How Many Licensed Gun Owners Are in Peabody?

With substantive gun control proposals now at both the federal and state levels, you may be wondering what the situation on the ground is in the Tanner City.

In light of the reinvigorated debate on gun control and substantive proposals at both the federal and state levels from President Barack Obama and Gov. Deval Patrick this week, you may be curious how many licensed gun owners there actually are in Peabody.

According to some basic state data, between 2008 and 2012, about 3 percent of Peabody residents are licensed to carry large capacity weapons, i.e. semiautomatic guns. That's 1,688 licenses.

A notable difference between Peabody and many other cities and towns in Massachusetts is that no one held a machine gun permit in the Tanner City.

It is lawful in Massachusetts to obtain a license (Class 3) for a fully automatic weapon, but a person has to either be a state certified firearms instructor or a bona fide gun collector to qualify. And in the former case, the license has to be solely for the purpose of instructing police officers.

It's also worth noting that Peabody appears to have a greater amount of licenses for non-semiautomatic weapons, i.e. revolvers, single-action rifles or shotguns, etc.

The following statistics are from 2008-2012:

Peabody Firearms Identification Card 194 Firearms Identification Card Restricted Chemical Propellant Only 130 Resident Class A Large Capacity License to Carry Firearms 1,688 Resident Class B Non-Large Capacity License to Carry Firearms


For the sake of comparison, here are the numbers in Salem and Lynn as well a few other similar-sized communities across the state:

