------------------------
Samuel Whittemore is spinning in his grave, likely at speeds exceeding 10,000 RPM.
...and some (colorful) background:
http://www.badassoftheweek.com/whittemore.html
Posted on 03/07/2018 6:33:11 AM PST by MarvinStinson
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. Crime didn’t rise in Massachusetts because the state made it harder for honest citizens to lawfully carry a gun; it rose because other states didn’t do the same thing.
“Massachusetts probably has the toughest laws on the books, but what happens is people go across borders and buy guns and bring them into our state,” rationalizes Boston Mayor Tom Menino. “Guns have no borders.”
This has become a popular argument in gun-control circles. It may even be convincing to someone emotionally committed to the belief that ever-stricter gun control is a plausible path to safety. But it doesn’t hold water.
>
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.”
>
I would love to see the #’s of into vs. out-of residents during this time as well.
IOW: Did the gun ‘laws’ drive out the gun-owners?
>
Later they have many reasons and explanations as to why the “SOLVED” problem has gotten worse. Naturally there are many reasons for the failure, but “THEY TRIED to DO SOMETHING!”
>
True, but too few, if any, are penalized, in any way/shape/matter/form, for having ‘done something’ that made things worse. And, ‘voted out of office’ (w/ all the bennies still intact) really isn’t a *deterrent*.
>
Menino is currently dead and not actively rationalizing anything.
>
Well, maybe, “How did I get (down) *HERE*?”
An oldie, but bump for reference
In Mass the Attorney general has unique power in that she can, at will, declare specific guns to be unauthorized in the state. There is no review or appeal.
She waves a magic wand and all of the AR-15s on the shelves become illegal.
Our legislature and RINO governor walk in lockstep behind this Social Justice Warrior and her coven-mate Lizzy Warren.
Probably not.
The gun laws have been pretty restrictive here for years. Along with that, the tax situation has been progressively bad as well. However, there are mechanisms where over spending can be limited.
If I were considering moving out of MA, the gun laws wherever I was moving to would be better.
And the leftist answer to the fact that crime soars when guns are restricted is - imagine how bad it would be if we didn’t restrict the People from defending themselves...
“Menino is currently dead and not actively rationalizing anything.”
Menino didn’t rationalize anything even when he was alive———dumber than a rock.
.
But he hid it pretty well by mostly just mumbling.
------------------------
Samuel Whittemore is spinning in his grave, likely at speeds exceeding 10,000 RPM.
...and some (colorful) background:
http://www.badassoftheweek.com/whittemore.html
““Massachusetts probably has the toughest laws on the books, but what happens is people go across borders and buy guns and bring them into our state,” rationalizes Boston Mayor Tom Menino. “Guns have no borders.””
Like the states that border MA are simply “the wild west” when it comes to their gun laws.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.