Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

General discussion - Feel free to discuss anything you want here. Firearm related is preferred, but not required
Post Reply
Stratojaxter
Sharp Shooter
Sharp Shooter
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 17:37:50

Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by Stratojaxter »

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... Their-Guns
Less than a week after the push by Democrats push for more gun control went down in flames in the Senate, Reuters is reporting the suspected Boston Marathon bombers ignored gun laws that are already on the books in possessing the firearms they used in shootouts with the police.
According to Reuters, "The two brothers suspected in the Boston Marathon bombings, who police say engaged in a gun battle early Friday after a frenzied manhunt, were not licensed to own guns in the towns where they lived."
This means the handguns and "at least one rifle" the brothers had with them were acquired and possessed in ways that broke laws already in existence.
For example, to have acquired and possessed the firearms legally, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the elder brother, would have first needed "to apply for a gun license with the local police department where he lived in Cambridge, Massachusetts."
In Massachusetts, a Firearms Identification Card (FID) is required before buying, transporting, or possessing a firearm.
Another example of how new gun control laws will not deter criminals who have been ignoring the old laws for years.
I know you are all as shocked as I am about this. I bet they didn't have a bomb making permit either.
User avatar
Greybeard
Sharp Shooter
Sharp Shooter
Posts: 649
Joined: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 19:53:09
Location: SouthCentral PA for now - Northern Neck Forever

Re: Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by Greybeard »

Uh oh. They're in trouble now.
Karl
Years ago it was suggested that, "An apple a day keeps the doctor away." But since all the doctors are now Muslim, I've found that a bacon sandwich works great!
User avatar
FiremanBob
VGOF Bronze Supporter
VGOF Bronze Supporter
Posts: 2083
Joined: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 08:50:05

Re: Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by FiremanBob »

This aspect of the story strengthens the terrorist cell theory. Having been an active participant in the Northeast Shooters forum, I can say with confidence that a legal Massachusetts resident would not have sold the firearms to either of the terrorists in a private transaction.

There is also the question of how they financed their lifestyles, being unemployed and not living with parents. My suspicion is AQ.
Author of The 10/22 Companion: How to Operate, Troubleshoot, Maintain and Improve Your Ruger 10/22
1022Companion.com
Project Appleseed Instructor
OakRidgeStars
VGOF Gold Supporter
VGOF Gold Supporter
Posts: 14108
Joined: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 10:13:20

Re: Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by OakRidgeStars »

Greybeard wrote:Uh oh. They're in trouble now.
More like we are in trouble now. Don't you know that it's our fault these criminal dirtbags acquired their illegal guns illegally?

Time to pass more gun laws.
User avatar
Palladin
VGOF Platinum Supporter
VGOF Platinum Supporter
Posts: 4154
Joined: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 22:06:43
Location: Louisa

Re: Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by Palladin »

FiremanBob wrote:
...There is also the question of how they financed their lifestyles, being unemployed and not living with parents. My suspicion is AQ.


How 'bout dem sowdys? :whistle:
Now is the time for all good men to get off their rusty dustys...
User avatar
DryBones
VGOF Silver Supporter
VGOF Silver Supporter
Posts: 527
Joined: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 12:56:14

Re: Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by DryBones »

I can't believe their guns haven't been linked to a gun show in Chantilly yet...oh wait...give the MSM time. :bangin:
User avatar
RWBlue01
Sharp Shooter
Sharp Shooter
Posts: 332
Joined: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 12:10:50

Re: Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by RWBlue01 »

Hmm, criminals breaking the law, hmm.
User avatar
101stABdiv
On Target
On Target
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 20:42:11
Location: Culpeper

Re: Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by 101stABdiv »

Did they have a permit for the pressure cookers that they used to make the bombs with? The liberals will focus on the police officer that was killed with the gun but how about the 3 that died and over one hundred seriously injured by everyday items like a pressure cooker, nails and ball bearings?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image
User avatar
DaRoller
Sharp Shooter
Sharp Shooter
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 20:57:47

Re: Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by DaRoller »

101stABdiv wrote:Did they have a permit for the pressure cookers that they used to make the bombs with? The liberals will focus on the police officer that was killed with the gun but how about the 3 that died and over one hundred seriously injured by everyday items like a pressure cooker, nails and ball bearings?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image
Oh, they'll focus on that, too. At least, on where they got the stuff that made the other stuff go *boom*.
User avatar
TacticalMom
VGOF Bronze Supporter
VGOF Bronze Supporter
Posts: 806
Joined: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 14:58:10

Re: Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by TacticalMom »

Wow there is a shocker... Glad that was cleared up. Criminals not listening to the laws. Well whoda thunk it?
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves."
Abraham Lincoln
User avatar
GeneralG
Marksman
Marksman
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 07:57:14
Location: Front Royal

Re: Bombers didn't have permits for their guns

Post by GeneralG »

just get ready for pressure cookers, ball bearings, nails, backpacks, and white and black hats to be banned next :tinfoil:
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”