Tamerlin Tsarnaev (courtesy thegatewaypundit.com)

Eagle-eyed TTAG reader Dirk Diggler spotted this in a foxnews.com report on one of the Boston bombers. “Tamerlan [Tsarnaev] previously studied at Bunker Hill Community College for three semesters — fall 2006, spring 2007 and fall 2008 — in hopes of becoming an engineer. He took off a semester from his studies to practice boxing at the Wai Kru Mixed Martial Arts Center in Boston. He also had a three-year-old daughter, his father told Bloomberg TV, and was reportedly arrested in 2009 for domestic assault and battery following an incident involving his girlfriend.” If the arrest went on his record, Tamerlan Tsarnaev would not have been able to purchase or own a firearm in Massachusetts. Legally.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

60 COMMENTS

    • This is MA, I live in MA. For a first arrest, he would have received a ‘continued without a finding’. That is not a conviction or guilty plea so his right to own a gun would not have been affected.

      This is MA though and a firearms license is a may issue and left to the police chief for your town or city. Cambridge is VERY liberal and anti gun. I would be shocked if the chief there would give this guy a gun permit. They can reject for any reason they want, they would have here.

      • So you have to get a permission slip from the local law enforcement bureaucrats just to buy a pistol and bring it home and keep it in your house?

  3. Bad guys get what they need regardless of laws. All the laws do is create more victims for the bad guys.

    • Especially when they’re engineers. Look at how many of the Islamist terr’s have been engineers or engineering students. When an engineer decides to “go rogue,” there’s nothing that paper laws can do to stop him. Nothing.

      Take that to the bank from a retired engineer.

      • Worse is an engineer who’s also a COMBAT engineer. Not that I would know anything about that…

        • I grew up reading Shape Charge/demo formulas in my Fathers Army TMs (we had no TV)
          Army TMs have a TON of great information on dem…

          One Second… FBI at door.

  4. If he illegally obtained a gun, I have a feeling the gun owning community is still gonna catch flack. I’m guessing the blame will be cast on something like the so-called “gun show loophole” when it was probably the “I bought it from some guy who stole it loophole”.

        • And the broken window loophole.

          Two more firearms are on the illegal market in KCMO because an alarm customer of mine (as of Friday) got burgled on Thursday.

    • You can’t stop the “two guys meeting in a parking lot” loophole

      There are plenty of gangs who run guns, there are plenty out there to be purchased illegally.

      See “Sons of Anarchy” (TV show) for reference of how it can be done.

      • if there’s one thing you should NOT do, it’s look to Sons of Anarchy for a realistic portrayal of illegal firearm trafficking.

    • Accomplices. He’d have recruited someone with a clean record to buy the guns. Problem solved.

      People act like these “obstacles” they want to put in the path of criminals and terrorists would actually do anything, but in reality they’d be minor inconveniences that would take a slow person 15 minutes to think their way around. They’d be pretty handy for knowing where the guns are for confiscation purposes later, though.

  5. Yeah. That must be their man. NOT the “right-winger gun nuts” of yesterday; NOT the Saudi before him. HEY, folks, WE FINALLY GOT HIM.

    Whenever a particular narrative changes daily or hourly, A MASSIVE COVERUP is taking place.

    • No, William Burke, as one who once worked for the now long-defunct “New York Herald-Tribune,” and later for the “New York Times,” I can tell you that whenever a particular narrative changes daily or hourly, it’s much more likely that the situation that is the topic of the narrative is very fluid and confused/confusing, with multiple reports coming in from multiple observers, than that “A MASSIVE COVERUP is taking place.”

    • Yes, it’s not that the media is completely incompetent and just wants to be the first to break the story for ratings so it publishes any and all hearsay they come across, it’s that everyone is extremely intelligent and in on an extremely intricate coverup plan.

      Within hours there were pictures of “suspects” that left backpacks only to find the pictures simply obscured the backpacks or used the “not looking with the crowd” argument when they were obviously security contractors. Security contrators don’t care about the event they are scanning the crowds and checking each others positions. One of them happened to look Arabic, hence the Saudi national rumor came to be. Other “suspects” were conspicuous white men.

      • “Security contractors” with backpacks that happen to look an awful lot like the ones in which the bombs were planted…

        Hmm, that’s weird…

        But assuming that it was the Brothers Chechen, I wonder if any of the MSM will do the real journalist work of investigating whether or not these guys were ALSO on anti-depressants with a history of recent dosage changes?

        Guess that’s just wishful thinking, but maybe…

    • Yup, it’s a coverup. The bombing was actually done by aliens from Area 51 who launched death rays from the grassy knoll.

    • i really dont believe so.

      you have to wait and gather all of the facts rather than jump to the conclusion that it was a conspiracy (alex jones you f^cking asshole).

