Experts Baffled How Sydney Hostage Taker Got Firearm

How did the Sydney hostage taker obtain a rifle?

Reaction to the Sydney siege has ranged from absolute horror to stunned sadness, but as the dust has settled, one question remains: How did Man Haron Monis obtain his firearm? Shortly after the Port Arthur mass shooting in 1996, Australia implemented some of the most strict gun control laws in the world. According to Business Insider:

The laws banned all automatic and semi-automatic weapons and instituted strict licensing rules involving background checks and waiting periods for purchases. The conservative government also instituted a buyback program, where people were paid for turning in newly illegal automatic and semi-automatic rifles; 650,000 weapons were voluntarily handed in and destroyed at a cost of roughly $359.6 million. Today, Australians must demonstrate a justifiable need to have a gun, such as being a farmer or sport shooter.”

Common sense tells us that every citizen will obey the law. Given that, and given the strict gun control laws in place, Australia should be a crime-free nation. Gun control laws should have stopped this abhorrent incident from ever occurring. Yet, even with the ink on the paper, this man somehow obtained a firearm, and used it to commit a crime.

Several experts have weighed in on the incident, all of whom have differing opinions regarding the manner in which Haron Monis obtained his firearm.

Dr. Jarod Miller, of Sydney Technical University believes that magic may have been used:

Well, Occam’s razor tells us that the simplest answer is usually the correct one. Given that we have strict gun control laws, it’s clearly not possible that this man obtained his weapon on the street, or via a subversion of the law. What’s left but to conclude some sort of sorcery? He must have transmuted various metals into a firearm. However, now that we know how he obtained his weapon, we can put laws on the books banning transmutation, and all sorcery which would lead to the creation of firearms.”

Emily Becker, a high-ranking politician within the Australian government, offers a different opinion:

Given our restrictive gun control laws, it’s not possible that what Haron Monis used was a gun at all.”

When pressed further regarding what the weapon could have been, if not a gun, Becker simply shrugged, and looked off into the distance until we walked away.

There are those on the fringe who are actually positing that Haron Monis broke the law in order to obtain his firearm, but their claims are being dismissed as utter nonsense, given the fact that laws cannot be broken.

Regardless of the method by which Haron Monis obtained his gun (not gun?), journalists, and talking heads are seemingly unanimous in their pride that not one hostage had a firearm on their person during the crisis.

Rebecca Lundergan, author of the national best seller Guns = Bad, heaped praise upon the hostages:

It really is an extraordinary measure of success that not one hostage was able to defend themselves, or take out Haron Monis using a firearm. Adding a trained, law-abiding gun owner into the mix could have caused more than three deaths. The families of the two citizens who were killed during the crisis can rest easy knowing that their loved ones died following the letter of the law.

Investigators are currently looking into how Haron Monis could have obtained his weapon; however, they are confident he did not break the law, because that would be impossible.