The Law: The Guns of Boston

• Share

"Nobody can get you out," warned the TV spots announcing Massachusetts' new Bartley-Fox law. It imposed a mandatory one-year sentence for those caught carrying guns away from their homes or places of business without the necessary permits. Because registration requirements were unchanged, even gun clubs joined in supporting the law which went into effect April 1, 1975. And up to a point it worked: 100,000 gun owners "living in sin" rushed to get authorization for their weapons that first month—ten times the usual number. But what was the effect on the crime rate?

The first answers have just come from a study of Boston crime by Harvard Law School's Center for Criminal Justice. Says James Beha, the report's main author: "It contained grist for both mills"—for those against and those for gun control.

Off the Street. Center Director James Vorenberg, who oversaw the survey, notes that the law has been enforced even against illegal gun carriers who had no other apparent criminal intention and "seems to have discouraged the casual carrying of firearms by those who do not have permits." This apparently led in turn to a drop in the use of guns in serious assaults. Previously, a steady 25% of those assaults involved guns; after the law went into effect the rate fell to less than 18%. In addition, there was an increased likelihood of prison terms for those who did use guns in such crimes. The effect on homicide is not yet statistically clear, but the death rate from assaults seems to have been reduced. As Beha says, "If someone gets into a fight in a bar, and a gun is less easily available, there is less chance of fatality."

Unfortunately, says Vorenberg, there has been no drop in "the use of guns in premeditated crimes like armed robbery." That, concedes Beha, "lends some credence to the argument that 'guns don't cause crime, criminals do.' " But, he adds, "a gun is very much the weapon of choice if you are going to plan a robbery," and the Massachusetts law does not limit the general availability of guns. Beha observes that without such restrictions there is "no reason to expect the number of premeditated crimes to be affected." In short, gun laws aimed merely at street possession can help in the war on crime, but are not enough by themselves.