We should not make any assumptions here.
I remember that about 20+ years ago a famous biologist was killed, and there were all kinds of speculations about terrorists, the government, and so on. A few years later, Snapped episode was released.
Questions alone are not productive. Asking questions and being willing to deal with delayed, missing, incomplete, unexpected and unwelcome answers is where it's at.
"The information about a possible connection between the two incidents was developed in the last 24 hours as detectives working on both cases compared notes, the sources said."
I like to think HN is better than the level of conspiracy theory adoption and 4chan-like haha dude died let me make jokes about it posts in those pages.
Although this was probably a random act of violence, it makes me wonder.
As a nuclear scientist, could he have been involved in any sensitive research?
Maybe he "knew too much" and was deemed a NatSec/InfoSec threat by certain clandestine groups? It wouldn't be the first time...
But on the actual topic, it could be a case of home invasion etc. No need to jump to conclusions of further malicious intent (yet).
Obviously not. It matters what surrounding facts and circumstances are reported, how extraordinary they are, how they are known, how they were cross-checked, who is doing the reporting, what is their track record around research and impartiality, etc etc.
Different people will come to different conclusions about who they trust for what reasons. Some people may conclude they do not trust "the news" in this particular case or in general. Some may have ideas about what they think really happened and will not be convinced otherwise.
Very, very few people, especially outside "the news", will do actual, open-minded research. A lot more will comment and speculate pointlessly.
Also FWIW in MA firearms aren't licensed, rather their owners are. And ownership isn't registered, rather many types of transfers are supposed to be recorded.
Granted, even if you find such matches, you still have to prove motive and opportunity.
You'd also be excluding everybody who illegally has a firearm or knife or whatever the murder weapon is.
I think there’s also the issue that you’re more likely to be murdered by someone you know than a random person. At the very least, matching bullet marks from shots fired from his associates guns to any casings found at the scene is just due diligence.
The most rapidly increasing (although still small in absolute numbers) class of gun associated with crime today are the 3D-printed variations:
Thousands of guns are found at crime scenes. What do they tell us?
* https://www.npr.org/2025/12/17/nx-s1-5641154/crime-guns-data...
So, yes, if this a crime of passion, a dispute between aquaintainces that escalated badly then there's a good chance the gun used has a history of ownership and registration.
If this is a crime related to home invasion gone badly then it's more likely to be a gun that fell off the radar some time past.