Ben Cartwright SASS
NES Member
Here is my letter pre hearings
John,
I wanted to take the time to make some observations on the proposed gun laws to have public hearings tomorrow. First and most important I don’t see anything in these proposed laws that are aimed at stopping criminals from miss-using or acquiring guns, they are all aimed at law-abiding gun owners. The licensed gun owners in this state are statistically among the most law abiding group there is.
Since 1998 when Mass passed it historic firearms laws, gun homicides are up 68% and gun related assault injuries are up by 72% all while the homicide rate nationwide is down 49%, sounds like we are heading in the wrong direction. Also according to the FBI Mass is the most violent state in the entire northeast US, including the states of NY NJ and PA.
Among the things I question and have problems with are
Section 18
Private face to face transactions will no longer be allowed.
What this means- all transfers will have to be facilitated by a federally licensed firearms dealer. This new section is so poorly worded at the moment that it is impossible to tell if this is legal with regard to federal laws FFL’s must follow. It is also unknown if this provision will end the ability to privately transfer handguns that are not on the Executive Office of Public Safety roster or the “secret Attorney General list” (which has never been published in any official recording). Under current law, private transfers of any handgun were legal so long as the gun is not banned by the Assault Weapons Ban and both parties hold the proper level of license to possess the transferred handgun.
There are several sections that I (and GOAL) support while there are several we oppose. Here is a summary of the various sections and how I and you should feel about them.
Gun Owners Action League’s
Report on “An Act Relative to the Reduction of Gun Violence”
Chapter 180 Part II
May 30, 2014
Download a .pdf of the report here. View Speaker DeLeo's Bill - H.4121 here
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 House Speaker Robert DeLeo released “An Act Relative to the Reduction of Gun Violence” to the general public. Upon reviewing the legislation we were very disappointed. GOAL was hoping that after a year of hearings across the state a bill would be drafted that we could immediately support. Sadly, that is not the case.
It was our sincere hope that a bill would emerge that would begin to reform the state’s convoluted and ineffective gun laws. Instead what appeared could be described as Chapter 180 Part II. In 1998 the Massachusetts legislature passed sweeping changes to the gun laws known as Chapter 180. These changes resulted in an alarming 80% reduction in the number of licensed gun owners in the state. As for the ability of these new laws to reduce crime, they have been an abject failure! In the fifteen years since the bill was signed into law, gun-related homicides have doubled and gun related assaults have tripled.
This newly proposed legislation was supposed to be about addressing mental health issues and providing more crime fighting tools. While some of the bill covers those matters to some degree, there are proposals in it that will simply result in the further persecution of lawful gun owners. Further, rather than actually reforming the convoluted laws so that lawful citizens and law enforcement can better understand them, this bill would actually add to the legal chaos.
There are certain proposals that GOAL can support if the language is drafted correctly like the compliance with the 2007 National Instant Check System Improvement Amendments Act. There are also sections that cover punishing armed carjackings and home invasions that we could support. The bill also addresses the delays in licensing renewals to some degree.
It is our hope that this legislation can be amended to the point where GOAL and its members can support thoughtful mental health and crime fighting tools. Below is a review of the proposals by subject matter, section and GOAL’s stance:
SECTIONS 1, 10, 11, 12, 42, 43 & 44 (Compliance with the 2007 National Instance Check System Improvement Amendments Act) – Could Support if Drafted Correctly
SECTIONS 2, 3 & 45 (Firearm Retailer Employees) – Support
• The language in these sections would allow access to CORI information and mandate that all employees for firearm retailers are subject to such checks.
SECTION 4 (School Resource Officers and Mental Health of Students) – Support
• This section would pave the way for School Resource Officers across the state. There is the concern that schools may not have the financial means to accomplish the task.
• A secondary concern is to assure that such officers are exempt under MGL 269 § 10j, carrying firearms on school grounds.
• Provides for school plans to deal with acute mental health needs.
SECTION 5 (Suicide Awareness Training for School Personnel)
• The concept is to make teachers and other school employees aware of the warning signs of potential suicide at risk persons. Will there be appropriate funding for this and are we asking too much of teachers these days? Perhaps an informational campaign for the students would be more effective.
