Something I wrote up to explain MA gun laws

[Turbocharged]

I wrote this to roughly explain the gun laws in MA to less educated people.
It's aimed at people between 16-20, so I limited the details and vocabulary to bare essentials. So most of you will be slightly bored. It's common knowledge in this community, but not to the general public.
Everyone is welcome to post this elsewhere, but please site me (Matt C. aka Turbocharged) as the author.
Go easy on the criticism. It was writen to meet simple needs.

Massachusetts Gun Control ​

When you think of gun control, chances are a lot of thoughts run through your mind, probably including thoughts about these recent shootings, and concerns for public and personal safety as well. The most common opinion is that strict gun control laws will prevent violence and gun related crimes. We’ll see what the hard, factual statistics have to say about that. You might be surprised what actually happens when more controlling gun regulations are put in place. My focus for right now will be Massachusetts gun control laws, but a lot of the trends you’ll notice also apply to other states throughout the US.
First, I think an explanation of current Massachusetts and federal gun control regulations is in order. Prior to 1998, all that was require to obtain a rifle was an FID, or Firearms Identification. An FID could be obtained by anyone at least 15 years old, assuming they had their parents consent and had no felonies on their record. At 18 one could apply for an FID on their own, again, assuming they had no felonies on their record. Now, federal law prevented then, and still prevents, anyone under 21 from buying a pistol or revolver. Prior to 1998, all that was needed to buy and carry a pistol or revolver was a valid FID and being at least 21.
That may seem fairly reasonable, and I agree that it was, but that is not the case today. In 1998, Massachusetts passed The Gun Control Act of 1998, which was one of the most restrictive gun control acts in the country. The act went into effect on October 21, 1998. The act is extremely confusing, causing a lot of confusion. Due to the new laws being so difficult to understand, a lot of people were inadvertently turned into criminals simply because they did not understand the new regulations. I’ll try to simplify things so it can actually be considered English. The conditions for applying for an FID remains relatively the same, but there are added restrictions to the FID license. While it is called a “Firearms Identification”, it doesn’t not cover all firearms. An FID only permits the licensed individual to buy or posses a rifle that holds no more than ten rounds, and a shotgun that holds no more than five.
The gun control act of 1998 also created 2 new types of licenses; the LTC (or “License to Carry”) class “A” and LTC class “B”. To apply for either, the applicant must be at least 21 years old, and have no felonies on their record. An LTC class “B” permits the licensed individual to buy or posses rifles or shotguns of any capacity, and pistols that hold less than ten rounds. An LTC class “B” does not, however, permit the licensee to carry a gun on their person. Now, can you honestly say you think that those restrictions are reasonable?
These laws stem from a common belief that all people will follow the laws and go through the correct channels to acquire a firearm. Last time I checked, robbery was a crime no mater what tool is used. What most law makers don’t realize is that if someone is going to commit a crime, they aren’t going to be concerned with following all the laws to get one. Meaning, criminals will get guns whether it’s a crime to have them or not. Criminals, by definition, do not follow the law. Therefore, these laws only apply to law abiding citizens, making it more difficult for law abiding citizens to exercise their rights.
Maybe the moral side of the issue doesn’t mean much to you, so here are some facts. Massachusetts has the toughest gun control laws in New England. Massachusetts also has the least number of gun owners (per 100,000) in New England. Both of those facts may seem to be a good thing, but listen to this: Massachusetts has the highest violent crime rate in New England. Since the Gun Control Act of 1998 was implemented, gun related homicides increased by 68%. Assault Related Gun Injuries increased 72%. Assault Related Hospital Discharges increased 160%. Gun Assault Emergency Room Visits increased 222%. Gun Assault Outpatient Observations increased 538%. Is that really moving is a good direction?! That is the result of the Gun control Act of 1998. When guns are outlawed, only criminals will have guns. If the average citizen has guns, then a criminal is less likely to try to rob that citizen, or any citizen that could potential have a gun. If guns are difficult for a law abiding citizen to get, criminals are much more confident and are more willing to commit crimes without the fear of being stopped.
The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental part of American history, stretching back to the 1770s, and the conflict between America and Great Britain. If it weren’t for firearm owners and riflemen, my speaking out against the laws in place would be considered treason. It’s an important part of our history, and we fought for our right to firearms. In a state with such a history in the Revolutionary war, you would think more importance would be placed on the rights we won. This state also saw a lot of oppression under the crown, oppressing it’s citizens rights seems like the last thing they would do. Our Constitution says “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”. That says nothing about restrictions, or that the right only applies to some people to keep some arms. While the point that felons should no t have access to weapons is reasonable, Restrictions in Massachusetts far exceed simply keeping the weapons out of the hands of criminals and dangerous persons, and just restricts law abiding citizens ability to exercise their right as well as protect themselves.

