Can confirm that this works with a real firearm. You need to put non-TSA locks on the case, and it's kept in custody of the airline at baggage claim (does not go on the carousel). You must provide ID to retrieve the case.
I use a cheap 1911 frame. This is a 48.5-state solution; don't try it in Illinois or NYC.
A starter pistol with a non-bored barrel is purported to be legal in Massachusetts, so that's an option too. Just don't bring ammunition, that's a problem if it is a type usable in a regular firearm.
>Non-residents with a valid Massachusetts non-resident hunting license do not need a firearm license to possess or carry rifles and shotguns and ammunition during the hunting season.
>Non-residents do not need a firearms license to transport their firearms in or through the Commonwealth, provided the firearms are unloaded and enclosed in a case while traveling.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
This seems to indicate that a MA firearms license is required if
a. You are staying in MA
b. You don’t have a MA hunting license and/or it is not hunting season.
> (h) Possession of rifles and shotguns and ammunition therefor by nonresidents traveling in or through the commonwealth, providing that any rifles or shotguns are unloaded and enclosed in a case;
I'd think that it would be hard to argue that "traveling in or through" doesn't include staying in some sort of accommodations during your trip.
Interesting, though, that their FAQ page says “firearms” are allowed while the code only provides an exception for rifles and shotguns (excluding handguns). Seems dangerously misleading considering the penalties for violations
Yes, there is a federal preemption law (FOPA) that permits travel through a restrictive/prohibitive state if the origin and destination permit the carrier to lawfully posses the firearm. However, meeting the FOPA criteria may be treated as an affirmative defense in some states. IANAL so YMMV.
As near as I can tell from the available pictures, the victims are largely or entirely black. They make up 23% of the city, according to wikipedia, or 159,754 people. So that is about 35 black victims per 100,000 black residents.
In 2018, Chicago is about 40 black victims per 100,000 black residents.
This is comparable to black victim rates elsewhere. I don't think that your gun rates are helping so much as the fact that you are a mostly white state without many urban centers.
Seeing the faces of the victims really hammers home the reality of murder in the United States: something that's much worse for black men (and the black community) than it is for everyone else.
I'm afraid that I unaware of evidence that mass murders are a Christian problem whatsoever. Nor does it seem to be a political "radicalization" issue, as would be similar to what the UK saw during the Irish troubles, to take one of several possible examples. But I think that people might better describe it as serious mental health epidemic of as yet poorly understood origin. (Pick your poison: drugs, social media, social climate, etc.)
Some people have put forward decent ideas on how we could restrict firearms from such individuals. (I personally think that everyone purchasing a firearm should have to find a longtime acquaintance to swear under penalty of perjury that this person is fit to own a firearm. Maybe others have better ideas.) Regardless, I hope that that situation can be improved somehow.
Your idea is similar to MA gun license requirements - you need two non-relatives to sign your application before you submit it to your local police to decide if you meet the requirements to hold a gun license
> I am not sure what the race of murder victims has to do with gun death rates, the race of the gun using murderer is more important...
The race of a murderer is strongly correlated with the race of the victim. "As with homicide in general, most victims are the same race as the offender(s)....More than 80 percent of all crime involves victims and perpetrators of the same race. Whites and African Americans of course can and do attack each other, but they are the exception, not the rule. "
> young white Christian men have a mass murder problem, somehow they are being radicalized.
There is definitely a mass murder problem, but it isn't particularly biased toward young (mean age 31) or white (54% of shooters out of 60+% population share). It is overwhelmingly male (especially for perpetrators - 98% of mass murder perpetrators, but also for victims - 75% of murder victims).
Not sure where you're getting the idea that Christians in particular are committing the shootings - there doesn't seem to be a lot of data or discussion of the religion of the perpetrators.
"Despite the widespread perception that mass shooters are overwhelmingly white males, researchers have found that white men are not overrepresented among mass shooters. In other words, white men are no more likely than other male demographic to engage in a mass shooting. Daniel Engber, writing for Slate, noted that mass shooters are not disproportionately white male. He writes that “the notion that white men of privilege are disproportionately represented among mass shooters—indeed, that they make up ‘nearly all’ of them—is a myth.” A widely referenced analysis by Mother Jones (mentioned earlier) found that “white people weren’t overrepresented among mass shooters. "
Statistics change if you include other types of mass shootings (family more white, felony more black) which are much more common than the "public mass shootings".
The article you cite references a study that looked at mass shootings from 2006-2016, I am sure Las Vegas shootings and other more recent ones would changes the statistis. It also breaks down shootings into a category called "public" - which is the one most people are interested in. Non-black perpetrators committed 70% of these public shootings
Which lends support to the claim that the shooters are not disproportionately white. Searching for a variety of sources on percentage of population that is white in America out the figure at 74-76%.
I described the variance between public and other mass shootings above: "Statistics change if you include other types of mass shootings (family more white, felony more black) which are much more common than the "public mass shootings"."
> Non-black perpetrators committed 70% of these public shootings
So you're bolstering your argument that public mass shootings are primarily white by claiming that blacks (14% of the population) commit 30% of the public mass shootings?
And yet Massachusetts' murder rate of 3.2/100k/yr is right about the median for the US. Who ever would have thought? (Granted, the suicide rate of 8.8/100k/yr is pretty impressive, and some of that might be assignable to their gun control efforts)
Lower availability of guns does not influence murder rates (much?).
Murder is when one human wants to kill another and that's not hard, humans are as dedicated as they are fragile.
What availability of guns influences most are homicides. Where you don't necessarily want to kill another human but you want their stuff or you want to teach them a lesson, also accidental deaths and I think suicides (probably quickness and decisiveness draws people).
But Massachusetts is middling (20/50) on the gun murder rate ('''includes murders and willful manslaughters, but excludes "deaths caused by negligence, suicide, or accident" and justifiable homicides.'''). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_death_rates_in_the_Uni...
Yes, the only thing the Mass laws do is stop gun deaths "caused by negligence, suicide, or accident" and justifiable homicides - self defense or police shootings
I looked for it, but there are lots of confounding factors, particularly that statistics don't really distinguish between accidental poisoning/overdose and attempted suicide by poisoning/overdose.
There is a good discussion of various factors (duration of suicide crises, availability of means, opportunity to abort the attempt or be rescued, and the lethality of the mechanism).
"Nine out of ten people who attempt suicide and survive will not go on to die by suicide at a later date."
"A number of studies have indicated that when lethal means are made less available or less deadly, suicide rates by that method decline, and frequently suicide rates overall decline. This has been demonstrated in a number of areas: bridge barriers, detoxification of domestic gas, pesticides, medication packaging, and others."
I use a cheap 1911 frame. This is a 48.5-state solution; don't try it in Illinois or NYC.