SECTION 6 &13 (Suicide Prevention in Hunter Education Courses & Data Collection) – Oppose
• While we understand the importance of suicide prevention, it is our belief that adding such curriculum to safe handling courses may be inappropriate. Specifically hunter education courses are nationally accredited and may not be able to be changed to meet the criteria. Primarily certified firearm instructors are not versed in mental health issues.
• There is also language in the section about collecting data on firearm related suicides. If this is to be done, we believe this should be expanded to all types of suicides, especially since the number of suicides by hanging/suffocation are more than guns, drugs and poison combined.
SECTION 7 (Physicians and Firearms) – Oppose
• GOAL strongly objects to physicians discussing the “role of firearms” with their patients. While we appreciate the effort to recognize suicide risk and mitigate potential means, these subjects should be dealt with concerning all means of suicides. Further, it is likely that this matter would be better suited to licensed mental health professionals.
SECTION 8 & 9 (Hospitalization and Evaluation) – Need More Clarification
• It is not quite clear what is being accomplished with these sections. If it is for the purpose of making sure that persons needing help are receiving it that would be a good start. We do need to clarify that persons who have been evaluated and released as not needing treatment should not be disqualified.
SECTIONS 15, 21 & 28 (Posting of and Printing of Suicide Prevention Numbers) – Oppose
• These sections seek to mandate that firearm retailers post information about suicide prevention and that phone numbers for such information be placed on firearm licenses. While we appreciate legitimate methods for reducing suicides, such mandates would only go further to stigmatize lawful gun ownership and are unlikely to have the positive effect sought.
SECTION 16 & 46 (Firearm Retailer Records) – Oppose
• This section would mandate that firearm retailers who have closed their business must forward their records to EOPSS. It is already mandated at the federal level that all such materials are to be handed over to the BATFE, why does the state need them as well? This would only add more bureaucracy and useless data to a system that is already in a mess.
SECTION 17 (Technical Correction)
SECTION 18 (Banning “Private Sales”) – Oppose
• This section would needlessly ban the private sales of guns by licensed citizens. Under current law lawfully licensed citizens are limited to four such sales in a calendar year. The seller has to be legally licensed and thus has gone through a background check. The purchaser has to be legally licensed and thus has gone through a background check. Then a state transfer form (FA-10) must be completed and submitted to the state within seven days giving the state a second chance at reviewing the transfer.
• Another problem exists as there are many high quality handguns that cannot be lawfully transferred by firearm retailers. As the language in this bill would even further complicate that problem it is not be justifiable to ban private transfers on those firearms.
SECTIONS 19 & 26 (Firearm Identification Cards & Licenses to Carry) – Oppose
• Expands the “suitability” clause currently in the License to Carry laws to the FID Card.
• This changes FID cards from a “shall issue” to a “may issue” making it a discretionary license. It also adds “good reason” language to FID cards, meaning a citizen would have to provide a reason for wanting an FID card.
• Adds the ability for licensing officers to place arbitrary restrictions on FID Card holders.
• In both the FID card and LTC laws it lowers the two year misdemeanor disqualifier to only one year. This could easily result in thousands more citizens losing their civil rights.
• Adds misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
• Removes the right to apply for an FID card after a five year period of a conviction of a nonviolent crime.
• Adds extensive mental health language as for commitments and hospitalization that uses the term “confined”, but offers no definition for what that is.
• Creates additional language for drug and alcohol addiction, still has the “cured” language which has been a problem.
• EOPSS to establish rules/ regulations for suitability with the advice of the Mass Chiefs and GCAB but will NOT be in law. The suitability clause has been widely abused by some local chiefs, but yet they are going to be allowed to determine definitions.
SECTION 20 & 27 (Receipt for License Applications) – Support*
• This section would mandate that a receipt is given when a license application is received. The receipt would provide evidence that a license would be valid until the system has approved or denied the application. This would relieve at least some of the problems with the system.
• We would like to see the system fixed as a whole to assure that licensed individuals can expect a professional level of service for the high license fees they pay.
• We would also like to make sure that said receipts would make the license valid for purchasing guns and ammunition while they are waiting for the full renewal.
SECTION 22 & 30 (Gun Registration & Penalties for not Renewing Early) - Oppose
• Would require gun owners to submit an affidavit at time of application on lost or stolen firearms. Since reporting such matters is already law, why are we wasting time with yet another bureaucratic step? This is obviously an attempt at backdoor gun registration which has always led to confiscation.
