What to know about the proposed gun laws in Massachusetts

A woman holds a sign with the words "Where did the gun come from?" and an illustration of a drop of blood falling out of a handgun's barrel. Behind her are identical signs. — Carol Streiff, of Boston, second from right, displays a placard as Mass. State Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz, D-Boston, right, looks on during rally in front of the Statehouse, in Boston, Tuesday, June 15, 2010. The Massachusetts House approved a sweeping gun bill Wednesday, Oct. 18, 2023, aimed at tightening firearm laws, cracking down on unregistered, so-called “ghost guns" and strengthening the state’s assault-style weapons ban.

Katie Lannan covers the State House for GBH News. Feedback? Questions? Story ideas? Reach out to Katie at katie_lannan@wgbh.org.

Paris Alston is co-host of Morning Edition at GBH News. Feedback? Questions? Story ideas? Reach out to Paris at paris_alston@wgbh.org.

February 05, 2024

Paris Alston: This is GBH's Morning Edition. The Massachusetts House and Senate have now passed bills aimed at cracking down on untraceable weapons known as ghost guns, and otherwise strengthening the state's gun laws. GBH statehouse reporter Katie Lannan has been following this effort and joins us in the studio now to discuss. Good morning, Katie.

Katie Lannan: Hey, Paris. Good morning.

Alston: So let's set the table here. Massachusetts already has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. So why is the legislature doing this now?

Lannan: So when you talk to the lawmakers who are behind this push, the thing they say is, yes, the gun laws here in Massachusetts are strong. But that doesn't mean that they can rest on their laurels. They want to keep improving the laws that we have. And part of this is to respond to technology. You know, you mentioned those untraceable weapons, ghost guns. The Senate's bill, in particular, speaks to the 3D printing of guns, something that wasn't considered the last time we had a major gun overhaul.

Alston: Technology, right? Affecting so many different parts of our lives here. So how did the House and Senate bills compare?

Lannan: A lot of them have similar themes. One difference in the Senate's bill is that it does specifically prohibit advertising or marketing that targets minors trying to get them to buy guns, which would be illegal. They're very similar in concept. The big difference is the length. The Senate's bill is 94 pages shorter than the House, and it is a matter of degrees on a lot of the specifics, because you'll look at things like: Both expand the state's red flag law, allowing more people to petition the courts to remove the firearms of someone deemed to be a danger. Both add health care providers to that list. The Senate bill doesn't go quite as far as the House, which would also add employers, school administrators. Interestingly, the Senate bill won the support of police chiefs. The Police Chiefs Association in Massachusetts didn't back the House bill. Senate President Karen Spilka says that was really important to her. Here's what she had to say when I asked her about that last week.

Karen Spilka: It doesn't make sense to pass laws that that cannot be implemented or that are not reasonable, or don't make sense, to put it bluntly. So it was very important that we got the feedback.

Alston: So, Katie, now that they have been able to sort of bring, those folks along, how do they turn this final bill into one they can send to Governor Healey?

Lannan: So what's going to happen now is it's going to move into essentially closed-door negotiations. We're not really going to be able to follow the path of the bill anymore. Sometime this week, maybe even today, we'll likely see them appoint a negotiating team of six representatives, three representatives and three senators, who will hash out those details. We won't know kind of who's saying what to them or what any sticking points might be. But the ultimate goal here will be to get a bill to Governor Healey, reach agreement by July 31st. After that date, Republicans will have more leverage and could block the bill from advancing.

Alston: So who has been opposed to this throughout the process, Katie?

Lannan: You know, interestingly, most of the Republicans in the legislature have been opposed to this, and they're echoing concerns expressed by Second Amendment groups, sportsmen clubs, gun owners and the groups that advocate for them. Like I said, the police chiefs opposed the first bill, the House bill, but were able to come on board with the second version passed by the Senate. So there is a notable opposition. However, in the legislature, almost all the Democrats back it. And that's what matters. They have enough numbers to get a bill through.

Alston: Okay. And there has also been debate within the legislature about this. I mean, the Senate, we talked a little bit about making sure that they got that feedback from the police chiefs, but among their own colleagues, how did they bring people along?