      MSN’s “rebuttal” on the bombing not being a false flag was utterly pathetic, although I honestly believe it was two shitheads that did it with a axe to grind. Not going to draw conclusions yet.

      Like what i said after sandy hook: if you claim “conspiracy” and “false flag”, you better have your 1000 footnotes and 600 pages of information (ala Crossing the Rubicon for 9/11).

  6. Intriguingly, an report of an interview with his father, who claimed he was “an angel”, also mentioned that he was a second-year medical student.

  7. The anti-gun newest attack points:
    1. He shouldn’t have had legal Second Amendment rights, even though he became a legal citizen in 2007

    2. A background check would have stopped him to begin with, even though his record was clean

    Fail, on both.

    http://wr2a.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/a-background-check-would-not-have-stopped-tsarnaev-brothers/

    Like with Sandy Hook, the AG cultists want to claim after the fact that their way would work best. But how does one stop a future terrorist when no one knows he is to be a future terrorist? Fail, fail, fail.

    • We already have predictive software – the “rudimentary” stuff is how Netflix figures your movie likes, and Target knows your daughter is preggers before she does.

      It’s no secret in the least that all our intel agencies are constantly improving their predictive software. Which is light-years ahead of the commercial stuff.
      TIA? Not quite, but once Bluffdale works up good pile of readily used data in one convenient building, be very concerned.

  8. So what was the motivation, or does the media not care about the motivation and they’d rather just use this as a front to fuel gun control? For an engineer you’d think he could pull off a more impressive feat like taking down a building, don’t get me wrong, this is a tragedy.

    I think we all know the solution here. Ban engineering.

    • First guy got killed. If this guy dies, it would be the worst thing that could happen-hear me out. If this person is taken in alive, his motivation, as well as connections of any type can be discovered and dealt with accordingly. If he is killed or does himself in-his motivation will not be known, leaving the media free to whip up all sorts of stories based on innuendo, but no FACTS. Furthermore, if there are any connections to be made to other potential rogues who may become an issue in the future, his death would make it difficult to connect the dots. I personally would prefer facts-ergo he must be brought in alive. After that Federal trial and execution.

      • The tinfoil hat crowd is not going to believe anything anyway. They are genetically incapable of accepting Occam’s Razor.

        • ethical investigative journalists and whistleblowers, long repudiated as “tin foil hatters” f^cking invented Occam’s Razor.

    • in MA, you have to get a purchase permit. He would have been flagged for the arrest record, and the police chief would have dinged him. or so in theory.

      • FIDs (for long guns) are shall-issue, though, and the bureaucrats are forbidden from denying an FID application except for one of the factors enumerated in statute.

      • in MA, you have to get a purchase permit.

        Negative, DD. Once you have an MA LTC (license to carry), you do not need a separate purchase permit.

  10. Why wouldn’t you find out if he had an arrest record for beating his girlfriend before you post this? He could have bought guns before that arrest too. Im still pissed about that reloading post you did. You are not checking things out again.

    • court would have ordered him to surrender his guns AFTER the arrest given it was domestic violence. the protection orders in MA actually state this. or so in theory.

  11. Too bad he’s dead. Having blown up all those people he was now qualified to teach social justice at nice universities like Chicago, Columbia and Florida.

  12. MA Law: http://www.mass.gov/eopss/firearms-reg-and-laws/gun-laws/revisions-to-gun-control-act.html :

    “The FLRB has the authority to review only misdemeanor convictions. Further, there may be more than one conviction, but all convictions must arise from a single incident. The FLRB may not review convictions for:

    •a felony; or
    •an assault or battery on a family or household member, or person with whom there is/was a substantive dating relationship, as defined by G.L. c. 209A, § 1;

    In addition, an individual may not apply for review until after the passage of five (5) years since conviction or release from supervision, whichever is last occurring. The FLRB will review criminal histories as part of the petition review process.”

  14. Why do you think he bought a firearm at all?
    More than likely the weapons just like the bombs were given to him and his brother by their handlers. Do you really believe this was a 2 person job?

    These two were nothing but soldiers and their screwed up attempt at a getaway sounds more like their handlers left them out to dry once their pictures were shown on the news. I bet the handlers got away when the going was good. These two were left on their own and their inexperience showed when they tried to rob a store no doubt because their funding was pulled.

  17. The older brother was here with a green card, last I checked you had to be an american citizen or be here with a work visa detailing some type of security position to obtain a firearm?

    • You’re wrong (or it was the requirements of your state, and do not apply to other states). Federal law allows one to obtain a firearm even on a work or student visa – all you need is a hunting license – and most states don’t restrict this further (although some require additional licensing / background checks).

Comments are closed.