University of Minnesota Cyber Security Expert Arrested for “Gun Buying Spree”

“Investigators say [Massoud] Amin – who his attorney describes as a gun hobbyist – bought 14 handguns from seven separate gun shops across the metro in a two-and-a-half-week span this summer,”kstp.com reports. He was under a felony indictment at the time, accused of providing fabricated financial documents in his divorce.”

Do you trust a journalist who doesn’t know when to use “who” or “whom”? I don’t trust any journalist, even if their grammar is faultless. Including myself. Me? Anywho . . .

Professor Amin’s the Director of the Technological Leadership Institute at the University of Minnesota (when he’s not having fun with guns). His brief’s gonna have to explain why his client answered “no” to the question about being under a felony indictment on his ATF Form 4473.

The good (some say great) professor now faces seven gross misdemeanors for his firearms purchases, each charge carrying a sentence of up to a year in jail. Fourteen guns. Fourteen years.

The question of whether or not Mr. Amin was eventually cleared of the forgery charges doesn’t seem to interest the reporters at KSTP. Same for whether or not a non-violent felony indictment — never mind conviction — should disqualify an American from exercising their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

Of course, lying on Form 4473 is a felony. So ace lawyer or not, I reckon Professor Amin is well on his way to being a prohibited person for the rest of his natural life.

Interestingly, it appears Professor Amin had a concealed carry permit — which, in Minnesota, would exempts him from the need to undergo an FBI background check at the time of purchase. While this case doesn’t have a victim — save, perhaps, Professor Amin’s (former?) better half — I can foresee a day when the antis cry “gun permit loophole”! Not to give them ideas . . .

comments

  1. avatar JDH says:

    Meanwhile the liberals ignore felonious behavior by government officials like Operation Fast and Furious.

    1. avatar DrewR says:

      Yup, a branch of the federal government sold fully automatic weapons to criminal enterprises who then turned those weapons on both American and Mexican citizens, but you and I are a danger because we like to hit the range a few times a month. Everyone associated with Fast and Furious should be imprisoned for a very long time.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        Ummm…F&F did not involve the sale of fully automatic firearms, but rather a variety of rifles and shotguns, with a large number being ARs or AKs plus a few Barrets. You know, the cheap stuff (relatively speaking). Any automatic weapons sales by the U.S. government were direct to the Mexican government/military, a large number of which seeped into cartel ownership when they went walkies with AWOL soldiers. the cartels also purchase automatic weapons and grenades from Guatemala.

        Just sayin.

    2. avatar TwoJohnsonsAreBetterThanOne says:

      Govt officials can get away with a lot of things, even sponsoring terrorism, like John McCain.

      1. avatar The Punisher says:

        Another thing I always get a kick out of aside from the general ignoring of the fact that government itself perpetuates more crime than most run of the mill criminals is the sudden capitulation and further indictment of the person caught up in this nonsense.

        He’s getting a divorce and doesn’t want half his stuff taken from him. That’s their business not ours. Doesn’t make him a criminal.

        Lying on a financial statement? Civil issue at best. So maybe she ends up getting half after all. Felony? Psssssh.

        Making this guy a “prohibited person” for life? Stupidest nonsense ever. If you are a true danger to society and shouldn’t be able to have a gun for protection then you should be in the ground or on a remote jungle in exile. Period. I don’t advocate locking people in cages, but since that’s what happens now then I believe that once you’ve served your penalty in the time out box then you’re no longer prohibited.

        It’s injustice system all the way around.

  2. avatar Ken says:

    Are you sure about that carry permit exempting the need for a NICS check at purchase. At least here in FL, the only thing it gets us out of is any waiting period. A NICS check is still made. EDIT: Never mind. I see now that it is different from state to state.

    1. avatar little horn says:

      i think thats up to the state or business, something like that. In Arkansas it works that way. they CAN take my CCL as a background check if they want.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Carry license eliminates need for BC in TX, but 4473 must still be filled out, signed and retained by FFL, so po-po can still come back to dealer for 4473 and prosecute.

    3. avatar Rusty Chains says:

      If the State complies with guidelines from ATF, then your weapon carry license allows the FFL to accept your permit in place of having to run you thru the NICS system. Super convenient when NICS is down (again). Only twice in the past 20 years have I had my information run through NICS for a gun purchase, once when I screwed up and let my carry permit lapse, and once when Dicks Sporting Goods ran me anyway as is their policy. Too bad NICS wasn’t down, so the guy would have had to explain what he was doing in the back while I was waiting; I no longer give Dicks any business.

