Mass. residents, instructors and advocates urge repeal of Chapter 135, citing confusion and enforcement problems

Dozens of residents, instructors and advocacy groups told the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security on Nov. 10 that Chapter 135 of the Acts of 2024 has produced confusion, unintended consequences and, in some cases, criminal penalties for law‑abiding people.

"When Governor Healey signed into law Chapter 135 ... she signed a sweeping piece of legislation that represented one of the most significant infringements on the rights of law‑abiding gun owners that we've seen in Massachusetts in decades," State Sen. Peter Durant told the committee during opening testimony, urging repeal bills the senator filed (S.1671–S.1677).

Supporters of repeal described multiple implementation problems. Several firearm instructors and program leaders said the new statute requires expanded curriculum and live‑fire training that state agencies have not defined and for which range capacity is limited. "The law demands brand‑new curriculum ... but no one knows what that actually looks like," said Carrie Ann Auclair, a certified firearms instructor, who told the committee instructors have not received guidance from the state on who can teach the new modules.

Family and hunting impacts were a recurring theme. Multiple witnesses, including parents and youth‑hunt leaders, said the law made common equipment unavailable or required different permits for longstanding hunting practices. "A semiautomatic shotgun is highly recommended for women hunters to help with recoil," said Britney Gersky; she added that Chapter 135 prevented her father from participating in deer season because his longstanding FID status no longer matched a new set of requirements.

Civil‑liberties and privacy concerns were also raised. Several testifiers warned that the new mandatory electronic registration and serialization create a centralized database of owners and inventories that could be vulnerable to theft or misuse. "This creates a vast centralized database containing our personal information ... a giant target on the backs of lawful gun owners," said Steven Tribestone, a testifier who described cybersecurity risks.

Opponents of Chapter 135 also described enforcement problems and case examples. Multiple speakers recounted instances in which residents said they faced months of legal uncertainty, uneven local licensing practices, or unexpected charges. Witnesses urged the committee to prioritize clear implementation guidance, to restore or revise provisions that limit commonly used hunting equipment for adults under 21, and in many cases to repeal the statute outright.

Committee members did not vote on any bills during the hearing. The chairs accepted oral and written testimony and read into the record numerous companion and repeal measures for further consideration.