• The section also allows for penalties if gun owners do not renew their licenses 90 days early! What could be the purpose of this other than pure harassment?
SECTION 23 (Technical Correction)
SECTION 24 & 31 (Lowering Fines for Renewals) – Support
• Reduces the fine for an expired license from $500 to $100.
SECTION 25 (Increased Penalties for Failure to Report Lost or Stolen Guns) – OPPOSE
• The main reason for licensed gun owners being wary of reporting a theft or loss is the abuse of the “suitability” that this bill even seeks to expand. For good reason, gun owners fear that if they make such a report that they will have their license revoked. As evidence there is an ongoing case where it took the thieves two days to break into the safe and the homeowner was still brought up on charges for unsafe storage. If the government wants the assistance of lawful gun owners then we would strongly suggest that it begin to earn our trust.
SECTION 29 (LTC Renewals) – Support
• This section changes the renewal language for a License to Carry concerning renewals. The law will now allow licenses to remain valid until the renewal process is completed.
• We would want to make sure that there is a means to make sure firearm and ammunition purchases will be legal during this time.
SECTION 32: (Further Complicating the Approved Firearm Roster) – Oppose
• For almost two decades there has been great confusion over what handguns can be legally sold in the Commonwealth. This has been caused by two different state entities claiming authority over these sales.
The current laws allow for companies to have their products tested and if passed placed on the Approved Firearms Roster through the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS). There are also regulations under the Consumer Protection laws through the Attorney General’s office over the sale and manufacture of handguns.
These two entities have confused gun owners and retailers as a list is published, but the Attorney General does not recognize it. So rather than clarify the problem, this legislation would make the matter worse by giving the Attorney General the authority to arbitrarily remove firearms from the list.
SECTION 33: (Increase Penalties for Storage Violations) – Oppose
• Drastically increases penalties for storage violations. The question is why? Is there a particular need for such increases?
• There is also a change in the law regarding severe penalties, up to 15 years in prison, for access to large capacity rifles or shotguns, handguns and machine guns to anybody under the age of 18, regardless if they have a license. What is the purpose for removing the licensed junior shooter exemption? This will greatly complicate providing junior shooters with safety training and the ability to compete and practice their sport.
SECTION 34 (Drastic Changes to the Certified Instructor Training Program) – Oppose
• It removes the recognition of instructors certified by a nationally recognized organization (NRA).
• Grants the Colonel of the State Police wide “suitability” authority over who can be a certified instructor.
• Hints that there will be one standardized curriculum for all firearm safety courses and it will be created by the state.
• Adds mandatory live fire to all courses that will add expense to non-fire courses. This may also make the Hunter Education courses ineligible since Massachusetts does include live fire.
• Seeks to include suicide prevention and “harm reduction” into the curriculum.
SECTION 36 (Tracing of Guns used in Crime) – Support*
• This particular piece is actually included in GOAL Civil Rights and Public Safety bill where we propose to create the Criminal Firearms and Trafficking Division.
• One concern we do have is the sharing of private information that could be misused as has been done in the past.
SECTION 37 (Penalties for Armed Carjacking) – Support
SECTION 38 & 39 (Penalties for Armed Home Invasion) - Support
SECTION 40 (Possession of Firearms While Intoxicated) – Support*
• We would like to see some clarification that people on moderate doses of prescribed medication are not caught up in any such penalties.
SECTION 41 (Increasing Penalties for Carrying a Firearm on School Grounds) – Oppose
• This law needs to be amended to allow lawfully licensed citizens to carry on school grounds. There exists an absolute right to protect life and that right should not stop at the edge of school property.
SECTION 47 (Special Commission on School Emergency Response) – Support*
• The members of the commission should include individuals who are specially trained for such responses as these specialties have drastically changed in the last few years.
SECTION 48 (Commission for Mental Health in Schools) – Support*
• Mental health issues have come to the forefront in the past several years. Every tragedy we have witnessed recently has been the result of a very disturbed person that was not helped. This commission should actually be much broader and look at the state of mental health services across the Commonwealth. GOAL has suggested that the legislature look at drafting a mental health omnibus bill or bond bill in the next session.
