Felony Friday: MA Panel Wants Arrest to Disqualify Firearm Ownership
In 1998, the state of Massachusetts passed legislation with the intent to reduce violence and make the state safer. The lawmakers reasoned that a drop in violent crime could be achieved by reducing the amount of legal guns.The 1998 gun legislation accomplished the goal of reducing the amount of gun owners in the state. In 1998 the number of gun licenses totaled 1.5 million, by 2002 that number was down to two hundred thousand. That is an 87% drop in legal gun ownership for those scoring at home. Unfortunately, criminals did not heed the new laws (shocking!), therefore the most important aspect of the equation failed.The Boston Globe published an article in February of last year that summarized the ineffectiveness of the 1998 gun-control law. Writer Jeff Jacoby points out that violent crime committed with and without a firearm rose between 1998 and 2012.
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.
The politicians in Massachusetts are charting a course that will double down on these failed policies, yet they expect a different result.This past week a panel that consisted wholly of gun-control advocates recommended a forty-four point plan to reduce gun violence in the state. Guns.com reported on the panel’s recommendations.
A panel of specialists in Massachusetts released a report this week laying out a 44-point plan to reduce gun violence in the state, which would include enhancing school safety, expanding background checks, submitting more records to the NICS database and better defining who is considered “unsuitable” to own a firearm, such as those who have been arrested, but not necessarily convicted of a crime.
Maybe at a later date we will take an in-depth look at the recommendations presented in this plan and shoot holes in each liberty infringing aspect (no pun intended). For now, focusing on the most egregious of the bunch will have to do.The recommendation to strip individuals that have been arrested of the right to own even a rifle or shotgun should make constitutionalists and liberty lovers throughout the land furious. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? More like guilty upon arrest!Imagine if you were falsely accused of a crime and subsequently vindicated without ever being charged. If the Massachusetts’ panel had their way you would leave without the right to defend your life.This is unacceptable and must be met with strong ideological opposition. The gun-control laws in Massachusetts are already the toughest in the country, yet the number of violent crimes continues to increase as the rest of the country has experienced a reduction in recent years.Several weeks ago I wrote an article asking if felons should have their second amendment rights restored upon release. The response to the article was overwhelmingly in favor of returning the Constitutional rights of non-violent felons upon release. It was very encouraging to see so many opposed to laws that infringe upon a non-violent individual’s liberty. Infringing upon an individual’s ability to protect their life, when they have not harmed another person, is not the foundation which a free society is built.Liberals claim that crime has not dropped in Massachusetts because gun-control laws in surrounding states are not as stringent. This argument follows common liberal logic. If a liberal policy does not work, which they never do, then they claim it is because the law did not go far enough. In this case, they claim that guns from surrounding states, with less strict gun-control caused the increased violent crimes rates. If liberals truly believe this nonsense, then how can they justify grabbing more guns, without lobbying other states to adopt a similar anti-gun stance?Gun-control advocates will never achieve their objectives by passing sweeping federal legislation; rather they will erode our liberties by offering false protection and misleading the public. This dangerous recommendation is in the early stages in New England, but it is never to earlier to sound the alarm.Check out our past editions of Felony Friday!Receive access to ALL of our EXCLUSIVE bonus audio content – including “Conspiracy Corner”, “Degenerate Gamblers” and the “League of Liberty Podcast” by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride and supporting us on Patreon!