Lannan: Yeah. You know, it was interesting. There was, as I said, most Republicans oppose. The Senate did have one Republican, Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, managed to vote for the final bill, the only Republican in the whole legislature. And one of the things he said was that he liked some of the amendments that really refined the bill's focus on people using guns to commit crimes rather than gun owners who follow the law, who get licensed, things like that. So one of the things that he said helped move the bill in the right direction was an amendment that would make it easier to detain repeat gun offenders before trial if they, you know, violate the terms of their release or in certain other conditions.

Alston: So in the larger social sphere here, Katie, I mean, we are living in a time, right, where gun reform is a really present issue, given all of the different acts of gun violence that happen in the Commonwealth and in the country. What will you be looking for on that front as lawmakers work to do this effort in the statehouse? What sort of ripple effects will you be keeping an eye on?

Lannan: Yeah. You know, there's some pieces in this bill that look at making sure that the way the state funds community gun violence prevention and efforts taken on that front, that they're working, that the money is going to effective organizations, that it's mirroring the needs of communities, rather than being kind of dictated from Beacon Hill. So that's something, I think, to keep watching there, to make sure everything does what it's supposed to do.

Alston: Well, that is GBH's State House reporter Katie Lannan. Katie, thank you so much.

Lannan: Thank you.

Alston: You're listening to GBH News.

The Massachusetts House and Senate have now passed bills aimed at cracking down on untraceable weapons known as ghost guns, and otherwise strengthening the state's gun laws. Next, legislators will take their negotiations behind closed doors. Here’s what to know about the bills up for consideration, according to GBH statehouse reporter Katie Lannan.

What changes to Massachusetts gun laws are in the new bills?

More than half of the 161 people killed in homicides in 2022 died by gunfire, according to crime statistics collected by state police.

“When you talk to the lawmakers who are behind this push, the thing they say is, yes, the gun laws here in Massachusetts are strong. But that doesn't mean that they can rest on their laurels,” Lannan said. “And part of this is to respond to technology.”

The Senate bill includes language on 3D-printed weapons, sometimes called “ghost guns.” It would also prohibit advertising or marketing guns to minors, who cannot legally purchase firearms.

There are also efforts to make sure gun violence prevention is community-based and effective.

“There [are] some pieces in this bill that look at making sure that the way the state funds community gun violence prevention and efforts taken on that front, that they're working, that the money is going to effective organizations, that it's mirroring the needs of communities, rather than being kind of dictated from Beacon Hill,” Lannan said.

There are two versions of this bill, one in the House and one in the Senate. How do they differ?

There’s a lot of common ground, Lannan said, but some key differences.

“The Senate's bill is 94 pages shorter than the House, and it is a matter of degrees on a lot of the specifics,” Lannan said. “Both expand the state's red flag law, allowing more people to petition the courts to remove the firearms of someone deemed to be a danger.”

Both bills would allow health care providers to ask courts to take guns away from people who may pose a danger to themselves or others. The House version also includes employers and school administrators.

The Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association has backed the Senate version of the bill, something Senate President Karen Spilka said was important to her.

“It doesn't make sense to pass laws that that cannot be implemented or that are not reasonable, or don't make sense, to put it bluntly,” Spilka said. “So it was very important that we got the feedback.”

Who is opposing this legislation?

Most of the Republicans in the state legislature have opposed the bills, Lannan said, though Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr did back the final version.

“They're echoing concerns expressed by Second Amendment groups, sportsmen clubs, gun owners and the groups that advocate for them,” she said. “There is a notable opposition. However, in the Legislature, almost all the Democrats back it. And that's what matters. They have enough numbers to get a bill through.”

Tarr has said he supports the Senate version’s more narrow focus, Lannan said.

“One of the things he said was that he liked some of the amendments that really refined the bill's focus on people using guns to commit crimes rather than gun owners who follow the law, who get licensed,” Lannan said.

What happens now?

Until now the process has been more public, with open meetings and published draft versions of the bills.

But as the process moves forward, a team of six legislators — three from the House and three from the Senate — will negotiate away from the public eye.

“What's going to happen now is it's going to move into essentially closed-door negotiations,” Lannan said “We're not really going to be able to follow the path of the bill anymore. … We won't know kind of who's saying what to them or what any sticking points might be. But the ultimate goal here will be to get a bill to Governor Healey, reach agreement by July 31st. After that date, Republicans will have more leverage and could block the bill from advancing.”