SECTION 49 (Commission to Study the Safekeeping of Firearms for Distressed People) – Support
SECTION 50 (Class B Licenses) – Needs Redrafting
• It appears that this section was intended to do away with the LTC Class B licenses. These licenses have seldom been issued because of the confusion over what one can possess on them. We agree that the Class B should be eliminated, the problem is that the language only states that they shall not be issued. This could be taken a completely different way to a licensing officer. The language needs to be redrafted removing the Class B from section 131 and subsequent laws entirely and then transforming all Class Bs currently issued to Class A licenses.
Finally
I am contacting you today with great concern over the recently released legislation “An Act Relative to the Reduction of Gun Violence”. As a lawful gun owner of the Commonwealth, I have been forced to live under the oppressive laws passed in 1998. Since Chapter 180 was passed the number of lawful gun owners has been drastically reduced while gun crime has tripled. After a year of hearings and deliberations I had seriously hoped to see legislation that would bring me some relief and find ways to go after the criminal element. Instead what this bill represents amounts to Chapter 180 Part II.
I am greatly opposed to many of the measures in the legislation including:
• Expanding the “suitability” clause currently in the License to Carry laws to the FID Card. This policy is already widely abused by some licensing officials.
• FID cards will be changed from a “shall issue” to a “may issue” making it a discretionary license. It also adds “good reason” standard to FID cards meaning a citizen would have to provide a reason for wanting an FID card.
• It would allow licensing officers to place arbitrary restrictions on FID Card holders.
• In both the FID card and LTC laws it lowers the two year misdemeanor disqualifier to only one year. This could easily result in thousands more citizens losing their civil rights.
• Allows Public Safety to establish rules/regulations for “suitability” with the advice of the Mass Chiefs and GCAB but will NOT be in law. The suitability clause has been widely abused by some local chiefs, but yet they are going to be allowed to determine definitions.
• Grant authority to the Attorney General to remove guns from the Approved Firearm Roster making it even more difficult for lawful gun owners to purchase quality handguns in Massachusetts.
I urge you to oppose this bill as it is written and ask the Speaker to withdraw it and redraft the bill to go after criminals rather than lawful gun owners.
John,
I wanted to take the time to make some observations on the proposed gun laws to have public hearings tomorrow. First and most important I don’t see anything in these proposed laws that are aimed at stopping criminals from miss-using or acquiring guns, they are all aimed at law-abiding gun owners. The licensed gun owners in this state are statistically among the most law abiding group there is.
Since 1998 when Mass passed it historic firearms laws, gun homicides are up 68% and gun related assault injuries are up by 72% all while the homicide rate nationwide is down 49%, sounds like we are heading in the wrong direction. Also according to the FBI Mass is the most violent state in the entire northeast US, including the states of NY NJ and PA.
Among the things I question and have problems with are
Section 18
Private face to face transactions will no longer be allowed.
What this means- all transfers will have to be facilitated by a federally licensed firearms dealer. This new section is so poorly worded at the moment that it is impossible to tell if this is legal with regard to federal laws FFL’s must follow. It is also unknown if this provision will end the ability to privately transfer handguns that are not on the Executive Office of Public Safety roster or the “secret Attorney General list” (which has never been published in any official recording). Under current law, private transfers of any handgun were legal so long as the gun is not banned by the Assault Weapons Ban and both parties hold the proper level of license to possess the transferred handgun.
There are several sections that I (and GOAL) support while there are several we oppose. Here is a summary of the various sections and how I and you should feel about them.
Gun Owners Action League’s
Report on “An Act Relative to the Reduction of Gun Violence”
Chapter 180 Part II
May 30, 2014
Download a .pdf of the report here. View Speaker DeLeo's Bill - H.4121 here
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 House Speaker Robert DeLeo released “An Act Relative to the Reduction of Gun Violence” to the general public. Upon reviewing the legislation we were very disappointed. GOAL was hoping that after a year of hearings across the state a bill would be drafted that we could immediately support. Sadly, that is not the case.
It was our sincere hope that a bill would emerge that would begin to reform the state’s convoluted and ineffective gun laws. Instead what appeared could be described as Chapter 180 Part II. In 1998 the Massachusetts legislature passed sweeping changes to the gun laws known as Chapter 180. These changes resulted in an alarming 80% reduction in the number of licensed gun owners in the state. As for the ability of these new laws to reduce crime, they have been an abject failure! In the fifteen years since the bill was signed into law, gun-related homicides have doubled and gun related assaults have tripled.
