For those who have not heard yet there was recent assault on a gay nightclub in Orlando Florida where 50 people were reported killed and scores more injured. A gunman who allegedly pledged allegiance to the Islamic State went on a shooting rampage to kill as many people as he could before he himself was gunned down. When I read all the follow up stories I keep hearing interesting facts. It was recently reported that he had been frequenting that place for over a year. He also had a wife and child. This could lead to the fact that he just might have been gay himself (or confused about his own sexuality). If in fact he “was” gay, then why single out gay people as his targets in the name if Islam? The Islamic State was well known for punishing gays by killing them (amputation, whipping or throwing them off of tall buildings). If this guy had been frequenting this place as reported, then the radical Islamic State would probably would have executed him just behind the “possible thought that he was gay.” Why would anyone want to pledge allegiance to a group whose conditions he was violating? To me that sounds like someone with more of a “troubled mind” than one who was thinking “rationally.” His own father said he believed that his son had no ties to ISIS. He also said that his son did not seem agitated or angry the day before he carried out his rampage (If this is true, then something personal may have sent him over the edge). He said that he didn’t think religion or Islam had anything to do with it. If that is true, then to me it sheds a different light on this whole situation. To me it no longer has a tone of terror for the sake of radical Islam, but rather the mental state of one troubled man. If in fact it is determined that the killer had mental issues, then to me the next focus should be on “how he was able to purchase the firearms he needed to commit these killings in the first place.” In other words, if this guy was “already” on the FBI’s “watch list” then why weren’t these weapons purchases reported and why wasn’t an alert issued? I understand that the shooter purchased the guns legally. However, to me that “is” the “problem.” SHOULD he have been allowed to purchase them legally in the first place? How much longer do we have to deal with troubled minds committing random acts of violence before we change our laws to make “stricter background checks?” Right now just about anyone can “go buy” guns and ammunition anywhere (no matter what their mental states are). They can shoot up movie theaters, schools and clubs with the weapons they purchased easily. We can refer to this particular incident as “an act of terror in the name of some organization” if we want, but please keep in mind that “without the ability to purchase weapons” a lot of those people would still be alive today. Guns don’t kill people. PEOPLE who use guns kill people. The BEST way to stop this craziness is to stop them “at the purchase.” I welcome any opposing views… Thank you for checking out my Daily Thought and as always I wish you the very best that life has to offer.