Obama’s gun control proposal

By Tom Quiner

Syed Farook had it good.

The Muslim American had a job in San Bernadino, California, with wages and benefits that amounted to $71,000 per year.

To his credit, he prayed midday, and his employer allowed him to leave work for this prayer time.

He had warm, friendly co-workers who threw a baby shower for Mr. Farook’s wife.

The rest is history.

Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, assembled an arsenal of weapons, entered Mr. Farook’s workplace, and began a killing rampage. Fourteen were killed; twenty-one more were injured.

The FBI said they were “radicalized” Muslims.

The president refuses to use the term “Muslim” and “terrorism” in the same sentence. And yet terrorism has a purpose, an intent that directs these acts of violence.

Acknowledging the purpose, which is ‘death to infidels’ in the case of radicalized Muslims, helps us understand motives and develop a strategy to counter future terrorist attacks.

What is the president’s strategy?

  1. Close the gun show loophole.
  2. Don’t sell guns to people on the terrorism watch list.
  3. Run background checks on people selling them guns.

In the case of Mr. Farook, he didn’t buy his guns at a gun show.

He wasn’t on a terrorist watch list.

He passed a background check.

In other words, nothing the president and his party proposes would have made a difference.

They don’t have a clue what to do.


  1. parrillaturi on December 8, 2015 at 3:15 pm

    He doesn’t have a clue, and won’t, as long as it pertains to radical Islam.

    • quinersdiner on December 8, 2015 at 3:22 pm

      That’s how it seems to me.

  2. bluebird of bitterness on December 12, 2015 at 2:35 pm

    Once again, it’s not about guns, it’s about control. Leftists will seize upon any crisis or calamity to increase the power and reach of government while diminishing the freedom and personal responsibility of individuals.

  3. […] He was reacting to an earlier Quiner’s Diner posting, “Obama’s gun control proposal.” […]