Activists promised that Massachusetts gun restrictions would reduce crime. Didn’t happen.
The result of Massachussetts gun restrictions in 1998 was more crime than before. This was in complete contradiction to the promises made by those advocating these gun restrictions. But when none of the benefits materialized, these people did not want the gun restrictions ended. Instead, they moved the goal posts and said that guns had to be banned in every state.
All of this and more was published in the Boston Globe!
Jeff Jacoby writes, “Crime soared with Mass. gun law.”
The 1998 legislation did cut down, quite sharply, on the legal use of guns in Massachusetts. Within four years, the number of active gun licenses in the state had plummeted. “There were nearly 1.5 million active gun licenses in Massachusetts in 1998,” the AP reported. “In June , that number was down to just 200,000.” The author of the law, state Senator Cheryl Jacques, was pleased that the Bay State’s stiff new restrictions had made it possible to “weed out the clutter.”
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. Aggravated assaults jumped 26.7 percent.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for gun-control activists to admit they were wrong. The treatment they prescribed may have yielded the opposite of the results they promised, but they’re quite sure the prescription wasn’t to blame. Crime didn’t rise in Massachusetts because the state made it harder for honest citizens to lawfully carry a gun; it rose because other states didn’t do the same thing.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com