      FYI the State of Georgia complies with the ATF regulations, so no NICS with Weapons Carry Permit.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        The California CCW doesn’t do jack squat when it comes to buying guns, not even a waiver of the ten day wait.

      2. avatar Snatchums says:

        Yeah, South Dakota has 2 types of license, the basic which is just a background check and $15 for 5 years and the enhanced, which is for broader reciprocity and includes fingerprints and a training requirement, about $300 when you’re all said and done. The enhanced license lets you skip the BC but you still fill out the 4473.

  3. avatar anonymoose says:

    Snackbar was probably planning to kill his wife for divorcing him, which is absolutely halal. Why can’t you infidels be more tolerant?

    1. avatar jwm says:

      Infidels? Aren’t we deploreables? Another memo that missed me.

      1. avatar anonymoose says:

        There are “deplorable” infidels and “ally” infidels. All must be put to death eventually.

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      I have a feeling that killing is wife was not a part of the plan at all; rather, he was trying to hide cash by buying assets so that she couldn’t get her hands on it, which is consistent with his falsifying of financial records. And which happens with unsurprising but nonetheless sad frequency in divorce litigation.

      1. avatar Klause Von Schmitto says:

        I found out that Judges take a dim view of you selling a house to your divorce lawyer – especially when’s he’s also your best friend and you give him a really good deal.

  4. avatar Darkman says:

    Same in Iowa…^ @Ken

  5. avatar Regal442 says:

    If his permit expires after August 1st 2019 he did not have to fill out a 4473.

    https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/minnesota-permit-carry-qualify-alternative-background-check

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Um, yes, he did have to fill out a form 4473. All his concealed carry license eliminates is the need to pass a background check right then and there.

      1. avatar Regal442 says:

        That makes more sense. My error.

      2. avatar Jim Macklin says:

        If the dealer wishes, the phone call to NICS can be waived. Some dealers will still make the call.
        This an the GFSZ exemption are two reasons to have a CCW/CCH in your home state.

  6. avatar JoeMoma says:

    I believe in MN if you got your CCW permit in the last 2 years you do not need an FBI check during purchases

  7. avatar Gabe says:

    In MN the permit does exempt the buyer from doing the check if the permit expires after Aug1, 2019. So it depends on when the permit was issued. But some dealers can still choose to run the check.

  8. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    He gets indicted for forgery and then he suddenly needs fourteen (14) handguns. Huh.

    Too bad he didn’t buy them before he got divorced. Sux 2B him, I guess. I’m trying to muster up some sympathy for the poor guy, but unfortunately, none is forthcoming.

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      I take it you’ve never been divorced, never mind twice.

      1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

        You presume correctly.

        Of course, if I found myself in the process of a divorce, I still don’t know why I would need an additional fourteen (14) handguns.

        1. You’re either lucky or bound to get further insight.

        2. avatar DrewR says:

          You’d think he’d wait until after the divorce, she would likely have ended up with eight of those guns after all was said and done. Maybe they had an agreement that he would be able to keep all his guns but she would get a big chunk of his money, so he tipped the odds in his favor.

        3. avatar sc says:

          if its an equitable distribution state, the split of assets is usually based on the date of commencement, which is the day the action was filed. So its possible she got half the collection he had at that date, and he wanted to replace everything she got.

        4. avatar JasonM says:

          Maybe it was a way for him to transfer his easily tracked liquid funds into something harder to track.
          Maybe he had a prenup that said they’d split bank accounts, but he got to keep all guns.

          If he planned to kill his wife, I don’t see why he’d buy 14 guns, especially when he already owned other guns.
          If he planned to go on a killing spree, I don’t see why he’d buy 14 guns. One or two, with a big stack of magazines and ammo, would be more effective.

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      Maybe his wife didn’t like guns and that is why he waited until the divorce. Maybe he didn’t want his wife taking half of his guns in the divorce?

      1. avatar Stinkeye says:

        I suspect it was unrelated to the divorce. My guess is he was worried about being convicted on the forgery charges and wanted to stockpile some firearms before he became a prohibited person.

  9. avatar MamaLiberty says:

    Dayum… sure wish I could buy 14 handguns in two and a half weeks… or a lifetime. Earlier, I was on a roll… but decided finally that eating regularly was more important. 🙂

    But indeed… the gun confiscators will do everything they can to criminalize as much personal behavior and as many possessions as possible. Once we are all “prohibited persons” they’ll be happy… for a little while anyway.

    Obviously, criminals will only be inconvenienced somewhat because there may be fewer guns to steal.

  10. avatar Kevin C. says:

    I am trying to imagine buying so many pistols in such a short time. Just curious–maybe invite him to write what should be an interesting article. What might be the motivation?

