Skip to comments.Report: Boston attack suspects not licensed to own firearms
Posted on 04/21/2013 9:21:09 PM PDT by Nachum
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 President Obama's gun-control package.
Police say Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, and his 19-year-old brother, Dzhokhar, went on a deadly shooting spree Thursday and Friday, killing a university policeman before confronting local officers in a wild firefight in the middle of a Watertown, Mass., street that left the elder brother dead and a transit policeman injured.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
I am shocked, shocked, I tell you.
What!? You mean that these gun control measures will only serve to control law a using citizens? Criminals break laws? I’m amazed!
Yes, add more laws to make double sure they couldn't get firearms.
wow quell surprise
Yes, we obviously need more gun control if even terrorists can aquire weapons inside one of the most restrictive states in the country! Sheesh. Turn in your guns Alaska!!!
Because when laws don't work, clearly we need more.
So I guess we need to expand the universal background check to private sales to terrorists. :-)
If we ban guns, only criminals will... oh, never mind.
If the bombers got guns illegally, it is grounds to argue why we don t want tougher gun laws. It would make it even harder for law abiding citizens to get one for self protection while criminals have the means to get one off the street. US needs tougher immigration laws to make it harder for terrorists or people from countries with religious values and political viewpoints that can make them into terrorists or spies. That means the US should allow less Chinese, Russians, Arab Muslims, and Muslims in general from entering as immigrants into US.
They broke the law!!??
Newsflash: Making bombs is against the law... We need new tougher laws against making bombs...
Nothing ever seems to stop the liberal agenda, even when reality appears and starts shooting.
Anyone notice there seems to be a blackout on news as to what type of firearms they used?
Normally if such a shootout happens the media would be full of photos of the weapons used with lots of calls for more bans on them.
Just to point something out, here, but weren’t the vast, overwhelming majority of the deaths and injuries here inflicted by kitchenware?
Government is entirely inept.
Takes a terrorist attack to prove it.
How about crockpots. Were they licensed there???
Obviously the only ones in this matter with AR15’s and M16’s were the cops.
It is up to us to not let them play us in this crisis.
No way! So in addition to making pressure cooker bombs filled with shrapnel to kill children and others, THEY CHOSE TO BREAK A GUN LAW???
This reporter did not ask these questions:
What if the FBI had booted them out of the country when they interviewed them?
What if we simply automatically deported anyone with a green card that breaks the law?
What if we never allowed visas for anyone known to come from a country that sponsors terroism or is a breeding ground for them?
What if there had been a ban on pressure cookers?
Exactly. The stupid LIBS want to take guns away from law abiding citizens while the criminals and thugs will always have them.
I guess the ultimate question here is are liberals this stupid or do they think the public is this stupid or both?
So how did they get their firearms ? Should that not be issue number 1 ?
Probably stamped For Government Use Only. Actually, my guess is the phony guns never got planted on them.
In an unusual development, a murderous terrorist did not possess a license to carry a firearm. Wow! Color me shocked too!
“The news that the suspects were not authorized to own firearms will likely add fuel to calls for tougher gun laws ”
What’s wrong with the above sentence?
“So I guess we need to expand the universal background check to private sales to terrorists. :-)”
Don’t give them any more great ideas.
They were also not authorized to have/use bombs or IED’s.
>werent the vast,overwhelming majority of the deaths and injuries here inflicted by kitchenware?<
When pressure cookers are outlawed only criminals......... Oh, nevermind
“Massachusetts has strong gun laws that help combat the illegal gun market, prevent the sale of most guns without background checks and reduce risks to children according to the Brady Campaign.
In the organizations 2011 state scorecards released for all 50 states, Massachusetts earned 65 points out of a total of 100.”
In a 2nd-amendment respecting society they would not be busted on the guns per se, but for using them for a criminal purpose. So I am conflicted on “throw the book at them for that.”
According to Brady Campaign, Massachusetts has the third “best” gun laws in the nation.
A 200-round firefight is the biggest I’ve ever heard of.
Glad to know Massachusetts has such good gun laws. Undoubtedly, if it hadn’t been for those strong gun laws, this these thugs might have terrorized a whole city.
My guess is that 190+ of those were from the cops.
Aw, fer cryin’ out loud...who the heck writes these “duh” stories?
You're probably right.
I hate to say it, but the thought almost makes me wonder whether the brothers had any dogs in the car with them.
Wishful thinking on the author's part. What that news will do is remind people that criminals don't obey laws. This is akin to noting that these people bombed a public gathering, killed three people, engaged in a running shootout with a small army of police officers, and drove their stole SUV too fast, and concluding that what we need are stronger speed limits to address the issue. You can't reason with stupidity this monolithic.
I’m waiting for the first Democratic pol to suggest that murders committed with guns be made a federal crime as well, with a mandatory death penalty attached.
Two ones in Los Angeles that occurred when I lived there come to mind. I looked up the numbers...:^)
Around 2,000 rounds total (1,300 from the robbers) in the N. Hollywood bank robbery of 1997. The bad guys had full body armour.
The 1974 SLA shootout (remember Patty Hearst) was around 9,000 rounds - probably mostly from the cops in that case.
The SLA shootout apparently was a sort of news TV first...
#1- it’s a car that killed the older bomber.
#2- the explosives killed and injured more people than all the gunshots did.
#3- police killed a boat with guns.
He didn’t die in a gun battle with LEOs. He was alive and the LEO was attempting to handcuff his hands behind his back, when the younger brother “Joker” drove the vehicle at them. The LEOs jumped out of the way and the vehicle ran over the older brother, killing him.
The over a million families locked in their homes unable to protect themselves and their children from a gun/bomb toting madman are going to call tougher gun laws I am sure. Did you know that they could not even protect themselves with mace? Mace is outlawed in their great state.
Perhaps each city should just be made into a “bomb free zone”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.