This newly proposed legislation was supposed to be about addressing mental health issues and providing more crime fighting tools. While some of the bill covers those matters to some degree, there are proposals in it that will simply result in the further persecution of lawful gun owners. Further, rather than actually reforming the convoluted laws so that lawful citizens and law enforcement can better understand them, this bill would actually add to the legal chaos.
There are certain proposals that GOAL can support if the language is drafted correctly like the compliance with the 2007 National Instant Check System Improvement Amendments Act. There are also sections that cover punishing armed carjackings and home invasions that we could support. The bill also addresses the delays in licensing renewals to some degree.
It is our hope that this legislation can be amended to the point where GOAL and its members can support thoughtful mental health and crime fighting tools. Below is a review of the proposals by subject matter, section and GOAL’s stance:
SECTIONS 1, 10, 11, 12, 42, 43 & 44 (Compliance with the 2007 National Instance Check System Improvement Amendments Act) – Could Support if Drafted Correctly
SECTIONS 2, 3 & 45 (Firearm Retailer Employees) – Support
• The language in these sections would allow access to CORI information and mandate that all employees for firearm retailers are subject to such checks.
SECTION 4 (School Resource Officers and Mental Health of Students) – Support
• This section would pave the way for School Resource Officers across the state. There is the concern that schools may not have the financial means to accomplish the task.
• A secondary concern is to assure that such officers are exempt under MGL 269 § 10j, carrying firearms on school grounds.
• Provides for school plans to deal with acute mental health needs.
SECTION 5 (Suicide Awareness Training for School Personnel)
• The concept is to make teachers and other school employees aware of the warning signs of potential suicide at risk persons. Will there be appropriate funding for this and are we asking too much of teachers these days? Perhaps an informational campaign for the students would be more effective.
SECTION 6 &13 (Suicide Prevention in Hunter Education Courses & Data Collection) – Oppose
• While we understand the importance of suicide prevention, it is our belief that adding such curriculum to safe handling courses may be inappropriate. Specifically hunter education courses are nationally accredited and may not be able to be changed to meet the criteria. Primarily certified firearm instructors are not versed in mental health issues.
• There is also language in the section about collecting data on firearm related suicides. If this is to be done, we believe this should be expanded to all types of suicides, especially since the number of suicides by hanging/suffocation are more than guns, drugs and poison combined.
SECTION 7 (Physicians and Firearms) – Oppose
• GOAL strongly objects to physicians discussing the “role of firearms” with their patients. While we appreciate the effort to recognize suicide risk and mitigate potential means, these subjects should be dealt with concerning all means of suicides. Further, it is likely that this matter would be better suited to licensed mental health professionals.
SECTION 8 & 9 (Hospitalization and Evaluation) – Need More Clarification
• It is not quite clear what is being accomplished with these sections. If it is for the purpose of making sure that persons needing help are receiving it that would be a good start. We do need to clarify that persons who have been evaluated and released as not needing treatment should not be disqualified.
SECTIONS 15, 21 & 28 (Posting of and Printing of Suicide Prevention Numbers) – Oppose
• These sections seek to mandate that firearm retailers post information about suicide prevention and that phone numbers for such information be placed on firearm licenses. While we appreciate legitimate methods for reducing suicides, such mandates would only go further to stigmatize lawful gun ownership and are unlikely to have the positive effect sought.
SECTION 16 & 46 (Firearm Retailer Records) – Oppose
• This section would mandate that firearm retailers who have closed their business must forward their records to EOPSS. It is already mandated at the federal level that all such materials are to be handed over to the BATFE, why does the state need them as well? This would only add more bureaucracy and useless data to a system that is already in a mess.
SECTION 17 (Technical Correction)
SECTION 18 (Banning “Private Sales”) – Oppose
• This section would needlessly ban the private sales of guns by licensed citizens. Under current law lawfully licensed citizens are limited to four such sales in a calendar year. The seller has to be legally licensed and thus has gone through a background check. The purchaser has to be legally licensed and thus has gone through a background check. Then a state transfer form (FA-10) must be completed and submitted to the state within seven days giving the state a second chance at reviewing the transfer.
• Another problem exists as there are many high quality handguns that cannot be lawfully transferred by firearm retailers. As the language in this bill would even further complicate that problem it is not be justifiable to ban private transfers on those firearms.
SECTIONS 19 & 26 (Firearm Identification Cards & Licenses to Carry) – Oppose
• Expands the “suitability” clause currently in the License to Carry laws to the FID Card.
• This changes FID cards from a “shall issue” to a “may issue” making it a discretionary license. It also adds “good reason” language to FID cards, meaning a citizen would have to provide a reason for wanting an FID card.
• Adds the ability for licensing officers to place arbitrary restrictions on FID Card holders.
• In both the FID card and LTC laws it lowers the two year misdemeanor disqualifier to only one year. This could easily result in thousands more citizens losing their civil rights.
• Adds misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
• Removes the right to apply for an FID card after a five year period of a conviction of a nonviolent crime.
• Adds extensive mental health language as for commitments and hospitalization that uses the term “confined”, but offers no definition for what that is.
• Creates additional language for drug and alcohol addiction, still has the “cured” language which has been a problem.
• EOPSS to establish rules/ regulations for suitability with the advice of the Mass Chiefs and GCAB but will NOT be in law. The suitability clause has been widely abused by some local chiefs, but yet they are going to be allowed to determine definitions.
SECTION 20 & 27 (Receipt for License Applications) – Support*
• This section would mandate that a receipt is given when a license application is received. The receipt would provide evidence that a license would be valid until the system has approved or denied the application. This would relieve at least some of the problems with the system.
• We would like to see the system fixed as a whole to assure that licensed individuals can expect a professional level of service for the high license fees they pay.
• We would also like to make sure that said receipts would make the license valid for purchasing guns and ammunition while they are waiting for the full renewal.
SECTION 22 & 30 (Gun Registration & Penalties for not Renewing Early) - Oppose
• Would require gun owners to submit an affidavit at time of application on lost or stolen firearms. Since reporting such matters is already law, why are we wasting time with yet another bureaucratic step? This is obviously an attempt at backdoor gun registration which has always led to confiscation.
• The section also allows for penalties if gun owners do not renew their licenses 90 days early! What could be the purpose of this other than pure harassment?
SECTION 23 (Technical Correction)
SECTION 24 & 31 (Lowering Fines for Renewals) – Support
• Reduces the fine for an expired license from $500 to $100.
SECTION 25 (Increased Penalties for Failure to Report Lost or Stolen Guns) – OPPOSE
• The main reason for licensed gun owners being wary of reporting a theft or loss is the abuse of the “suitability” that this bill even seeks to expand. For good reason, gun owners fear that if they make such a report that they will have their license revoked. As evidence there is an ongoing case where it took the thieves two days to break into the safe and the homeowner was still brought up on charges for unsafe storage. If the government wants the assistance of lawful gun owners then we would strongly suggest that it begin to earn our trust.
SECTION 29 (LTC Renewals) – Support
• This section changes the renewal language for a License to Carry concerning renewals. The law will now allow licenses to remain valid until the renewal process is completed.
• We would want to make sure that there is a means to make sure firearm and ammunition purchases will be legal during this time.
SECTION 32: (Further Complicating the Approved Firearm Roster) – Oppose
• For almost two decades there has been great confusion over what handguns can be legally sold in the Commonwealth. This has been caused by two different state entities claiming authority over these sales.
The current laws allow for companies to have their products tested and if passed placed on the Approved Firearms Roster through the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS). There are also regulations under the Consumer Protection laws through the Attorney General’s office over the sale and manufacture of handguns.
These two entities have confused gun owners and retailers as a list is published, but the Attorney General does not recognize it. So rather than clarify the problem, this legislation would make the matter worse by giving the Attorney General the authority to arbitrarily remove firearms from the list.
SECTION 33: (Increase Penalties for Storage Violations) – Oppose
• Drastically increases penalties for storage violations. The question is why? Is there a particular need for such increases?
• There is also a change in the law regarding severe penalties, up to 15 years in prison, for access to large capacity rifles or shotguns, handguns and machine guns to anybody under the age of 18, regardless if they have a license. What is the purpose for removing the licensed junior shooter exemption? This will greatly complicate providing junior shooters with safety training and the ability to compete and practice their sport.