 

[Underwhere]

without reading it, I can tell you it needs some more line breaks or some sort of additional formatting.

 

[punx45]

I think you should stick to either explaining the laws, or arguing against them. You are doing both here, and I don't think the persuasion part brings anything new to the argument. I would go back, strengthen the plain and simple "here are the laws" part, and save the "heres why they are wrong" for another time. Its what I was expecting from the title.

Writing wise, you have a few redundancies "The act is extremely confusing, causing a lot of confusion." And, if you are going to use facts (especially numbers), you should cite your sources. Also, citing and quoting MGL can help re-enforce your position that the laws are confusing :-D

Its cool that you want to get the message out, good luck.

 

[Turbocharged]

I think you should stick to either explaining the laws, or arguing against them. You are doing both here, and I don't think the persuasion part brings anything new to the argument. I would go back, strengthen the plain and simple "here are the laws" part, and save the "heres why they are wrong" for another time. Its what I was expecting from the title.

Writing wise, you have a few redundancies "The act is extremely confusing, causing a lot of confusion." And, if you are going to use facts (especially numbers), you should cite your sources. Also, citing and quoting MGL can help re-enforce your position that the laws are confusing :-D

Its cool that you want to get the message out, good luck.

Lol, I must have missed that sentance while proof reading. XD

I think you're right, I think I'll split it into two documents.

I'll also add some more breaks. I wrote it without any paragraph breaks, and decided to add them to make it easyer to read. Obviously I need to add more.

As for the persuasion part being old news, the aim was to at least bring people without any knowledge of the facts up to speed. Like I said, it will be boring and common knowledge to you guys.

Thanks for the tips guys, +rep.

 

[cekim]

As others have said, formatting, formatting, formatting...

Too many words all smashed together - remember your audience should be assumed to be reading at a 6th grade level (sad, but if you want to get a point like this across, it better be plain as the nose on your face)...

Just my personal preference, but "bullet lists" are helpful to present lots of info in a small space as they allow the short-cutting of grammar/transition words and visually bring people's attention to your points...

Subject Headers! Remember, not to insult your readers, but whether they are actually mentally impaired (as most MA voters seem to be) or they have just turned off their brain - the result is the same...

They need to be spoon fed - so paragraphs should be set apart and labeled so you barely have to read them to get the "point"...

Lastly, like all written work, including this post - I am sure there is fat to cut... You don't have long before you lose even a supportive audience...

Prioritize your "message" so that if they stop reading at any point, you've at least gotten one really important thing across to them...

 

[crak]

You guys are all just complaining because the internet and powerpoint have dumbed us all down enough to stack overflow on paragraphs longer than 1-2 sentences long.

There are paragraphs, he just couldn't Tab indent them on the forum.

 

[Turbocharged]

As others have said, formatting, formatting, formatting...

Too many words all smashed together - remember your audience should be assumed to be reading at a 6th grade level (sad, but if you want to get a point like this across, it better be plain as the nose on your face)...

Just my personal preference, but "bullet lists" are helpful to present lots of info in a small space as they allow the short-cutting of grammar/transition words and visually bring people's attention to your points...

Subject Headers! Remember, not to insult your readers, but whether they are actually mentally impaired (as most MA voters seem to be) or they have just turned off their brain - the result is the same...

They need to be spoon fed - so paragraphs should be set apart and labeled so you barely have to read them to get the "point"...

Lastly, like all written work, including this post - I am sure there is fat to cut... You don't have long before you lose even a supportive audience...

Prioritize your "message" so that if they stop reading at any point, you've at least gotten one really important thing across to them...

I thought it was already "dumbed down" enough. Perhaps not you say.
I was hoping that the intended audience could understand it, but you think it's still too much? hmmmm... I might try making it simpler, but at some point it becomes less of an article and more of a power point.

Crak is right, forum means a lot of my formating gets killed to simplify the post.

 

[terraformer]

I thought it was already "dumbed down" enough. Perhaps not you say.
I was hoping that the intended audience could understand it, but you think it's still too much? hmmmm... I might try making it simpler, but at some point it becomes less of an article and more of a power point.

Crak is right, forum means a lot of my formating gets killed to simplify the post.

Post the original word doc (assuming you use word) as an attachment to a post and we can edit it with track changes. I am more than happy to take a stab at it.

 

[terraformer]

You guys are all just complaining because the internet and powerpoint have dumbed us all down enough to stack overflow on paragraphs longer than 1-2 sentences long.

There are paragraphs, he just couldn't Tab indent them on the forum.