Salem Lynn Revere Haverhill Weymouth Framingham FID Card 122 125 149 234 168 252 FID Card Chemical 90 135 94 132 77 149 Class A License 1,111 2,189 1,153 2,645 1,384 1,688 Class B License 47 0 0 10 29 48 Class C License 3 1 1 5 4 18
bjean January 18, 2013 at 02:09 AM
Are you going to publish addresses next? Its our right and no ones business! Lets publish info about criminals, not people who are authorized to have weapons for self defense, work, etc. Better yet, publish who DOESNT have a weapon in their home. It will make it easier for criminals.
John Castelluccio (Editor) January 18, 2013 at 02:30 AM
Bonnie-Jean, the names and addresses of licensed gun owners are not actually public records in Massachusetts. That information can only be requested by law enforcement and criminal justice agencies, and even then they don't have unlimited or direct access to the records.
Suzana January 18, 2013 at 12:25 PM
This problem is not about gun owners THIS IS ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH I wish these politians would use their brains they are taking the easy way out. If some one with mental health problems want to kill someone they will find a way to kill no matter what with a gun, knives ,hammers whatever I wish they would stop coming after law abidding citizens who obey the law.
bjean January 18, 2013 at 12:35 PM
@ Suzana, great point!
Joseph Maio January 18, 2013 at 02:52 PM
I am sick of this gun crap. It's a mental health issue not a gun issue. People are morons to thing that a mentally ill person can't buy a gun legally that they can buy an assault weapon. I can drive 20 minutes from here and buy any type gun I want with out a license. So all these laws and the stupid side show that disgracing the memory of those poor children who died. They will not fix a frigging thing. Christ they can't stop banks from robbing use. Gun control black mail for the NRA to spread money around to there lobbyist friends.
J January 18, 2013 at 02:55 PM
Suzana is right. Even if guns never existed someone that has mental health issues would find another way. It's very easy to learn how to make a bomb, a simple google search will show you. Look at Timothy McVeigh 168 people died in the Oklahoma City bombing.
James H Cavanaugh January 18, 2013 at 04:39 PM
How many criminal gun owners are in Peabody? That's what you should truly be worried abou not the law abiding gun owners in a particular city. ( I bet there are more illegal guns out there than registered!) Registered gun owners have permits for a reason, to protect themselves from the criminal element. Do you have a problem with that? If so elaborate what the problem with law abiding citizens having weapons for protection is please?
T. Gordon January 18, 2013 at 04:54 PM
Where do you think the criminal gun owners get their guns? Do they make them in their basement????? NO! They steal them or buy them from "law abiding" gun owners, who purchased the firearm legally! SO ALL GUNS IN USED CRIMES ORIGINATED AS LEGALLY OWNED WEAPONS! Less guns mean less frequent and less catastrophic killings. Time to get rid of these things...and it boggles my mind that you can't see that.
L January 18, 2013 at 04:59 PM
What other amendment would you like to get rid of T. Gordon?
T. Gordon January 18, 2013 at 05:01 PM
Instead of a wise-guy comment how about you address the issue that I raised. Please present a coherent argument that explains away the "all guns used in crimes originated as legally owned weapons" logic....I'm all ears.
James H Cavanaugh January 18, 2013 at 05:18 PM
When you show me the statistics where all guns that criminals have came from registered gun owners then we can talk. Sounds like total BS to me. Sure criminals STEAL here they also get them outside the country. Case in point, the guns the Mexican drug cartel got from our wonderful ATF. Funny, I do not see any ATF people being incarcerated for that! Our government at work again protecting their interests and not us!
James H Cavanaugh January 18, 2013 at 05:30 PM
Since when does less guns mean less catastophic killings? Did not using a guns stop Mc Vhey from bombing the federal building with common fertilzer? Did not using guns stop the Al Quida from crashing jets into the World Trade Center? You're argument is all wet.
Tony Crisostomo January 18, 2013 at 06:08 PM
T Gordon, where do you think that people that steal cars then go on wild drives get there cars? those cars all started as legally registed cars. your argument is ridiculous. If a criminal wants to commit a crime, murder, or anything else he will find a way. the The only reason to take taking guns from LAW ABIDING citizens only is for government control of the people.
T. Gordon January 18, 2013 at 07:00 PM
Really James? That is an absurd comparison...should we tally up murder totals? What would that nutcase (sandy hook) have done with his mommy's guns? Bet at least a couple more parents would have been able to spend time with their kids this Christmas if Mommy didn't have a stockpile! What occurs more often.....mass killings with guns or bomb/jet attacks? The movie theater shootings, columbine, sandy hook, the dc sniper....need I continue? Whose argument is soaking, dripping wet now?
bjean January 18, 2013 at 08:03 PM
The psycho who killed those babies in Connecticut should have been locked up in a mental institution! His mother knew he was crazy. I say bring back mental institutions, throw all the crazies in there, and throw away the key!
Greg January 18, 2013 at 10:21 PM
I didn't realize there has been a proposal to ban all guns or confiscate those that people already have? You people are really blowing Obama's proposals out of proportion. What is so offensive about requiring people to go through a background check before buying a gun? What is so offensive about limiting the types of guns that people can purchase? I mean, we limit the % of alcohol in your beer or the amount of lead in your gasoline. How is this any different? Not to mention, how is limiting access to semi-automatic weapons different than limiting access to grenade-launchers? Both share a sole purpose of killing people. Bonnie-Jean....your statement above is "how dare you limit the gun I can buy since that infringes upon my 2nd Amendment rights, but let's just imprison this entire group of people over here". Doesn't that sound even a little crazy to you???
scott englin January 19, 2013 at 03:16 AM
thank your fellow voters for voting for democrats in every single race in this state. you cant have a well run democracy with one party ( democrats ) rule. it turns into a dictatorship and thats exactly what we have here in taxachusetts. and obama is trying the same thing with all his executive priviledges. its complete insanity what we have going on in this state and country. when you have cockroaches ( democrats ) hanging on for so long eventually they multiply and have a majority. like they got now. and they are not doing whats in the best interest of america or its citizens. HOW DID THIS COUNTRY AND STATE GET SOOOOOOOOOOO STUPID???? god help us all
James H Cavanaugh January 19, 2013 at 05:15 AM
The only thing absurd about my comparison is that you are on the other end of it. As a matter of fact it is people like you who created the problem by making gun free zones around schools. They really keep the criminal element out of there! Conecticut has very restrictive gun laws. They just don't work on criminals do they?
Fed Up January 19, 2013 at 08:07 AM
