What We Know About the Tsarnaev Brothers’ Guns


We still don’t have a full account of where and how the Tsarnaev brothers obtained the firearms and explosives they allegedly used in the deadly attacks that began on April 15 at the Boston Marathon. Here are the details about their guns that have emerged so far:

How may firearms did they have?
Along with several pipe bombs, law enforcement officials recovered four guns they believed the Tsarnaevs used, according to a report in the New York Times (Update: officials are now saying only one 9 mm handgun was recovered.) Authorities believe three of the firearms—two handguns of unspecified makes and models, and a BB gun—were used in the dramatic early morning shootout with police in Watertown that left Tamerlan dead.

Did they have military-grade weapons?
The other gun, described by the Times as an M-4 carbine rifle “similar to ones used by American forces in Afghanistan,” was reportedly found on the boat in the Watertown driveway where Dzhokhar was captured. It is unclear whether the rifle is a semi-automatic civilian model or the selective-fire model used by the military.

What gun laws would they have been subject to?
Both Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev were residents of Massachusetts, a state with strict gun laws including a ban on assault weapons and magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Along with Washington, D.C., Massachusetts is one of just seven states with some form of assault weapons ban. No such restrictions exist under federal law, but if the M-4 is a selective-fire model it would fall under the highly restrictive National Firearms Act of 1934 that requires the registration of automatic weapons.

Did they have gun permits? Could they have gotten any?
Reuters reported that neither brother had a valid handgun permit in the state of Massachusetts. Because he is younger than 21, Dzhokhar could not have legally owned a handgun even with a permit. He also did not have the firearms identification card he would have needed to legally possess a semi-automatic rifle with a 10-round magazine. BB guns don’t require licensing for non-minors in Massachusetts.

I heard Dzhokar turned a gun on himself. Is that true?
When he was captured, Dzhokhar “had visible injuries including gunshot wounds to the head, neck, legs, and hand,” according to an FBI agent in the Boston Globe. His wounds initially prevented him from speaking, and, according to a senior US official cited in the Times, at least one “had the appearance of a close-range, self-inflicted style.”

Did the Tsarnaev brothers attempt to get additional weapons during their rampage?
According to CBS News, investigators are looking into whether the Tsarnaevs allegedly killed an MIT police officer to obtain another handgun. They failed because they couldn’t remove the handgun from the slain officer’s locking holster. “There was apparently an attempt to yank it and they couldn’t get it and left,” reported CBS News senior correspondent John Miller.

Did they have high-capacity magazines?
It seems more probable than not that the Tsarnaevs used ammunition devices that were in violation of the state’s 10-round magazine limit. According to reports on the Watertown shootout with police, more than 200 rounds were exchanged in that gun battle.

Will the ATF be able to trace their weapons?
According to the Washington Post, authorities are attempting to trace one of the Tsarnaevs’ handguns, whose serial number was removed. If technicians are able to determine the serial number, they plan to hand it over to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives in West Virginia.

UPDATE, Wednesday, April 24: The Associated Press reports that two US officials are saying that Boston bombing investigators have just one 9 mm handgun that they believe was used in the Tsarnaevs’ shootout with police. That contradicts the Sunday report in the New York Times, which cited an unnamed official who said the brothers used two handguns and a BB gun during the shootout.

UPDATE 2, Thursday, April 25: According to a report in the New York Times, law enforcement officials are now saying that Dzhokhar had no gun with him in the boat where he was captured. Earlier, officials said there had been an exchange of gunfire between police and Dzhokhar, but now, according to the Times, “officials say they are exploring what prompted officers to fire at Mr. Tsarnaev, who some feared was armed with explosives.” (Previous reports suggesting that Dzhokhar tried to kill himself in the boat with a self-inflicted gun shot apparently were inaccurate.) Officials reportedly have recovered only one gun, a 9 mm Ruger they believe was used by Tamerlan.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate