Readers Say

‘Let’s fix the problem’: Readers weigh in on Mass. gun laws

51% of readers say gun laws are strict enough, but most agree more education is needed.

Dorothy Grady of Clinton, participates at a One Million Moms for Gun Control rally at the State House in Boston. Aram Boghosian for The Boston Globe

By Zipporah Osei

April 12, 2023

6 minutes to read

Another high-profile mass shooting has lawmakers and activists across the country making a renewed push to tight gun laws in the country. Massachusetts has the sixth-strongest gun laws in the U.S. and the lowest rate of gun deaths, according to gun violence prevention organization Everytown for Gun Safety, but some lawmakers in the state say more can be done to avoid tragedies like the shooting at a Tennessee school that claimed the lives of three children and three educators.

State lawmakers are working on a gun safety bill that would review the current laws and address areas that need more focused action, including ghost guns and firearm modification parts.

With the heightened attention to the threat of gun violence in the state, we asked Boston.com readers if they thought Massachusetts should have stricter gun control laws and readers were split on the issue. A slight majority, or 51%, said the state has done enough to restrict access to guns while 49% are eager to see lawmakers further address gun control. Most readers said the focus should be on educating the public about the protections already in place and enforcing punishments for those that violate the laws.

“The gun laws are fine,” Joe C. from Bridgewater said. “I would like to see stiffer penalties for violation and more vigorous enforcement.”

Do you think Massachusetts should have stricter gun laws?

Yes, more gun control.

49%

No, the laws are restrictive enough.

51%

The Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence gives the state an A- grade in its annual gun law scorecard and cites “significant investments in community violence intervention programs.” One of the components of Massachusetts’ gun control laws are “red flag orders,” which allows loved ones or law enforcement to prevent someone at risk of harming themselves or others from accessing guns, even if they have a license to carry. This is an under-utilized tool, according to a report by the Associated Press, and several of our readers shared that they weren’t aware the law existed.

“We need a lot more education of the public about red flag orders, plus further education of police and government agencies who deal with the public to encourage the use of these laws. We also need to make families more aware of risks to children if guns are stored with ammunition, and are not locked up,” Elizabeth K. from Belchertown said. “Overall, I am very glad to live in Massachusetts with its strict gun control laws. Every state should have them.”

Regardless of if they support more gun laws in the state or not, readers had ideas about how the state could better protect residents against gun violence. Below you’ll find a sampling of responses from readers sharing how their thoughts on the current state of gun laws in Massachusetts and what, if anything, they’d like to see changed.

Responses have been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Do you think Massachusetts should have stricter gun laws?

No, the laws are restrictive enough.

“Massachusetts’ firearms laws are overly restrictive on many fronts. Neighboring states like New Hampshire and Maine have little to nothing by way of state-level gun laws with no material difference in gun crime.” — Aubrey T., Groton

“I don’t think that creating more laws is necessarily the answer. Education and campaigns pointing out mental health issues and signs to look for would be an intelligent plan. People lose the perspective that it’s not a gun that causes the killings, it’s a person. If we remove all guns, do you think that someone who wants to harm or kill others will stop if they can’t get their hands on a gun? Let’s not keep putting band-aids on things, let’s fix the problem!” — Barton, Pepperell

“Massachusetts’ low gun violence is due to positive socio-economic factors. It’s not because of its strict gun laws. The answer is right in the Constitution: A well-regulated militia. So the focus should be on who can get firearms, not on gun accessories. All features should be made legal, including folding stocks, threaded barrels, short barrel rifles, pistol grips, and standard capacity magazines.

