(Illustration via Pixabay by Mickey Mikolas) field_54b3f951675b3

MASSACHUSETTS HAS THE lowest rate of gun deaths in the continental United States, a statistic that is cause for celebration and one that we earned through our commonsense firearm safety laws. Study after study proves that our laws save lives and are designed to keep firearms out of the hands of those who cannot safely possess them.

We know that if we walk back our gun laws, the number of firearm-related deaths in our state will increase. That is why we are concerned by radical interests that are trying to reverse the policies that have made us the safest state in the nation. Those groups have put a question on this November’s ballot—Question 9—that would repeal the landmark 2024 law that has kept Massachusetts at the forefront of gun safety. A “yes” vote would uphold the lifesaving law; a “no” vote would repeal it.

As the architects of that gun safety law, we worked closely with all stakeholders – from police chiefs and district attorneys to gun owners and community violence prevention organizations – to identify trends in gun crimes and gun violence. We then used their input to craft a law that provided public safety officials with the tools they need to respond to the increases in illegal firearm trafficking and to make us all safer without infringing on the rights of lawful gun owners.

Put simply, the law focuses on the root causes of gun violence to make all Massachusetts communities safer – and it is working.

Before the law’s passage, bad actors sold “ghost gun” kits that allowed the purchasers to build untraceable firearms and then flood our streets with them. Because of old legal definitions, our law enforcement professionals were essentially powerless to seize these firearms before they hit our streets, resulting in a growing number of shootings and other crimes across the Commonwealth involving ghost guns.

The old laws also did not account for new technology in firearm modifications, like so-called “Glock switches,” that converted traditional guns into automatic weapons capable of spraying dozens of bullets in a matter of seconds.

Massachusetts law enforcement officers were well-aware of these problems and eager to respond to them—but they lacked the authority they needed to get ghost guns and Glock switches off the streets. The 2024 gun safety provided that authority, and we are all safer as a result.

The law includes dozens of additional provisions that promote community safety, and we will highlight a few that are representative of our commonsense approach to reducing gun violence.

The law says that if you are too drunk to drive, you are too drunk to hunt or carry a firearm.

It aligns our laws on harassment prevention orders with our domestic violence restraining order laws, allowing a court to require a defendant to temporarily surrender their firearms after a hearing.

The law allows our gun licensing authorities to review police reports detailing an applicant’s involuntary mental health hospitalization if one exists.

And it makes crystal clear that a copycat or duplicate of an illegal assault-style firearm remains illegal.

Despite the rhetoric you will hear from those who wish to remove these safety measures, the 2024 gun safety law does not infringe on lawful firearm ownership. If anything, it streamlined and made clearer the rights and expectations of an applicant. The numbers bear this out. Last year, the first full year after the new law took effect, Massachusetts gun licensing authorities issued seventeen percent more licenses to applicants that the year before.

Under the 2024 law, Massachusetts residents who are eligible for gun licenses have no problem getting them. The law, as it should, makes it more difficult for criminals and those who pose a risk to themselves or others to legally possess firearms. We think this is, well, commonsense.

While we find it regrettable that the lifesaving 2024 gun law is facing a referendum sponsored by Second Amendment absolutists, we also recognize that Question 9 is an opportunity for all of us to affirm that we deserve safe streets and that we deserve laws that keep guns out of the hands of those who cannot safely handle them.

This November, we will be voting “yes” on Question 9 to keep Massachusetts safe for all of our residents.

Cynthia Creem, a Democrat from Newton, is the Senate majority leader. Michael Day, a Democrat from Stoneham, is House chair of the Joint Committee on the Judiciary.