It’s never enjoyable to talk about a mass shooting. The idea that I’m talking about such a loss of life hurts my soul, probably because I get taken back to another mass shooting, but also probably because they’re just awful in general.

The magnitude of the shooting may play a slight factor, but not a huge one. They’re all awful.

San Jose is no different. Here’s the latest we know.

The nine victims of a mass shooting in San Jose on Wednesday have been identified as investigators begin the process of figuring out why such a fierce burst of violence happened during the early morning hours at a light rail yard.

Eight of the victims, who ranged from ages 29 to 63, were identified Wednesday by the Santa Clara County office of the Medical Examiner-Coroner as Paul Delacruz Megia, 42; Taptejdeep Singh, 36; Adrian Balleza, 29; Jose Dejesus Hernandez III, 35; Timothy Michael Romo, 49; Michael Joseph Rudometkin, 40; Abdolvahab Alaghmandan, 63; and Lars Kepler Lane, 63.

A ninth victim, Alex Ward Fritch, age 49, was transported to Santa Clara Valley Medical Center in critical condition and died Wednesday evening, the coroner’s office said.

They will be honored Thursday night at an event at the San Jose City Hall Plaza.

The gunman was also identified, though I’m not about to mention his name because that just spurs more of these dipsticks on.

However, we do know a few things about him.

[Redacted], the identified gunman, had a strained relationship with an ex-girlfriend, court documents show, which revealed troubling allegations she made in a filing in 2009 as she responded to a restraining order he filed against her.

The woman says she dated [him] for approximately one year in what she said became an off-and-on-again relationship after about six months.

She described [the shooter] as having mood swings that were “exacerbated when ([he]) consumed large quantities of alcohol,” she said in the court document, and she alleged he had bi-polar disorder.

She said he enjoyed playing mind games with her, according to the court document.

“Several times during the relationship he became intoxicated, enraged and forced himself on me sexually,” said the former girlfriend, who CNN is not naming and is reaching out to for comment.

[The killer’s] ex-wife, Cecilia Nelms, told CNN affiliate the Bay Area News Group he resented his work. Nelms was married to [him] for about 10 years until the couple filed for divorce in 2005. She has not been in touch with her ex-husband for about 13 years, according to the outlet.

He often spoke angrily about his co-workers and bosses, and at times directed his anger at her, Nelms told the outlet.

When the two were married, he “resented what he saw as unfair work assignments” and “would rant about his job when he got home.”

Honestly, some of this is interesting, other parts are unsurprising. For example, the fact that his ex-girlfriend describes him as abusive, which is something we see very often in these kinds of shootings. She also had a restraining order against him, which is interesting.

Also, the ex-wife talking about the resentment he felt toward his work and the kind of assignments he got. It sounds like he had some serious issues that were never really addressed.

Of course, this will play a factor in the ongoing gun debate. In fact, some already have tried to make it about gun control, such as Sen. Chris Murphy.

None of this is random.
None of this is coincidence.
None of this is bad luck.

Mass shootings are an American problem because we have the most lax guns laws in the high income world. https://t.co/m2euf8UdGV

— Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) May 26, 2021

And yet, this took place in California, the most gun-controlled state in the nation that already has absolutely every gun control measure Murphy is pushing for in the United States Senate. Just what more could have been done?

That’s a rhetorical question, of course, because as per usual, anti-gunners are beating the gun control drum before we know much of anything. We don’t know how he obtained his firearm, for example, so how can we really discuss anything?

That one’s not rhetorical.