Looking Out My Back Door

Words Fail

Today's Daily News ran pictures of the Virginia Tech victims, along with a brief bio of each. I am struggling to hold back tears here in my office at work because I work for two rabid NRA members who would no doubt defend the shooter's right to bear arms.

As was expressed on "The View" yesterday, when the Bill of Rights was created, no one could possibly have envisioned a world with rapidly firing automatic weapons. They were used to muskets and heavy cannon. Militias were needed to protect citizens. It's more than 200 years later. Other parts of the Constitution have been amended. It is time that this is addressed in a calm and sane manner.

I have no problem with licensed folks who are trained to use firearms to own them for their own personal protection. Some people transport money or valuables as part of their business. Others are fearful in their own homes, which they have the right to protect. However, does one need an AK-47 to hunt deer? Quail? Buffalo? I think not.

Rosie O'Donnell has said that she spent five years protesting our gun control "laws," but has come to realize that they will never change as long as they have such a powerful lobbying group (that would be the NRA). Look at Europe. They have much stricter rein over guns there (British police do not even carry guns) and fewer incidents of the Columbine or VT kind. Fewer individual murders caused by guns, too.

The shooter passed the requisite FBI check needed to purchase a gun. Perhaps a psychological test is in order. From all accounts, no one who knew him on that campus would have felt comfortable if he possessed a sling shot, let alone guns.

I grieve for these students and faculty members, along with our fallen service men and women. The first group dead because of our archaic laws. The second group dead because our administration lied to us and put our troops in harm's way. Which instance is more egregious?

posted by Hopster @ 10:59 AM