Jacoby: Nation's toughest anti-gun laws made Massachusetts less safe

[Acujeff]

IN 1998, Massachusetts passed what was hailed as the toughest gun-control legislation in the country. Among other stringencies, it banned semiautomatic “assault” weapons, imposed strict new licensing rules, prohibited anyone convicted of a violent crime or drug trafficking from ever carrying or owning a gun, and enacted severe penalties for storing guns unlocked.

“Today, Massachusetts leads the way in cracking down on gun violence,” said Republican Governor Paul Cellucci as he signed the bill into law. “It will save lives and help fight crime in our communities.” Scott Harshbarger, the state’s Democratic attorney general, agreed: “This vote is a victory for common sense and for the protection of our children and our neighborhoods.” One of the state’s leading anti-gun activists, John Rosenthal of Stop Handgun Violence, joined the applause. “The new gun law,” he predicted, “will certainly prevent future gun violence and countless grief.”

It didn’t.

The 1998 legislation did cut down, quite sharply, on the legal use of guns in Massachusetts. Within four years, the number of active gun licenses in the state had plummeted. “There were nearly 1.5 million active gun licenses in Massachusetts in 1998,” the AP reported. “In June [2002], that number was down to just 200,000.” The author of the law, state Senator Cheryl Jacques, was pleased that the Bay State’s stiff new restrictions had made it possible to “weed out the clutter.”

But the law that was so tough on law-abiding gun owners had quite a different impact on criminals.

Since 1998, gun crime in Massachusetts has gotten worse, not better. In 2011, Massachusetts recorded 122 murders committed with firearms, the Globe reported this month — “a striking increase from the 65 in 1998.” Other crimes rose too. Between 1998 and 2011, robbery with firearms climbed 20.7 percent. Aggravated assaults jumped 26.7 percent.

Don’t hold your breath waiting for gun-control activists to admit they were wrong. The treatment they prescribed may have yielded the opposite of the results they promised, but they’re quite sure the prescription wasn’t to blame.


HTTPS://WWW.BOSTONGLOBE.COM/OPINION/2013/02/17/THE-NATION-TOUGHEST-GUN-CONTROL-LAW-MADE-MASSACHUSETTS-LESS-SAFE/3845K7XHZKWTRBWY4KPKEM/STORY.HTML

 

[jkelly1229]

And....

 

[JayMcB]

to see it in the Globe is quite odd. kinda almost shocking

 

[Waher]

That's a 5 year old article. But don't worry the legislature is currently working on MOAR LAWZ!11

Here is a summary of where we are in Massachusetts and what is under discussion in the legislature.

 

[Varmint]

IN 1998, Massachusetts passed what was hailed as the toughest gun-control legislation in the country. Among other stringencies, it banned semiautomatic “assault” weapons, imposed strict new licensing rules, prohibited anyone convicted of a violent crime or drug trafficking from ever carrying or owning a gun, and enacted severe penalties for storing guns unlocked.

“Today, Massachusetts leads the way in cracking down on gun violence,” said Republican Governor Paul Cellucci as he signed the bill into law. “It will save lives and help fight crime in our communities.” Scott Harshbarger, the state’s Democratic attorney general, agreed: “This vote is a victory for common sense and for the protection of our children and our neighborhoods.” One of the state’s leading anti-gun activists, John Rosenthal of Stop Handgun Violence, joined the applause. “The new gun law,” he predicted, “will certainly prevent future gun violence and countless grief.”

It didn’t.

The 1998 legislation did cut down, quite sharply, on the legal use of guns in Massachusetts. Within four years, the number of active gun licenses in the state had plummeted. “There were nearly 1.5 million active gun licenses in Massachusetts in 1998,” the AP reported. “In June [2002], that number was down to just 200,000.” The author of the law, state Senator Cheryl Jacques, was pleased that the Bay State’s stiff new restrictions had made it possible to “weed out the clutter.”

But the law that was so tough on law-abiding gun owners had quite a different impact on criminals.

Since 1998, gun crime in Massachusetts has gotten worse, not better. In 2011, Massachusetts recorded 122 murders committed with firearms, the Globe reported this month — “a striking increase from the 65 in 1998.” Other crimes rose too. Between 1998 and 2011, robbery with firearms climbed 20.7 percent. Aggravated assaults jumped 26.7 percent.

Don’t hold your breath waiting for gun-control activists to admit they were wrong. The treatment they prescribed may have yielded the opposite of the results they promised, but they’re quite sure the prescription wasn’t to blame.


