You're absolutely right, jc! Frankly, I don't know even one person that I'd trust owning a gun, no matter how rational, sane or trained that they were. All too often, arguments can and do turn deadly when there are firearms present, resulting in an immediate death or a permanently and adversely altered life. Anybody, no matter how "sane" or "normal" or "self-controlled" they are is capable of mayhem/murder when they have a firearm in their hand(s).

Most of the people I know in Somerville are sane enough that I'd trust them with a firearm, even around my children. Maybe you're hanging out with, hm, a "different" kind of person?

Also, looking at the licenses, they are mostly in the category that allows you to carry a pistol. I'm guessing most are police or security guards who want to be able legally to carry their service pistol home or to store it there.

http://www.mass.gov/eopss/firearms-reg-and-laws/

Please read this entire link before posting.

See you in a year when your done reading the laws on the books in Massachusetts.

Those licenses are pretty tough to get. Maybe they're members of the national guard or military reserve units that have to carry machine guns to their exercises or something?

I agree with you, LSG. When I look out the windows on the sides of my house, I look directly at my neighbors' windows across our driveways. If they own a gun that accidentally fired, it could fire directly through my windows. Seeing these numbers, I also think it's definitely urgent for parents to ask whether their children's friends have guns in their houses, and if so, how are they stored? Are they unloaded and locked up? Do the kids know where they are?

Also, according to the link in the story, here is the description of those 1,208 Class A large-capacity firearms: "CLASS A LTC: Permits the purchase, possession and carrying of all ammunition, handguns, rifles, shotguns and feeding devices (both large* and non-large capacity). This is the only license that allows the carrying of concealed handguns-either loaded or unloaded." --and it defines "large capacity" as:

"*A large-capacity firearm is a semi-automatic handgun or rifle that is capable of accepting more than ten rounds, OR shotgun capable of accepting more than five shotgun shells, OR if it is an assault weapon."

Exactly, Paula. A gun owner doesn't have to be malicious, or even all that careless, to have an accident. And in a city this densely populated, that puts dozens of people directly in harm's way. As for "national guard or military reserve" folks, WHY can't they story their weapons at an armory - you know - away from where people who don't consent to be in the vicinity of military weapons live and raise their children?

How is a new City Hall a cost of guns? It's not like the old one is falling down from bullet holes.

Joe L,
I'd like to make the tax actually reflect the liabilities involved, and, in fact, as it is with driving a car, reflect how a gun owner treats his gun(s). If they are secure, they might cost less, and his insurance would be less; if they are loose, they'd cost a bundle; and if they are discovered without paper work, it's jail. In any case, over five years or so, my bet is that some of those fees would add up substantially.
And, frankly, I think the idea of a new City Hall as smokey and useless as a new library (as I said in Somerville Voices). The edifice complex of this administration bodes ill for their smarter idea of a walkable city.

I have zero problem with imposing substantial taxes on those who want to keep and use inherently dangerous instrumentalities/deadly weapons. The societal costs of their guns are enormous. I also support the recently proposed law that would require gun owners to have liability insurance. That really is the least they can do.

http://www.mass.gov/eopss/firearms-reg-and-laws/

The beauty of the intranets'.....

Enjoy.

Good idea.

Loaded handguns don't do damage?? Imho, they do plenty. The notion that stored grills or gas canisters are relevant in this discussion is a lot of nonsense, as far as I'm concerned, because they're far more regulated than firearms are.

Gas grills and gas tanks are designed for much different uses than guns, like for cooking, etc. Guns are weapons of war that're designed to kill other human beings.

mplo, Mary's point is that gas explosions do even more damage than gun misfires, not that guns are completely safe.

Yearly inspections? Not a bad idea.
But there are mechanical devices in the regulator on the propane tanks sold in the us that will help mitigate that. Like a trigger lock on a pistol or rifle.

See the story on the Times Square bomber from about a year ago.

I drove by a new condo development in the city the other day. And there was a gas grill sitting on their teeny tiny 'balcony'. You wouldn't even need an explosion, just a few sparks from starting up the grill could easily ignite the house, along with nearby houses. This is a densely populated city of mostly wood structures. Need I say more?

OMG! If ONLY we had a fire code in the Commonwealth! Especially one that already forbid the use of most kinds of gas grills on most kinds of balconies and that allowed local communities to impose even more stringent regulations! Oh! And an authority to take reports and investigate violations. Why, we could call that person a Fire Marshall and bring the force of law, with penalties and fines, to the Fire Marshall's orders. But surely that would be an unconscionable abridgment of the god-given right to endanger our neighbors' persons and property without their permission. http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXX/Chapter148/Section28

Excellent point Rog. I have relatives who are legally permitted gun owners. Most of them DO NOT keep their firearms or ammunition in their homes. Rather, they rent space in secure sites at the various sportsmen clubs, check them out when they go hunting, and check them back in when done.

