That could very well be true. A homophobic society on top of being a part of a religion that is probably less tolerant of homosexuality than any other, could lead to a sense of self-loathing. Then, claiming allegiance to ISIS could be a convenient diversion from his real motivation. I guess we'll have to wait and see how this plays out.
So, if he wasn't really a "radicalized Islamist terrorist", but just a conflicted gay man, perhaps President Obama is being prescient by not emphasizing the Islamist terrorism aspect of this tragedy. If so, we can go back to discussing pi$$-poor gun control laws.
We add to this that he was said to be a serious user of steroids and was quite muscled. Severe personality symptoms like rage and violence? Maybe some sexual dysfunction performance issues?
On the topic of gun control laws, consider what Mike Rowe said in part. If he's correct then the points he's making is that we ought not consider additional legislation. Rather, we are ineffectively using the information we already have to keep guns out of the hands most likely to abuse it. He's saying let's step back and look at what we have in place already and fix it.
"I'm just skeptical that expanding a broken system is the best way to keep guns away from bad guys and lunatics.
Currently, thousands of people deemed mentally incompetent by the courts are NOT registered in our National Check System. That’s insane, if you’ll pardon the irony, in part because it’s so easily correctible. Likewise, The ATF says that most states report less than 80% of their felony convictions to the national system. As a result, nearly 7 million convicted felons are not currently registered. Is it any surprise that nearly every mass killer in recent memory passed a background check?
Seems to me, our current system is only as good as the records in it, and right now, those records are laughably incomplete. But even more troubling are the tens of thousands of people who ARE in the system, that keep trying to buy guns illegally with absolutely no consequence.
Lying on your application to purchase a firearm is a federal offense, but very few are prosecuted for doing so. According to Politico, the Feds have prosecuted just 1.5% of all those individuals who have attempted to purchase a gun illegally. If my math is correct, that means 98.5% of people who are NOT allowed to own a gun, have not been prosecuted for trying to buy one.
Maybe it’s a manpower problem? Maybe it’s a resource problem? But whatever the reason, many thousands of individuals who try to purchase a gun illegally are allowed to keep on trying. Many eventually succeed, and then use that gun in the commission of a crime. This strikes me a serious problem. And yet, I’ve received no tweets from my favorite action heroes, asking me to support an effort to fix the system we have. Why is that?
To be clear, I’m not a member of The NRA. Last time I joined a club it was The Boy Scouts, and that was a long time ago. But from what I can tell, the NRA is not the reason that so many criminals and lunatics are able to buy guns today. Nor do they appear to oppose the kind of overhaul that would give us a more effective check system. In fact, wasn’t it The NRA that demanded background checks back in the mid-nineties, the moment the technology was first made available?
Regardless, we now possess the technology to update and maintain an accurate data base of felons, lunatics, gang members, terrorists, B-list celebrities, and other unsavory types that we can all agree should never be allowed to own a weapon. We also possess the ability to identify and prosecute anyone who attempts to buy a gun illegally. But if we don’t have the resources or the commitment to administer and enforce the system we have, why in the world would we want to make it bigger?
#When there’s a hole in your net, you don’t need a bigger net; you need a smaller hole.
#When your foundation is shaky, you don’t keep building on top of it, you knock it down and start over"