HTTPS://WWW.BOSTONGLOBE.COM/OPINION/2013/02/17/THE-NATION-TOUGHEST-GUN-CONTROL-LAW-MADE-MASSACHUSETTS-LESS-SAFE/3845K7XHZKWTRBWY4KPKEM/STORY.HTML

Uh, what makes you think their goal was to reduce crime? Gotta understand your enemy.

 

[Picton]

to see it in the Globe is quite odd. kinda almost shocking

Jeff Jacoby is their resident conservative. Most of his stuff would kinda almost shock you.

It’s a column, not an article.

 

[timgreynolds]

Jeff Jacoby is their resident conservative. Most of his stuff would kinda almost shock you.

It’s a column, not an article.

And it's five years old.

 

[Bob P]

Dead link

 

[Path-Finder]

Rich white liberals that live in places like Lexington, Lincoln, Concord and Sudbury won't believe it. "Oh but look how safe our town is thanks to these laws." I can hear it now.

 

[Horrible]

Gun crime increased at a time when the nations murder rates have been steadily decreasing (, basically since the retirement of the federal AWB).

Also look at the northern New England states. They all share a border with MA (ME almost shares a border,) and their violent crime rates are a third of that of MA!

 

[JayMcB]

Gun crime increased at a time when the nations murder rates have been steadily decreasing (, basically since the retirement of the federal AWB).

Also look at the northern New England states. They all share a border with MA (ME almost shares a border,) and their violent crime rates are a third of that of MA!

unfair demographics comparison. WAY fewer dump cities in ME. No Springfields, Lowell, Fall River Haverhill, Dorchester, Mattapan, Lynn, Chelsea, New Bedford, Brockton, etc

 

[Len-2A Training]

unfair demographics comparison. WAY fewer dump cities in ME. No Springfields, Lowell, Fall River Haverhill, Dorchester, Mattapan, Lynn, Chelsea, New Bedford, Brockton, etc

So how did we get there in MA?

All of those cities/villages were at one time thriving decent places to live and work.

They should spend some time looking at where those in gov't went wrong in creating those hell-holes!

 

[JayMcB]

So how did we get there in MA?

All of those cities/villages were at one time thriving decent places to live and work.

They should spend some time looking at where those in gov't went wrong in creating those hell-holes!

Deindustrialization
Unfettered immigration
Democrat management
The Hack class, wanting to keep their undocumented dumbocrats on the .gov teat

 

[wahsben]

Gun crime increased at a time when the nations murder rates have been steadily decreasing (, basically since the retirement of the federal AWB).

Also look at the northern New England states. They all share a border with MA (ME almost shares a border,) and their violent crime rates are a third of that of MA!

True but that's because all the criminals of Ma. go to those states to get their guns. That's what they claim anyway. What they ignore is that violent crime should be even higher in those states if easy access to guns is what causes the crime to happen.

 

[amm5061]

Well, the Glob took that one down pretty damn fast!

Page not found.

 

[JohnZ]

unfair demographics comparison. WAY fewer dump cities in ME. No Springfields, Lowell, Fall River Haverhill, Dorchester, Mattapan, Lynn, Chelsea, New Bedford, Brockton, etc

If dump cities is the problem, how come they passed gun control? Maybe we should bulldoze those dump cities.

 

[snd1t]

If dump cities is the problem, how come they passed gun control? Maybe we should bulldoze those dump cities.

Ask yourself the question......is the problem the city or is it the people that live in the city.

Its like blaming forks for obesity

 

[LTCRN]

So how did we get there in MA?

All of those cities/villages were at one time thriving decent places to live and work.

They should spend some time looking at where those in gov't went wrong in creating those hell-holes!

They got there by building more and more apartment buildings that eventually turn into Section 8 housing. With the cost of living in Boston increasingly skyrocketing and these people and their children "deserving or entitled to" a quality lifestyle and education it made perfect sense to bring them all and their sometimes other illegal family members out into other cities and towns. Ask any cop that works in towns South of Boston along 95 and Rte. 1 to the R.I. line how high the crime rate has gone up over the last 10 years or so to get a good idea on what is really going on. Firearms licenses have increased drastically and not just because of the criminal Obama and his potential replacement of crooked Hell - a ree.

 

[JayMcB]

deserving or entitled to

That simple phrase is what's wrong with the welfare state.

When it's multi-generational, it's even worse.

 

[ridleyman]

Rich white liberals that live in places like Lexington, Lincoln, Concord and Sudbury won't believe it. "Oh but look how safe our town is thanks to these laws." I can hear it now.

So true-I live in Lexington, filled with sanctimonious, hypocritical azzholes! These same people support sanctuary cities, except I don't see any minorities, except well educated and wealthy Chinese and Indian immigrants, invited to live here. Latinos and blacks are allowed to do yard work, but they better get out of town by sundown. Effing racists!