Massachusetts’ Own Data Does Not Support Live Fire Mandates
Other Startling Changes Actually Should Demand Attention
The latest drumbeat from the anti-civil rights crowd in Massachusetts is their incessant call for mandatory live fire training as another hurdle to exercise our 2A civil rights in the Bay State.
For several years Gun Owners’ Action League (GOAL) has been aware of this proposal. At every opportunity to ask the supporters of the mandate, GOAL has put forth the same question: “What problem exists that this “solution” is supposed to solve.” To date we have never received a logical answer.
From the very beginning when the 1998 Gun Control Act was passed, GOAL has told the legislature that the restrictions and mandates on lawful gun owners would not have a positive impact on safety or crime. From day one, the 2A community has not had an accidental death problem with firearms. That is 100% because of the great work the 2A community, with no thanks to the State government that does not spend a penny on firearm safety training/education.
A great example of this is that in 2014 GOAL was successful in passing a law that required the State Police to produce Public Service Announcements (PSAs) regarding the importance of training, how to get it, and safe storage laws. Nearly ten years later, no PSAs. Simply put, the State talks a good game, but couldn’t care less about firearm safety.
Now, fast forward to 2023, the anti-civil rights crowd wants to add mandatory live fire to the training requirements already in place. Why? Because they say bad things “might” happen without it. The State’s own data does not support any such thing. The supporters keep echoing that we must actually drive a car before we can get a car license. Last we knew, driving was not a civil right.
Also, there is no safety comparison of license firearms owners and licensed drivers. There are only five times more licensed drivers than licensed gun owners in Massachusetts. In 2021 there were 446 deaths on the State’s roads. This compared to 0 accidental firearm deaths in the same year.
On average there are only 2 accidental firearm deaths per year in Massachusetts. There is also no explanation as to whether those are lawful gun owners or criminals. So, what is the real reason for the proposed additional mandate?
When we actually review the State’s data on accidental deaths, it is alarming that they are going after a problem that does not exist when there are startling extreme problems that actually should be dealt with.
It is abundantly clear that the live fire mandate proposal is simply a solution looking for a problem. This is all part of the tantrum we have witnessed in anti-civil rights states after the Bruen decision.