FirstAlerts

Webster Man Pleads Guilty to Firearms Charges

Anthony Pietrowski admitted to illegally dealing firearms and possessing a machinegun, according to federal prosecutors.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 4, 2026, 4:52 p.m. ET
A Webster, Mass. man guilty on Sept. 3, 2026, in federal court in Worcester to illegally dealing firearms and possessing a machinegun, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts announced. Anthony Pietrowski, 24, guilty to one count of unlawful dealing in firearms without a license and one count of unlawful possession of a machinegun. Sentencing is scheduled for Dec. 7, 2026, before U.S. District Judge Margaret Guzman. According to the announcement, between August and October 2025, Pietrowski sold privately made firearms and components during four transactions in Webster, including a 3D-printed Glock-style pistol, multiple 3D-printed pistol frames, and a machinegun conversion device. He had never applied for or received a federal license to manufacture or deal firearms. The charge of unlawful dealing in firearms without a license carries up to five years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of $250,000. The charge of unlawful possession of a machinegun carries up to 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of $250,000. Pietrowski was arrested and charged in January 2026 and released on conditions following a detention hearing.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 14 Sept 2026, 20:52current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble β€” all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources β€” accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements β€” and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld β€” a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them β€” and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.