a TROLL ??
Robert January 21, 2013 at 01:54 AM
Well Steve...Michael and I are shooters and you are a talker...I'm DONE with you. You are obviously a TROLL. Please people don't waist your time with Steve.
LCT January 21, 2013 at 07:59 AM
Steven Cavaretta 8:59 am on Sunday, January 20, 2013 The gun debate is about mental illness. People who want to own assault rifles, large capacity magazines and semi automatic pistols are dangerous mental defectives. ____________________________________________________________ I own a semi-automatic pistol. Are you calling all who do "dangerous mental defectives"? In other words are you calling me a 'dangerous mental defective' based soley on the fact that I own a semi-auto pistol? How dare you! You don't know me or anything about me; where do you get off calling strangers incediary, insulting names? FYI I have a permit & the gun was bought legally. I'm not some street thug, hoolum, doper or gangbanger. GUNS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM; CRIMINALS ARE THE PROBLEM.
OldTownie January 21, 2013 at 02:09 PM
LCT, Ignorance and intolerance are a couple more problems we're dealing with. Steven has no tolerance for you being a law abiding member of society all while demonstrating his ignorance of firearms. -OT
Iron Mike January 21, 2013 at 09:46 PM
>> Ignorance of firearms is a virtue That is one of the most totally elitist and most ignorant things I've ever heard an American say – [other than that they voted to re-elect Obama]. What you're admitting to – and proudly it seems – is that your entire life has been lived in the protection of better and braver men and women than you will ever be. You're essentially saying 'I'm a nurtured hot-house pansy who has never even felt the rain on my leaves”.
Anna Bucciarelli January 21, 2013 at 11:09 PM
Steven ... way out of hand, your remarks. You may assume what you wish about Nam vets but I can tell you first hand that they were not all dopers and for the most part all were brave enough to be in the fight while others fled. You are correct, the new military relies heavily on tech but not in face to face combat ... what do you think a soldier will do, pull out his I-phone when someone is gunning him? Don't be foolish and talk about what you don't really know, since I detect you have never faced battle of any kind. And shame on you for disparaging any individual who has ever been in a war zone. Best to give valor it's due no matter your disagreements, and be ever grateful to those who were conscripted. Believe it or not, it was and is a sacrifice not only for the fighter but for the family as well, but I suspect you have little knowledge of such ... bet your squirmishs began and ended in grade school.
Anna Bucciarelli January 21, 2013 at 11:11 PM
PS Steven ... apology will be accepted!
Anna Bucciarelli January 22, 2013 at 02:33 PM
So you say, Steven, but it sure sounds to me like you just may be making up for it now Sorry Stevie boy ... I don't understand you any more than you understand what I said. You are completely off subject and just don't make sense so that leads me to assume that you just may be making up for lost time back in the day, smoking your own brains away.
Karla Vallance January 22, 2013 at 04:01 PM
Stop the personal attacks, folks. Debate ideas but when you start focusing on the person who is posting instead of the idea, you're off-track. We will delete the most egregious of the posts.
Anna Bucciarelli January 22, 2013 at 06:36 PM
Karla ... thanks for deleting that hideous comment about smoking Viet Nam vets and about their undeserving of respect for their service to their country. It was totally off topic and incredibly cruel and insulting.
Iron Mike January 22, 2013 at 10:33 PM
Sure would be nice if liberals waited for the facts to be known before assigning blame and coming up with new laws and new solutions. BEWARE of ANYONE who wants to 'disarm you'! Such people don't really believe in our Constitution.
Robert January 22, 2013 at 11:59 PM
Reminds me of what a wise old sage once said " I don't know all the facts....the Cambridge police acted stupidly."


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something