I agree people want to be spoon fed small bits of info via power point slides way too often (fan of Edward Tuffte). But there is also something to be said for stripping commentary from factual information. Turbocharged says he wants to do this to act as a primer for young people to understand what it takes to get an FID. This is a great thing. So is giving those young people the commentary on why things are so screwed up. But the two things can be separate and referential. The web and digital distribution allows that freedom. It can be a powerful tool to allow multiple presentations of the same info be useful for different purposes simultaneously.

 

[cekim]

You guys are all just complaining because the internet and powerpoint have dumbed us all down enough to stack overflow on paragraphs longer than 1-2 sentences long.

Know your audience... Or is that known thine enemy?

Whatever the cause, the result is the same and readily apparent...

As he is not trying to "preach to the choir", but inform and hopefully convert neutral or perhaps adversarial, but uninformed parties, you have to presume the worst. Particularly the younger generation is going to be more prone to this disease you mention of the 2 sentence paragraph...

I think terra' captured it well. Commentary vs Fact. A more concise way of saying "too much in one place"...

"Technical Sales" is a grueling process (which is what this is - you are trying to sell a detailed, complex analysis which requires looking past the sound bites they hear every day to history, logic and "unpleasant realities" before you will "buy it").

When forced to do such things, I like to think of the message/info I present as ratcheting gear - each tooth makes forward progress and then locks you in from moving backwards...

You can save-as HTML if you want it to keep the formatting...

 

[Turbocharged]

Post the original word doc (assuming you use word) as an attachment to a post and we can edit it with track changes. I am more than happy to take a stab at it.

I use word.
It should be attached.
You are correct on the purpose of this. I couldn't explain it, but yes this is a "primer" for younger people to realize how messed up things here really are.

I put the information on violent crimes and such in there so they don't say "so what? gun control is good". It would seem that the younger generations are taught not only that gun control is good, but that it works to prevent violent crimes.
I wrote it as one document because I didn't want to have the one on how difficult the laws here make things seen as supporting the laws, and because I wanted to make the point very clear that these laws were a BAD thing. I was afraid that if the reader had to switch documents, they may get distracted or might just be too lazy to read the second part.

EDIT: fixed attachment

 

[punx45]

I think another good thing to add might be more elaboration on the LTC application process. If I knew nothing about it, and read this, i would assume that i fill out a form, hand it in, and boom, card and guns.

Talk a little about how each town may have a different song and dance that you have to go through to even apply, and after that may still be denied for practically any reason. That may get a WTF? moment from some of the more level headed readers.

yeah, no problem with having both sections in the same piece, just logically separate them. the first draft just sort of melded together between the two points.

 

[hikerlt]

2 mny wrds.....

 

[Blitz1]

I use word.
It should be attached.
You are correct on the purpose of this. I couldn't explain it, but yes this is a "primer" for younger people to realize how messed up things here really are.

I put the information on violent crimes and such in there so they don't say "so what? gun control is good". It would seem that the younger generations are taught not only that gun control is good, but that it works to prevent violent crimes.
I wrote it as one document because I didn't want to have the one on how difficult the laws here make things seen as supporting the laws, and because I wanted to make the point very clear that these laws were a BAD thing. I was afraid that if the reader had to switch documents, they may get distracted or might just be too lazy to read the second part.

EDIT: fixed attachment

You have a couple of errors in the attached document. They're underlined in green. doesn't not, and posses.

Good job though.

 

[terraformer]

See attached. Keep in mind that these edits are in no way complete. I was trying to lay out a more defined structure of A) scannable fact B) historical context and common practice and C) commentary. So you tell someone, here are the requirements (which are likely not complete so others review them), here is what those mean in practice and then the blatant commentary. You can then fill in what is needed. Make sure you include the absurdities that result from these laws like OC being considered ammunition, or spent casings as souvenirs turn someone into an instant criminal, etc.

 

[Turbocharged]

Here it is after some editing from me. Large amount of thanks to Terraformer for the help. Once we've finished working on it, I think there are some places I can hand this out. You guys could do that too. Far too many people just don't know this stuff.


Collective effort by NorthEast Shooters; MA Gun Laws and Effects

EDIT: another version up

 

[terraformer]

New copy. You missed spots you needed to fill in about FID cards. I took care of it amongst other edits. BTW: This needs more eyeballs on it. I am sending a PM to some folks here who may be interested in helping out.

ETA: I don't think the doc should grow much bigger. I think it could use some more examples of where abuses can occur and where logic breaks down in the laws. It also needs to be tied together some more. Lastly, accuracy checks are paramount. Stuff like this must be accurate.

 

[punx45]

i like where this is going. Real writing is in the revision

remember, references for the stats!