Great discussion. First of all, we have a leader in the White House who is only representing about half the country. I have never seen the country so divided as it is today. I also anticipated this country changing its values, but not as rapidly it has since President Obama took over. The 'limit gun permits to the population' theory won't help because we already have about 300 million guns in circulation. If you check the facts, you will see the national murder rate has gone from 24,000 in '93 to 14,000 in '13. At the same time we have had a proliferation of guns. If we were to use these stats, everyone owning guns means less murders.
Greg January 19, 2013 at 12:37 PM
So again the argument against very reasonable gun control measures is cockroaches and gun-free school zones. Can someone on the right provide 1 single argument against background checks or waiting periods? Or 1 single argument for why you need an AK-47? Or allowing the govt to actually conduct research on gun violence? That's what I thought. Your all frothing at the mouth but you just don't know why.....
James H Cavanaugh January 19, 2013 at 04:02 PM
Ok Greg, I need them because people like you are runing the country. Letting the criminal element do what it wants by having the ATF give them guns to play out their ideals, and going after the law abiding citizens while slowly takiing our rights and privileges away because of my absurd comparisons. Is that a good enough reason for you? Or do I have to spell it out?
Charles Fotheringham January 19, 2013 at 04:31 PM
Just reading these comments makes me realize we are an ANGRY nation of people. I see it in traffic, in stores....we are all ready to pounce given the right or wrong set of circumstances. Sad, sad to say I am from this area.
Fed Up January 19, 2013 at 04:40 PM
The question that needs to be answered is WHY we are angry. The fact is we have egomaniacs representing us in government whose only concern is to get re-elected. What have the Barney Franks & Barack Obamas of this country do anything but run for an election? The only answer that would transform government is the institution of term-limits to all elected officials. We are angry for a very good reason, but we have to solve these anger issues instead of allowing it to fester.
Greg January 19, 2013 at 05:40 PM
James, who is going after law abiding citizens here? Who is taking your rights away? Please tell me how background checks and waiting periods do that? They don't do that. Your just upset that your team lost the last election, so you wave your faux flag of patriotism like its your teams colors. That's what's wrong with this country. I'm willing to have dialog, but your simply too angry to engage. 3x I've asked why background checks are bad and you haven't answered once. I think that says it all.
Fed Up January 19, 2013 at 08:35 PM
The issue is not with background checks. We have had background checks before and we have them moving forward. If you really look into what was just legislated by Obama is the fact that law-abiding citizens will have less to protect themselves while the criminal will continue to break the law. What will enhance the current laws? Simply increase the penalty of crimes with handguns. Instead of one year with an illegal handgun, make it ten years, and make it non-negotiable.
James H Cavanaugh January 19, 2013 at 09:18 PM
They slowly take our rights away right under our noses and you don't even notice? What is the Patriot Act? Sure the Repblicans created it. What does it do? Takes away your 4th Amendment rights. There is noting wrong with background checks. Ther IS something wrong when your government send guns to Mexico to play up against out right to bear arms though. The issue is you make these control laws so tough that you can't use a gun to protect yourself or your interests without punishment. For what? I didn't see Obama taking down the Patriot Act when he got in. I guess screwing us out of our rights is ok to the liberais as long as it fits their own agenda.
James H Cavanaugh January 19, 2013 at 09:19 PM
Background checks are fine but why the hell do I have to wait if I am a law abiding citizen? The criminals aren't going to wait a month to get their guns. This crap about so called "assault weapons" like a semi automatic gun that looks mean and military is any different from any other semi-automatic gun, 10 round clip or 30 round clip they both shoot bullets at the same rate. Wow it might take a second to put another 10 round clip in! Its not the gun, the tool, idiots it's the person behind it pulling the trigger you have to worry about. It didn't bother thm years ago when they dowsized the state mental hospitals and put those people on the street! Now it comes back to nip them in the bud! If a nutcase decides to kill he's going to do it with whatever he can get his damn hands on. Guns, fertilizer, baseball bats. Do you blame the car when someone hits you in an accident? No you blame the human driving it, same precedent.
Greg January 20, 2013 at 01:02 AM
Great analogy between guns and cars. How much regulation and control does the govt exert on the auto-industry? Let's see....there are safety requirements, cafe standards, required licensing, speed limits, insurance requirements, etc.... Does any of this inhibit your freedom? In regards to the waiting period, a lot of gun-related deaths are suicides. I think the thinking is the waiting period has the potential to give these troubled people the opportunity to re-think their decision. Considering the amount of online shopping people do today, does waiting a week for something really inhibit you? And don't give me the "it gives the criminals a week to get the jump on me argument". You live in Peabody, not the wild west. I've heard the argument between 10/30 bullet clips and its a reasonable argument. But so is the inverse of that argument....which is if it only takes you seconds to reload, then its really not a big deal. BTW - your absolutely correct in regards to our downsizing mental health services in this country. We clearly need to do a better job of reaching out....and part of that includes making a connection between mental health and access to guns. Just a quick question....are you this upset about the TSA when you fly?
Fed Up January 20, 2013 at 01:37 AM
Do you think the TSA is the defining moment of our air safety? It is another government bureaucracy that cannot get out of its own way. The TSA gives full inspections to 90-year-old grandmothers and 6-year-old children. Let me give a hint to the TSA; all terrorism in this country has been performed by Muslims between the ages of 20 and 40. Until we concentrate our efforts on these people, we are wasting our money.
James H Cavanaugh January 20, 2013 at 01:49 AM
Yeah but driving a car is a PRIVILIGE not a right. I don't fly so I cannot respond about the TSA. Chicago is the wild west and all their restrictions aren't keeping the gang bangers from having weaponry, only the law abiding. Peabody may not be the wild west but we still should have the right to protect our lives and property without a lot of harassment when someone does so. The police can't be everywhere. Suicide is a criminal offence, anyone doing it is a criminal, if not nuts to begin with. I don't see them putting dead bodies in jail though. We definitly need to check on the state of people's mental health if they are going to get a permit to carry or an FID. I see nothing wrong with checking on that as well as if they're a felon when looking at the records. It's not a week it's a month waiting by the way.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something