Among several new requirements are a mandate that would ban individuals from carrying a weapon into a person’s home without their expressed permission.
The law would force key gun components to be marked with serial numbers to be registered with state officials.
It includes a strengthened system to track weapons used in the commission of crimes — ostensibly to stem the flow of illegal firearms. The proposal would “modernize” the Massachusetts firearm registration system and increase the trove of gun data to be implemented for academic research and policy decisions.
New laws would be enacted prohibiting firing of guns near or at homes and banning carrying weapons while intoxicated. The bill would further ban firearms at schools, within government buildings and polling places.
Massachusetts, like a handful of other states aggressively opposed to gun rights, is working to revamp its laws in the wake of last year’s Bruen ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court. Justices decided that law-abiding Americans have the right to legally carry weapons outside of the home for self-defense.
This sent states scrambling to enact new ways to suppress Second Amendment rights.
The sweeping new proposal follows months of secretive meetings by a select group of Massachusetts lawmakers. HD 4607 is an updated and slightly shorter version of the previous and highly controversial HD 4420.
It is voluminous, and combing through the fine print will take some time.
The Gun Owners Action League (GOAL) noted that Rep. Michael Day’s (D) bill appears to establish new restrictions on who may possess and carry a weapon in the state. These mandates may far surpass federal law, and it reportedly includes a section that indicates a ban on the sale of all firearms without “safety devices.”
This could be leading towards a requirement that all guns sold in Massachusetts be “smart guns.”
It is possible, however, that a trigger or cable lock may be sufficient for state police, who will have the power to determine the safety of a weapon.
Gun rights opponents also included language creating a “special legislative commission.” This group is to be charged with studying “the status, feasibility and utility of emerging firearm technologies, including but not limited to personalized firearm technology and microstamp technology.”
The research by the committee will investigate “the commercial availability of personalized firearm and microstamp technologies, both in the production of new firearms and modification of existing firearms.”
A handful of states hostile to gun rights are enamored with microstamp technology, which even its developers admit is not reliable. Successful implementation would result in the imprinting of an identifiable number on each round fired by the weapon.
Thus far it has only proven to be expensive and unpredictable. Experts note that proponents of the technology are generally ignorant of the physics and mechanical aspects of firearms.
One key aspect expected in HD 4607 appears to be missing. The bill apparently does not greatly expand the state’s list of “sensitive places” where carrying a firearm is prohibited even for lawful permit holders.
This is a common addition by states post-Bruen that attempt to circumvent the high court ruling and eliminate citizen’s right to armed self-defense.
Despite the omission of these rules, it is certain that gun rights groups will rise in opposition to the sweeping changes proposed by Massachusetts. It also builds the momentum toward yet another showdown before the Supreme Court to clarify exactly how far governments may go to curtail gun rights.