“Instead the government should focus on being competent. Develop systems that can allow for the exchange of information between healthcare providers, psychologists, courts, police, and criminal records database managers. Create a clear list of who can get guns and who can not. Then determine lifetime disqualifiers (a violent record) and temporary disqualifiers (active warrant) and most importantly a way to recover gun rights once enough time has elapsed. Gun rights are a critical component of democracy. Once gun rights are removed, civil rights are soon to follow.” — Ayaz, Bridgewater

“You never hear of any regulations concerning the amount of ammo a person can lawfully possess. The shooter in Tennessee fired more than 150 rounds in under 15 minutes. If the government would regulate the sale of ammunition or ammunition-making materials, and limit the amount of live ammo a person can possess, these mass killings might be reduced regardless of the availability of guns. It just seems like an obvious middle ground between second amendment supporters and gun control advocates. In other words, you can keep your gun(s) but you cannot have an endless supply of ammo.” — Andrew, Westford

“As a responsible gun owner in Massachusetts, I believe our gun laws are unconstitutional. They infringe on the rights of responsible citizens like me and are made up of a patchwork of restrictions that seem completely arbitrary. Instead of trying to ban and restrict our way to an unattainable gun-free utopia, we should be leaning on what makes our Commonwealth one of the best in the nation: education. We should educate people about firearms. We should educate people on the dangers of firearms and educate them on how to properly handle and use a gun. Not everyone has to like or own guns, but learning about them and understanding them will make them less scary to many individuals and can even prevent gun violence. Lastly, we need to do a better job of getting individuals mental health treatment. If someone is in a mental state where they are willing to go out and hurt or kill children or other random individuals, there is no guarantee gun laws will work to stop their intentions. They could just as easily build homemade weapons to hurt people.” — Alan, Brighton

Yes, more gun control.

“I am so proud of the common sense gun laws that Massachusetts currently has but as a Moms Demand Action Volunteer Lead on the North Shore, I work on this because one death is too many. Here in Massachusetts, we are creating an example of how it can be done in other states. Gun Owners Action League continually bangs the same rhetorical drum about the bad guys with guns. The Crime Gun Data Analysis [bill], for example, would allow us to finally analyze that data to determine what and where the issues are so that Massachusetts could better address gun crimes. This should be something that both sides can agree on. The same with live fire training. Requiring actual firearm training is only going to ensure that law-abiding gun owners have the appropriate training. Finally, ghost guns are becoming a rapidly growing threat to all Mass. residents. These bills will save lives – it’s that simple.” — Rebecca O., West Newbury

“I’m not a ‘gun person’ so I’m always going to be for more gun control. As such, regardless of how effective our current gun laws are, I fully support any open dialogue among the various stakeholders to encourage broader mutual understanding and cooperation, particularly if it may lead to the identification of any remaining safety gaps we can close within the Commonwealth. That being said, so much is not within our control. We are bordered by and within close proximity to other states with looser gun laws and we can’t restrict their travelers or control what they bring with them. While I don’t claim to have all the answers, I’m thinking we all might be a bit safer if the Commonwealth could work across state lines with our neighboring state governments to encourage them to get on the same page, by working toward aligning objectives and strategies, thereby increasing the radius of our collective safety sphere.” — MaryAnn, Amesbury

“Mandatory firearms training. Mandatory firearms safes in the home where the firearm must be stored. Make parents of individuals 18 and under (21 if living at home) held responsible if guns become available to any young person living with them who obtains the guns and causes injury/death or physically threatens someone with the gun. Restrict the purchase of firearms to any individuals 18 and under (21 if living at home) who have brought a firearm to school, athletic events, basically anywhere but hunting, firearm classes, or shooting ranges. Purchase cannot be made until 25 years of age. Make assault weapons illegal to own or purchase.” — Barbara G., Worcester

“More education across communities on what laws exist and how to use them. I have a two-year-old son and am very grateful to live where we live, but gun violence is in the back of my head 24/7. I wasn’t aware of the red flag law — maybe we can talk more about that and other measures in place as a community.” — Emily H., Holliston

Boston.com occasionally interacts with readers by conducting informal polls and surveys. These results should be read as an unscientific gauge of readers’ opinion.