Firearms Regulation
Online HTML guide is bot-blocked (Incapsula); data from official PDF via block-level extraction.
Do you approve of a law summarized below, which was approved by the House of Representatives on July 18, 2024 by a vote of 124 to 33, and approved by the Senate on July 18, 2024 by a vote of 35 to 5? SUMMARY: This law makes a number of changes to Massachusetts laws governing firearms. The law adds school administrators and licensed healthcare providers as parties permitted to ask a court to issue an Extreme Risk Protection Order – requiring an individual to surrender or relinquish their firearm licenses, permits, and firearms - if an individual is a present danger to self or others. The law also provides that, when issuing an Harassment Prevention Order, a court may also order the surrender of firearms licenses, permits, and firearms. The law imposes penalties for possessing, creating, and transferring untraceable “ghost gun” firearms and requires all firearms except antiques and relics, including unfinished frames and receivers that can be readily made into a finished product, to have serial numbers. The law includes privately-made guns like 3D-printed guns within the provisions governing untraceable “ghost gun” firearms. The law changes firearms licensing requirements to: (1) allow local licensing authorities to request prior license and permit information from the state, as well as access petitions for involuntary mental health commitments denied by a court in addition to prior involuntary commitments, as a part of their review of applications for licenses to carry firearms, firearm ID cards, and licenses to sell firearms; (2) require an individual to be 21 years of age to own semiautomatic rifles or shotguns; (3) add the possibility of incarceration of up to six months for a second offense of failing to report a firearm loss or theft; and (4) enable 12-15 year olds to apply for a self-defense spray permit with parental permission, and 15 to 18 year olds to apply independently. The law allows local firearm licensing authorities to transfer the responsibility to inspect firearm dealers to the State Police. The law requires local licensing authorities to attend statewide training regarding those inspections. It requires dealers to confiscate expired or suspended licenses and report them to the state and to local licensing authorities. The law changes the definition of “machine gun” to include bump stocks, trigger cranks, Glock switches and auto sears among the devices whose possession and use are subject to penalties. It expands the definition of “silencer” to include the parts used to construct a silencer. The law clarifies how to determine whether a firearm is an assault-style weapon and the circumstances under which a person may continue to possess assault-style weapons and large capacity feeding devices they already own. The law requires the state Firearm Control Advisory Board and the state Secretary of Public Safety and Security to review and update the rosters of prohibited assault-style firearms, approved firearms, and approved firearms sold for target shooting. The law clarifies requirements relating to the carry and transport of firearms in motor vehicles and ATVs. It prohibits the carrying of firearms in government buildings, polling locations, and schools, with certain exceptions. The law expands data compilation and reporting requirements to and from the state, and creates a publicly-accessible dashboard of anonymized aggregate firearm data, along with a commission to study that data. The law requires the State Police to provide training and a test for new applicants for licenses to carry or Firearm ID cards. The law establishes two special legislative commissions – one to examine funding for violence prevention services, and one to study emerging firearms technology. The law criminalizes discharging a firearm and striking a building in use.
A YES VOTE would keep in place the law, which increases the regulation of firearms, including ghost guns, machine guns, and assault-style weapons.
A NO VOTE would repeal this law.
Not published by the state
Since the passage of this safety law in 2024, the Commonwealth has made significant investments to implement the law including training employees, promulgating new gun licensure processes, and developing IT infrastructure. Repealing the law would require the Commonwealth to expend resources in suspending or re-directing those investments.
A YES vote will keep in place Massachusetts’ lifesaving 2024 gun safety law. The law made vital updates, including banning ghost guns; outlawing devices that turn semi-automatic weapons into machine guns; expanding tools to help prevent firearm suicide and mass shootings; creating a firearms data dashboard to better understand gun trafficking; and more. Thanks to our comprehensive approach to gun violence prevention, Massachusetts has a gun death rate 70% lower than the national average. Critical elements of the 2024 law are actively being implemented; they are already helping keep our communities safe. To continue driving the rate of gun violence even lower, we must maintain the strong policies included in this existing law. A YES vote will preserve this law, safeguard important progress, and allow us to continue the work of eradicating gun violence. Repealing it would make everyone in Massachusetts less safe.
Ned Notis-McConarty Vote Yes for a Safe Massachusetts PO Box 15 Boston, MA 02137 508-203-7985 www.yesforasafema.com
A No vote on Question 9 repeals an unnecessary reinvention of state firearms law. Before the new law, the state already had some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Chapter 135 isn’t about public safety—it is a deeply flawed, 116-page piece of bureaucratic overreach that wastes valuable tax dollars and burdens local communities. Passed without proper planning, the law mandates an expensive, real-time electronic tracking system that the state hasn’t funded and doesn’t know how to build. It also forces local police departments to enforce a confusing patchwork of vague rules, pulling officers away from investigating violent crime to plow through piles of administrative paperwork. State agencies have struggled to explain the law, issuing dozens of clarifications for rules that treat harmless historical re-enactors and antique hobbyists like criminals. Vote no on Question 9. Demand common-sense, transparent legislation focused on violent criminals, not limiting citizens’ civil rights.
Toby Leary The Civil Rights Coalition PO Box 252 North Andover, MA 01845 978-481-6990 TheCivilRightsCoalition.com
Both columns use the same layout. Text is quoted from the official state guide. Views expressed belong to the argument authors.