The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,796 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The two suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings were not licensed to have the firearms they used in several shootouts with police on Friday, Reuters reported Sunday night.


The news that the suspects were not authorized to own firearms will likely add fuel to calls for tougher gun laws – an issue that was put on the back-burner last week after the Senate blocked the central elements of a gun-control package backed by President Obama.

Because Massachusetts state law bars handgun ownership for those younger than 21, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, age 26, was the only brother who could have obtained a license from the town of Cambridge, Mass., where he lived. But he didn't take that step, Dan Riviello, spokesman for the Cambridge Police Department, told Reuters.

"There is no record of him having a license to carry," Riviello said, according to the news service.

Massachusetts state law allows residents under 21 to have rifles, but only those weapons holding 10 rounds of ammunition or less, and only then if the holder has a police-issued ID card. Several local jurisdictions where the younger brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, has lived and studied told Reuters they have no record of issuing him such a card..............





http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-r...sed-to-own-guns
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,796 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
If only they would have applied for the license - they could have been stopped... from bombing innocents, killing a cop, car jacking, having a shoot out with police, making bombs used in Boston and in the fire fight with police.


Once again, this proves the point that some are clueless. Background checks only apply to the law abiding person.

Criminals will do as they please for the reasons they justify to no one.


A license, or a background check would have had no bearing on the ability for them to take the actions they took.


Of course, this article suggests something far different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,190 Posts
Remember that NY Police union representative arguing that the police should not have to abide by the 7 round magazine limit? He said he understand why nobody has any reason to legally own a magazine w/more than 7 rounds (which is to me a totally inappropriate statement coming from LE) but that since criminals will ignore the law, LE has to have sufficient magazine capacity to fight back.

So... what then exactly is the point of NY's magazine restrictions if the police openly admit that criminals won't bother to abide by it? ~ 80% of all homicides in NYC are done by people whose criminal records makes it a felony for them to even touch a firearm. The root cause is not the legal gun owner, and they know it.

In Massachusetts they have all kinds of ridiculous anti-gun laws, didn't stop these guys. I'm curious what kind of registration, background check, etc. a terrorist is going to abide by. It's a federal felony to even make a "destructive device". Did that stop them?

And the FBI KNEW these brothers had had contact w/Russian "militants", they questioned the older brother once and had his family home under observation for years. Now they're going to blame a lack of gun laws for this terrorist attack? What the (insert expletive).

BH
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
Next we will have registration when you buy a pressure cooker. What about nails an ball bearings? The politicians are so (insert your own word). Oh yes did these guys have a permit for explosive devices?
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top