Massachusetts is one of the most gun controlled states in the nation. Really, only California has a more anti-gun reputation. Proponents of Massachusetts-style gun control argue that such measures work, that it somehow keeps guns out of the hands of bad people. They’ll provide all sorts of claims along those lines.

However, are they right? Do such laws keep bad people from having guns?

Well, based on what police found at the scene of a Dorchester armed robbery, I can’t help but say that no, they don’t.

Around 1 p.m., detectives executed the search warrant at 19 Olney St. as part of an armed robbery investigation, Boston police said in a statement. Five loaded guns were found in the residence: a 9mm Taurus handgun, a .357-caliber magnum Smith & Wesson revolver, a .380-caliber Taurus handgun, a 9mm Browning Arms handgun, and a .380-caliber Lorcin handgun. Detectives also found “a large amount” of ammunition, police said.

The search warrant stems from an incident that occurred Saturday night, Boston police spokesman Sergeant Detective John Boyle said in a statement. Around midnight, officers responded to a report of an armed robbery in progress by Bowdoin Street and Hamilton Street. Upon arrival, two victims told officers they had been robbed at gunpoint, authorities said.

One victim had met the other to sell him a car for $8,000, police were told. As they conducted the transaction, they were allegedly approached by Brandon Pight, of Dorchester, a man whom the victims were familiar with, police said. He “lured them to a nearby house” on Olney Street and allegedly pointed a gun at them, demanding the money, authorities said.

The victims gave Pight the money, police said. As they complied, an unidentified man allegedly approached one of the victims, took his key fob, and fled in the victim’s car.

Now, if Massachusetts has so many gun laws and gun laws work, then why were police able to find so many handguns in the possession of a criminal? Why, it’s almost like people who will break laws against robbery won’t hesitate to break other laws as well.

In fairness, we don’t know how Pight got his guns. He’s charged with armed robbery and receiving stolen property, but no mention of him being arrested for being an armed felon or anything.

Regardless, we have another (alleged) example of a criminal having a gun despite the plethora of gun control regulations in the state. While law-abiding citizens have difficulty getting guns in the state, Pight didn’t seem to have all that much trouble. It’ll be interesting to find out where he obtained his firearms, though. My guess is the black market where no one cares too much about why someone wants a gun or whether they can pass a background check or not.

Just because there’s no mention of the guns having been stolen doesn’t mean they weren’t. Without serial numbers, there’s no way to identify a stolen gun, so Pight might have dodged the proverbial bullet on that one.

The important takeaway here, though, is that criminals will get guns. You’re not going to stop them from getting them. All you really do is make it difficult on the people who aren’t a threat while those who are will continue to do as they’ve always done.

I keep hoping against hope that someday, anti-gunners will come to realize this fact.