In NYC DiBlasio was calling the driver last week a lone actor before anyone had even really spoken to him. Most Trumpies I saw objected to that. Here, Trump draws conclusions about the root of the Texas shooting before we know all that much. Both these things are short on substance and long on political agenda.

We still don't know much about either, but I've now read a bit about the NYC scumbag. People who knew him described him as mean and "off". Articles say his life was not going well, and certainly not according to his plans.

We have a lot to learn about the Texas shooter, but he seems like a mean guy, guilty of domestic abuse and animal abuse, and who was discharged on bad behavior. I gather not as bad as a dishonorable discharge. And I just saw a report that the Air Force failed to put his record in the proper databases, allowing him to pass gun purchase background checks. So here, gun laws might have worked, at least in preventing a legal purchase. But the law wasn't followed (if the report I saw is true).

If both do turn out to be lone actors, at the core, how different are these two cases? Two guys who are not in their right minds, but I bet neither can use a legal insanity defense.