Heated debate over gun law is inevitable after the all-too-frequent mass shootings that have plagued the U.S., a country that now has more firearms than people.
And last week’s mass shooting in California – in which 14 people were killed in an apparent terror attack – was no different.
The suspects – Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, 27, both of whom were killed in a fierce shootout with police – apparently used legally purchased rifles, and amassed thousands of rounds of ammunition, before the rampage.
The attack, deemed “an act of terrorism” by U.S. President Barack Obama, prompted a New York Times front-page editorial – the newspaper’s first since 1920 – entitled ‘End the Gun Epidemic in America’.
But another “terror” attack in London, just days later, further intensified the fierce debate over gun laws.
In that attack, a knife attacker slashed a man at a London Underground station, reportedly screaming “This is for Syria!”. The main victim of the attack reportedly suffered serious, but not life-threatening injuries.
Many people turned to Twitter to highlight how the London attack could have been much different, and much worse, if the UK had the same gun laws as the United States.
“Lucky for London attacker had to use knife. In US he'd have easily bought an assault rifle,” wrote Kenneth Roth, executive director of the New York-based Human Rights Watch.
POLL: Do you think the UK’s strict gun laws make a severe terror attack less likely? https://t.co/oaLI7sAlam— Al Arabiya English (@AlArabiya_Eng) December 7, 2015