SECTION 34 (Drastic Changes to the Certified Instructor Training Program) – Oppose
• It removes the recognition of instructors certified by a nationally recognized organization (NRA).
• Grants the Colonel of the State Police wide “suitability” authority over who can be a certified instructor.
• Hints that there will be one standardized curriculum for all firearm safety courses and it will be created by the state.
• Adds mandatory live fire to all courses that will add expense to non-fire courses. This may also make the Hunter Education courses ineligible since Massachusetts does include live fire.
• Seeks to include suicide prevention and “harm reduction” into the curriculum.
SECTION 36 (Tracing of Guns used in Crime) – Support*
• This particular piece is actually included in GOAL Civil Rights and Public Safety bill where we propose to create the Criminal Firearms and Trafficking Division.
• One concern we do have is the sharing of private information that could be misused as has been done in the past.
SECTION 37 (Penalties for Armed Carjacking) – Support
SECTION 38 & 39 (Penalties for Armed Home Invasion) - Support
SECTION 40 (Possession of Firearms While Intoxicated) – Support*
• We would like to see some clarification that people on moderate doses of prescribed medication are not caught up in any such penalties.
SECTION 41 (Increasing Penalties for Carrying a Firearm on School Grounds) – Oppose
• This law needs to be amended to allow lawfully licensed citizens to carry on school grounds. There exists an absolute right to protect life and that right should not stop at the edge of school property.
SECTION 47 (Special Commission on School Emergency Response) – Support*
• The members of the commission should include individuals who are specially trained for such responses as these specialties have drastically changed in the last few years.
SECTION 48 (Commission for Mental Health in Schools) – Support*
• Mental health issues have come to the forefront in the past several years. Every tragedy we have witnessed recently has been the result of a very disturbed person that was not helped. This commission should actually be much broader and look at the state of mental health services across the Commonwealth. GOAL has suggested that the legislature look at drafting a mental health omnibus bill or bond bill in the next session.
SECTION 49 (Commission to Study the Safekeeping of Firearms for Distressed People) – Support
SECTION 50 (Class B Licenses) – Needs Redrafting
• It appears that this section was intended to do away with the LTC Class B licenses. These licenses have seldom been issued because of the confusion over what one can possess on them. We agree that the Class B should be eliminated, the problem is that the language only states that they shall not be issued. This could be taken a completely different way to a licensing officer. The language needs to be redrafted removing the Class B from section 131 and subsequent laws entirely and then transforming all Class Bs currently issued to Class A licenses.
Finally
I am contacting you today with great concern over the recently released legislation “An Act Relative to the Reduction of Gun Violence”. As a lawful gun owner of the Commonwealth, I have been forced to live under the oppressive laws passed in 1998. Since Chapter 180 was passed the number of lawful gun owners has been drastically reduced while gun crime has tripled. After a year of hearings and deliberations I had seriously hoped to see legislation that would bring me some relief and find ways to go after the criminal element. Instead what this bill represents amounts to Chapter 180 Part II.
I am greatly opposed to many of the measures in the legislation including:
• Expanding the “suitability” clause currently in the License to Carry laws to the FID Card. This policy is already widely abused by some licensing officials.
• FID cards will be changed from a “shall issue” to a “may issue” making it a discretionary license. It also adds “good reason” standard to FID cards meaning a citizen would have to provide a reason for wanting an FID card.
• It would allow licensing officers to place arbitrary restrictions on FID Card holders.
• In both the FID card and LTC laws it lowers the two year misdemeanor disqualifier to only one year. This could easily result in thousands more citizens losing their civil rights.
• Allows Public Safety to establish rules/regulations for “suitability” with the advice of the Mass Chiefs and GCAB but will NOT be in law. The suitability clause has been widely abused by some local chiefs, but yet they are going to be allowed to determine definitions.
• Grant authority to the Attorney General to remove guns from the Approved Firearm Roster making it even more difficult for lawful gun owners to purchase quality handguns in Massachusetts.
I urge you to oppose this bill as it is written and ask the Speaker to withdraw it and redraft the bill to go after criminals rather than lawful gun owners.