    How long would it take to learn the manual of arms for each? How many ammo, holster, accessory, case, cleaning supply purchases? Thinking about keeping tabs on 14 of almost anything makes me feel tired 🙂

    1. avatar MamaLiberty says:

      Gosh, Kevin… 14 guns wouldn’t be difficult to manage. They don’t run around much and they can be tied down or caged if necessary. 🙂 You don’t have to feed them all at once (or ever, actually), and they don’t have to wear diapers, so how hard could that be?

      I managed to keep track of two toddlers long ago – and both survived! 14 guns should be easy.

  11. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Hmm… I wonder if he’s any relation to Idi…

  12. avatar Pete says:

    The headline for this article is misleading. He wasn’t arrested for buying 14 handguns. He was arrested for lying on his form 4473.

  13. avatar jwm says:

    Were they 14 different handguns, types and calibers, or were they all one type and caliber.

    14 of different types and calibers is a collection.

    14 of same type and caliber is arming a squad.

    1. avatar Adub says:

      I thought of that too. But a real pro would have bought 14 uppers from PSA or Daytona Tactical, 14 80% lowers, a jig, a drill press at Harbor Freight, and had their ammo purchased via gunbot.

      Amateurs.

  14. avatar Adub says:

    He couldn’t have been a gun hobbyist if he was buying at Bill’s. They charge MSRP or above.

    And while I pretty much belong to the Gun of the Month Club, 14 handguns in 14 days?

    I guess he really wanted to take advantage of the Smith & Wesson and Walther rebates…

  15. avatar barnbwt says:

    Wait, so what was accomplished here apart from some scary-sounding disparagement of an illegal possessor?
    1) His life fell apart & he bought a ton of crap he’ll regret paying off next month if he’s not in jail
    2) He wanted to kill his wife & they only busted him after he’d acquired gun 14
    3) It’s not like he’d kill his wife/etc with more than one gun, or more than a couple bullets
    4) His illegal possession being the result of a *pending* non-violent criminal proceeding isn’t exactly indicative of violent intent
    5) If anything demonstrates mental stability, it’s filling out 7 freaking 4473s without screaming

    I get why he’s getting nailed for this, I don’t understand how we can claim it’s anything but a victimless crime, and a shameless grandstand by a criminal justice system that didn’t prevent a single tragedy except by dint of luck (or the more likely case that the guy wasn’t planning to kill anyone & was simply trying to conceal/convert his assets –something that would be in keeping with his alleged criminal behavior)

    On the flip side:
    1) ATF gets to prosecute one of the dozen or so 4473 violators for their annual quota
    2) Muslim, state university professor, pretty liberal state…probably not a friend of gun owners, though I’d be saddened to be wrong on that count (I’m sure even UC Berkeley has one pro-gun employee…oh wait, no I’m not)

  16. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

    1.) “Innocent till proven guilty in a court of law…? Anyone….?

    2.) “Due process….?”

    3.) “Constitutional waviers….?”

    4.) Well, if lying on a FED form #4473 [-Constitutional waiver.-] Is a crime…How come Clinton didn’t immediately become a “prohibited person”. Since he did admit he was a previous drug user [among other things] , and that he did own firearms…I believe there a lot of other current high profile DemoCRAPIC “law makers” , media personalities, or Hollyweird Fake Actors that would fit this criteria……

    1. avatar tmm says:

      I hadn’t thought much about it before, but I’m thinking an indictment does not a conviction make. Would that have dq’ed him, or would it have to just been noted without being an automatic fail? That amounts to a delayed or denied right. I don’t know what homeboy was up to necessarily, but I thought the idea was innocent until proven guilty. I don’t want to see it become untrustworthy until proven worthy. Oh, wait, I think it has.

  17. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    Who vs. whom grammar shaming from a fake news site like TTAG? Sounds about right.

    And oh, yes, fake news indeed. You can eventually and belatedly acknowledge that lying on form 4473 is a crime, but that doesn’t change the fact that this headline “University of Minnesota Cyber Security Expert Arrested for Gun Buying Spree” is a LIE. He was arrested for lying on the form, repeatedly, not for the purchases themselves.

    Never forget this about 2A absolutists: they’re absolutists. It’s right there in the moniker they adopt for themselves. The first thing any absolutist, aka extremist, will do in defense of their beliefs, is lie. Q.E.D.

  18. avatar kap says:

    Just Arming up for his Jihad, like any good goat roper

    1. avatar Pickle Rick says:

      Are you naturally a racist or do you have to work hard at it?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email