Rog: The discussions being held here on the subject of firearms don't refer to hunting rifles at all, because they're totally different than the handguns, the assault rifles and other automatic weapons/machine guns that're so prevalent and are really designed to kill other human beings, which is what they're all too often used for, and not in self-defense. Having said that, Rog, we gun control advocates are not trying to deprive you and other hunters of your sport. The same goes for people who use certain rifles for target practice. Hope I've been of some help here.

mplo: I tought the discussion was about how many firearms licenses are in Somerville. If so, then the discussion is about hunting rifles b/c you need a license to own any type of firearm in MA.

My point is that reporitng the number of firearm licenses in Somerville isn't helpful. It doesn't tell you anything. Folks may may have a license and not even own a gun or they may own a gun and not keep it stored at their house, etc. I would be more interested in knowing how many unlicesed firearms there are in Somerville.

You hunt with a large capacity weapon? You must not be very good at it.

Rog, you make some really good points. We really need to know how many (and what kind of) guns are in Somerville - not how many licenses have been issued. But, so far, this is the only info we have, and at least it's a start to the discussion.

As a lawful citizen it's your duty have e proper documentation to possess such items. Antique firearms are exempt.

Please do not promote unlicensed ownership. It is a quick jail sentence, under the laws we ALREADY have on the books.

Keep our assumptions to ourselves? Here's the thing: under our Constitution, you have a second amendment right, limited by the right of others to be reasonably safe in their pursuit of life and liberty, to have a firearm; we have the first amendment right, limited by the right of others not to be defamed or defrauded, to voice our concerns.

For example, fines for unauthorized use don't apply in the case of an "unforeseeable trespass." M.G.L. c. 140 § 131L. But really, there's no such thing as an unforeseeable trespass. And in a town like this, it is simply unacceptable to ask the innocent bystanders who are living right on top of you to bear the risk that you will misjudge the possibility that an unauthorized person will gain access to your large capacity weapon. Or that you will forget to lock your gun. Or that you will accidentally discharge your gun.

To the contrary, there is every reason for police to carry service pistols, which are "large capacity" weapons.

Not talking about police, Warren.

You are talking about police if you are talking about the gun licenses discussed in the article.

No, Warren, I actually specifically said that I'm not talking about police. I am talking about people who have zero need for a large capacity weapon possessing such weapons in a town where you can't swing a dead cat without hitting an innocent bystander. I am talking about people who can't figure out how to work a four way stop sign being entrusted with securing weapons that can shoot through the walls of a house a block away. I really hope the proposed law requiring gun owners to carry insurance passes. I also hope a provision is added requiring landlords to carry liability insurance if they decide to rent to tenants with guns.

I was not the one who stated that the machine gun permits were for military personnel - I was the one who objected to having machine guns in Somerville. Someone else stated that those permits were probably for military personnel or National Guard persons. Guess what? I still do not think there should be machine guns or large capacity weapons (except for those used by on-duty police officers) anywhere near Somerville. Here's another little factoid for you: 1200 large capacity permits does not mean there are only 1200 large capacity weapons in Somerville. Any one of those permit holders could have several guns, and there is no one checking up on them to make sure they are all locked in accordance with applicable law.

A national guard armoror still might need a permit to carry a machine gun between the armory and an exercise site.

Warren, you are guessing. Stop it.

LSG- "1200 large capacity permits does not mean there are only 1200 large capacity weapons in Somerville"

Exactly! We have no idea how many large capacity firearms there are in Somerville (both legal and illegal). For all we know there could be zero based solely on this data. For instance, I have a LTC-A license but I don't own a large capacity firearm. Or to say it another way... just b/c you have a driver’s license doesn’t mean you own a car.

Presenting licensing data is nothing but misleading.

The guns used in Newtown were licensed. And I don't have to worry about my neighbor's SUV accidentally driving through my bedroom window. Also, we as a society have decided that the (considerably broader and more available to the public) benefit from regulated use of automobiles is worth the (considerably lower) risks of letting examined, licensed, and insured drivers own them. EVERYONE who is within firing range of a gun has the right to object to being placed in harm's way.

ttt, Excellent points.

LSG, Why wouldn't you worry about your neighbor's SUV driving through your bedroom window? I'm far more worried about that than about gun accidents. Heck, you actually have to go through a gun safety course to get a firearms license - not true for a driver's license.