Newly released information about the attack on YouTube headquarters by Nasim Aghdam has once again shown that restrictive gun control measures — promoted as crime stoppers by their proponents — failed to prevent a determined person from committing mayhem.
But you won’t see people marching in the streets about it, gun rights activists have contended on social media.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle and SFGate.com, investigators found that Aghdam legally purchased the 9mm Smith & Wesson semi-auto pistol in January, complying with California’s restrictive gun control laws. She also used legal 10-round magazines, reloading at least once. Aghdam fatally shot herself after wounding three people outside of the YouTube building.
The 39-year-old animal rights activist reportedly at a long-sanding grudge against the social media company for its decision to demonetize her exercise videos.
“The suspect began firing the pistol until it was empty, dropped the magazine, reloaded a new magazine into it, continued firing and then turned the gun on herself.”—Geoff Caldwell, San Bruno Police Department
The newspaper acknowledged that the California magazine capacity limit of 10 rounds was “designed to limit the possible carnage from shootings.” Where that law comes up short is that its authors evidently did not consider that someone could quickly swap out magazines and continue shooting. Gun owners repeatedly contend that people who write gun control laws don’t know anything about firearms.
One Seattle anti-gun group calling itself “Seattle Indivisible” showed earlier in the week clearly demonstrated this when they posted on their website several gun control demands that should be made:
- A ban on assault-style weapons.
- Raising the legal age of gun ownership to 21.
- Comprehensive background checks.
- [for federal only] A ban on bump stocks or any devices that modify semi-automatic weapons.
None of these measures were even remotely relevant to the San Bruno attack.
Confirmation is found in a remark from Frank McAndrew, identified as a psychology professor at Knox College in Illinois. He essentially debunked the anti-gun rhetoric that has followed other shootings, while being noticeably absent in this particular case, explaining that none of several gun control proposals mentioned recently would have prevented the YouTube shooting.
The story does not fit easily with the gun control narrative, say gun rights activists. The shooter was a woman, an animal rights activist, and she complied with the strict California gun control laws, including using state-compliant 10-round magazines.
