On Tuesday afternoon 38-year-old Nasim Aghdam went on a shooting rampage at YouTube headquarters in San Bruno, California injuring several people before killing herself.
She was reportedly a vegan Muslim animal rights activist who was angry with the video publishing platform for allegedly censoring some of her videos and decreasing the revenue she received from her content.
Many of the videos she made have been circulating online and it’s clear if you watch them that Aghdam was mentally disturbed.
Now her father is coming forward saying his daughter was missing for days prior to the shooting and that he warned cops she was angry with YouTube.
The Gateway Pundit is reporting:
Aghdam’s father told a CBS reporter Nasim had been missing for several days and when police picked her up in Northern California, he warned them she was angry at YouTube.
CBS reporter, Tina Patel spoke with Nasim Aghdam’s father Tuesday evening.
BREAKING: Just spoke to the father of Nasim Aghdam. He says his daughter had been missing for several days. When cops found her in NorCal last night, he warned them she was angry with YouTube. @CBSLA pic.twitter.com/mgCw9ivqos
— Tina Patel (@tina_patel) April 4, 2018
Nasim Aghdam ranted on her YouTube account about being discriminated against. YouTube was censoring her videos through a filter and she became furious.
If police actually knew about this and did nothing, it would be the second time in over a month that authorities failed to uphold their duty to serve and protect the public from insane, evil people wanting to shed blood.
Which is one reason the right to bear arms exists in the first place.
California is a state with some of the most strict gun control laws in the country, and yet these laws seem to be doing very little to curb the desires of twisted individuals bent on destruction.
Is this because the laws on the books are not being enforced? If that’s the case, what’s the point of more gun control laws if they aren’t going to be upheld? Obviously more law is not the right solution.
Perhaps the answer is to try something radical and get back to the Second Amendment, allowing law abiding citizens to carry the tools necessary for self-defense?