Gun Rights Activist’s Death Proves Gun Control WRONG, Liberal Media Silent
Good guys with guns do exist, and they don’t need laws to tell them how to act. Unfortunately, the good guys are hampered by laws and regulations on guns and often can’t protect themselves or others since bad guys always find a way around laws, as one gun rights activist’s death proves. Unsurprisingly, the liberal media is relatively silent, not wanting this untimely death to receive the attention it deserves.
It’s doubtful that gun control knuckleheads will take into consideration the death of 20-year-old Tarak Underiner and seriously question how their ideals are responsible for his untimely demise. Tarak was following all of Ohio’s gun laws when he was shot to death in his home.
According to The Columbus Dispatch, Columbus Police Officers were called to a residence near the campus of Ohio State University at about 12:30 am when Tarak’s roommate called police after hearing gunfire and noticing the young man had been shot. Tarak was pronounced dead at the scene.
At only 20 years old, Tarak was a vocal advocate for concealed carry rights on campuses in the United States. Tarak even testified at the Ohio Statehouse in December of 2016 in support of the Republican-backed House Bill 48 and the right to concealed carry on campus.
During his testimony, Tarak was quoted as saying, “College campuses and the areas surrounding them present environments rich with potential victims. They’re willing to gamble we’re unarmed, and it pays off.” Although the legislation was passed, OSU officials have said they do not plan on taking up the optional provisions.
Gun control provision didn’t help Tarak, but likely cost him his life instead. He had guns in his home when he was shot to death with a gun that did not belong to him, according to police, which could have been prevented if not for gun control regulations.
In Ohio, a concealed carrier must be 21-years-old to apply for a permit to carry their gun hidden. So, gun control likely cost Tarak his life as his killer obviously disregarded the law that murdering another human being is illegal while Tarak obeyed the laws that left him defenseless.
Tarak followed the gun laws of his state and was an activist for the rights of others to protect themselves. Because he followed Ohio’s laws, he, himself, was a victim of a shooting. Although no one will ever know if Tarak could have saved himself if he had a gun on him, what is clear is that gun control didn’t save Tarak’s life but put it more at risk of being lost since he had no way to neutralize a criminal with a gun without a gun of his own in his hand. Now, a family is left mourning the loss of a loved one as we pray for them during this difficult time.