It is no secret that gun control is a highly contentious issue within the U.S. and that there seems to be no singular solution which pleases everyone. Taking this into consideration, my intention behind writing this article is not to sit here and preach my personal opinions on gun control-- I'd like to take a more fact-based approach to this issue.

According to a 2018 JAMA study, we now know that of the world's total yearly gun-related deaths, the U.S. is one of six countries which account for over half those deaths. No other developed nation comes close to the death toll these six countries face to gun violence, which, for the purposes of the study, excluded deaths from war, terrorism, executions, and police. Of the other five countries, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, and Guatemala, the U.S. is the only country within this group that has political and economic stability yet retains high levels of deaths due to gun violence. In fact, the same study found that the U.S.'s civilian gun death rate is nearly four times that of Switzerland, five times that of Canada, 35 times that of the United Kingdom, and 53 times that of Japan.

We all know that gun violence is a pressing issue in our country as illustrated by the numbers above, and the recurrence of mass shootings has only further propelled this issue into the national arena with protests, debates, and fervent activism on both sides of the issue. Within federal government though, there seems to be no legislative answer which satisfies both sides and unfortunately, it looks as though mixed political motives have clouded the bipartisan, common goal of protecting Americans. So, with this in mind, I decided to take a look at what state legislatures have been implementing to deal with gun control.

The most widely discussed solution among Democrats is the use of universal background checks. This is an avenue of gun control we hear about a lot. It is even one of the few policy plans all the Democratic primary candidates agree upon. But, how effective are universal background checks in reality?

Universal background checks have been implemented in twelve states, including California, but the effects are less than pleasing. Though the screenings involved in universal background checks weed out some of the people who should not have access to guns, there is growing research which suggests universal background checks alone do not have a large impact on deaths related to gun violence. A study by UC Davis on the effects of universal background checks in California since its implementation in 1991 has shown that in California specifically there has been "no net change in firearm suicide or homicide" associated with this policy.

The second most discussed solution, by more liberal Democrats especially, is an assault weapons ban. Another good idea in theory. But in reality, while this may aid in decreasing mass shootings, it does not address the fact that over 70% of gun-related homicides involve a handgun…

Another legislative solution is a red flag law. A red flag law could help law enforcement take guns away from dangerous people, but by definition, these laws only work after red flags arise, which is often too late.

So, if the most commonly agreed upon solutions aren't going to be effective solutions, what is? What actually works? My search for this answer brought me to the state of Massachusetts.

Though not overtly stated, Massachusetts' gun laws seem to function on the principle that it should not be easier to obtain and use a gun than it is to obtain and use a car. Seems pretty reasonable to me. Legislatively, this translates to the legal need to have a license to use a gun and registration to own one.

The intention is not to take Americans' constitutional right away; the intention of Massachusetts' gun laws are to make the acquisition of guns a more serious and thorough matter in order to hinder those with ill intent. A true testament to this statement is the fact that over 97% of license applications are accepted, yet because of the necessary education and accountability involved in the process, Massachusetts has one of the lowest gun death rates in the nation according to the Center for Disease Control. In fact, the CDC cites that in 2016 Massachusetts had only 3.6 gun deaths per 100,000 people, compared to states like Alabama and Louisiana which both have much looser gun laws and had over 21 deaths per 100,000 people in 2016.

There are two kinds of licenses to carry LTC or FID. The LTC is a license to use all firearms, including handguns, while the FID only allows for rifles and shotguns. The minimum age for an LTC is 21, but for the FID it's 18, or 15 with parental permission. Both documents require them same qualification process and are good for six years until you have to renew them by simply passing the background check again.

Walking through the process step by step, it begins with obtaining a permit to get your license. The permit process involves taking a gun safety course on how to safely store and handle a gun and when it is legal to use it. This course is usually done online-- similar to the online driver's ed course you'd take before your permit test to get your driver's license. Next, you must fill out paperwork and have an interview at your local police station. Then, the information from your paperwork is processed through a state background check system known as MIRCS, which looks at criminal, mental health, and other records like domestic violence, substance abuse, and certain misdemeanors. Overall the process takes two to six weeks, but once you've checked all those boxes you are given your license.

Next, when you go to the store to purchase your gun you have to show your license and sometimes may be asked to pass additional background checks if they have a substantiated reason-- additional background checks are mostly at the discretion of the business owner though. Then, when you've purchased your gun, you will have to register it into a database of all the state's firearms.

This type of gun control is one of the few methods where research demonstrates positive correlations to decreasing gun-related deaths and they've been so effective that this legislation has spread to other states as well. According to an article in Vox, "[t]he big state-wide studies so far come out of Connecticut and Missouri. In Connecticut, researchers looked at what happened after the state passed a permit-to-purchase law for handguns — finding a 40 percent drop in gun homicides and 15 percent reduction in handgun suicides. In Missouri, researchers looked at the aftermath of the state repealing its handgun permit-to-purchase law — finding a 23 percent increase in firearm homicides but no significant increase in non-firearm homicides, as well as 16 percent higher handgun suicide rates."

We know that there are other factors which also play into gun violence deaths within any given area in the U.S., however, we also know that licensing and registering guns significantly lowers gun violence. Considering that the research has told us repeatedly that the system implemented in Massachusetts is working there and elsewhere, we owe it to ourselves and our loved ones to push for the implementation of these laws nationally to stop any more gun-related deaths.