How Did Tashfeen Malik Get the Guns?

Syed Farook
Syed Farook, Facebook, Unconfirmed

Tashfeen Malik and her husband Syed Rizwan Farook have been the subject of intense Democrat debate, not because they were religious Muslims who killed 14 people and wounded 17, not because Farook spent time in Saudi Arabia where they do have jihadist training camps, not because Tashfeen is a Pakistani citizen, not because they were worried about the victims. No, what they are worried about is gun violence, but they haven’t asked the question, where did they get their guns, especially Tashfeen?

Is Tashfeen here legally? On what basis? Maybe we shouldn’t admit people from terror-sponsoring nations? Was she vetted?

Law enforcement found IEDs in their home. Will Obama pass IED laws and anti-pipe measures?

Where are the videos they took with their videos? Did they send them to ISIS for propaganda.

Barack Obama mentioned yesterday during the shootout that some gun laws are broken and he’s going to fix them – not Congress – him. We know one ruling he needs to fix right away that actually violates federal law.

Illegal aliens can now claim Second Amendment rights to own guns in violation of federal law, according to a federal appeals court. They obviously don’t understand the purpose of the Second Amendment which is to remove a tyrant from power.

Federal law, found at 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), makes it a crime for an illegal alien to have a gun.

The court’s opinion pointed to language in the Heller decision which refers to “law-abiding citizens” and “members of the political community” as the reason for making this ruling. The judge came to the conclusion that illegal aliens can have guns, an decision not in the Heller ruling. He was writing law from the bench.

While approving guns for illegal aliens, the judge also said other restrictions can apply and limit the rights of Americans. Chief Judge Wood wrote that while illegal aliens are entitled to Second Amendment rights, gun restrictions such as this one should only be subject to what courts call “intermediate scrutiny,” under which the court can uphold this statute, but also uphold a great many additional restrictions on the right to bear arms, Breitbart reported..

That’s more bad news for gun owners.

Let’s fix this broken law written by a judge not authorized to violate federal law.

Is it too much to ask that the laws passed to control guns actually address the problems and will stop or slow this type of crime? The administration knows there aren’t any, short of the Australian buyback both Obama and Hillary suggested was a good way to go. They want gun confiscation.



  1. Is it too much to ask that the laws passed to control guns actually address the problems and will stop or slow this type of crime?

    Yes. They’re not allowed, regardless of the result. The federal government cannot regulate arms. Period.

Comments are closed.