Revised gun bill still aiming at wrong target
When a major statewide police organization publicly opposes a proposed gun-reform bill, it’s a sure sign that measure as written doesn’t have a chance of passing.
Maybe that’s why Democratic leadership in the House had yet to address this particular gun-reform legislation, which had been mired in a procedural dispute with the Senate for nearly three months.
The House wanted to send state Rep. Michael Day’s omnibus gun-reform package ( HD 4420) to the Joint Committee on the Judiciary, which the Stoneham Democrat co- chairs, on June 26. But Senate leaders derailed that bid on July 10, wanting instead to refer it to the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security.
Until Thursday, the bill remained lodged in House Clerk’s limbo, awaiting direction on a committee assignment.
In an attempt to assuage law enforcement’s and gunowners’ concerns, Day retooled his bill somewhat, but in doing so still managed to incense a major guns-rights organization.
Speaker Ron Mariano announced Thursday that the House will move forward with a controversial revised gun- control bill, which would ban new purchases of assault- style rif les, like AR15s, similar to the rules instituted by the federal government in 1994.
Current owners of these potentially banned types of weapons would be “grandfathered” and allowed to legally retain ownership, but according to the new bill, the transfer or sale of all new AR-15S, regardless of manufacturer, must cease by Aug. 1, 2024.
Prior to retooling his legislation, Day said he toured the state, making 11 stops, including discussions with gun-rights groups. According to Speaker Mariano, the complaints of gun rights groups were heard.
“This is a huge pile of crap,” Jim Wallace, the executive director of the Gun Owners Action League, told the Boston Herald after the bill was announced.
Wallace contradicted assertions made by Day and fellow lawmakers at a State House press conference that his group had been involved to their satisfaction.
“The rewrite has been so secret,” Wallace said. “Nobody I talked to knew anything about it.”
The updated legislation did ease prohibitions on carrying concealed firearms on private property.
The new bill changes that language to include just private homes, not public places like bars and restaurants, according to Day.
The previous version would have prevented even off- duty police officers from possessing firearms in those locations.
The measure would still crack down on ghost guns, standardize firearm training, overhaul licensing rules, and block licensed firearm owners from carrying guns in schools, polling places, and government buildings.
While an incremental improvement, we doubt the updated bill satisfies all of law- enforcement’s concerns.
Fox 25 News reported in August that the Mass. Chiefs of Police Association and several local police departments had raised concerns about this wide-ranging gun-reform bill.
The MCOPA, along with the Plymouth and Ware police departments, separately criticized Day’s bill.
A July 7 MCOPA memo came down hard on the scope of the bill, raising questions about legal overreach and the ability to enforce it.
Plymouth Police Chief Dana Flynn also blasted the bill in a July 15 Facebook post, urging residents to contact their local representatives.
“This bill seems more designed to invade the privacy and vandalize and confiscate the property of lawabiding citizens than it does protecting them,” Flynn wrote.
Springfield Police Superintendent Cheryl Clapprood voiced similar sentiments.
She told Masslive that licensed gun owners are not the issue, and added that lawmakers should create legislation that would address the small percentage of criminals who are repeat, violent criminal offenders.
“Although I believe the intent of this legislation means well, in truth the … language does nothing to address the issue of illegal guns and ghost guns being used in criminal activity by repeat violent criminal offenders,” Clapprood said.
One law that could help, she said, is the Bartley-fox law, enacted in 1975, which “could substantially help reduce gun violence if it was utilized more by our courts.”
That statute mandates a minimum one year prison term for anyone who uses a gun in commission of a crime.
Unfortunately, that sentence is usually circumvented by legal maneuvering.
Day’s bill isn’t the only ongoing gun- control initiative.
In the Senate, Majority Leader Cindy Creem has sought input as that branch develops its own gun-reform bill.
“I have been meeting with Senators, gun safety activists, gun owners, and police and public safety officials to identify areas where we can come up with bipartisan, collaborative legislation to tackle gun violence,” Creem, a Newton Democrat, wrote.
We’d hope Sen. Creem’s sensible, consensus approach to gun reform would arrive at legislation that focuses more on the criminal element, not law- abiding citizens.