By Quetzalcoatl.Eradius 2016-06-14 09:56:11
Australia where I live, is an "island" in the middle of the sea with no mexico, east eu, or asia attached to it. With gun control- effective gun control.
However.
A terrorist still got his mitts on a gun and shot things up. They've gotten their hands on weapons and explosives in Australia, the UK, in Paris, etc.
Omar in the US made contact with ISIS, when you are already dealing with ISIS a gun is going to be obtained one way or another to get the deed done.
Turning the entire argument into gun control instead of addressing this radicalized father and the 20 different signs Omar wasn't such a straight character is insulting. The argument that the FBI check should have invalidated gun ownership still wouldn't help, he would have had to be investigated by other means to be stopped before he could ever illegaly obtain a gun, a simple task for a man already in conversation with an org like IS. This guy had the pair on him to go and do that even when he already knew the FBI had sniffed his crotch 3 times for other reasons. Think about that.
Gun control can be a thing, but its not going to stop a radical. Identifying radicals and stemming them should be the tactic when you deal with terrorism. Omar's father was/is radicalized and he has displayed as much with his statements and life history. I think the entire situation could have been prevented if at least one person said "whoa wait a sec" when his father applied for a visa.