Due Diligence

US Flag at half Staff over the White House

This morning the Rabbit Run, Commander-in-Chief and I had a discussion concerning the events at Fort Hood. I think this is the basis of a good discussion on the role of Government. Not that it will do anything for the servicemen and women killed an wounded at Fort Hood.

Is it the role of Government to protect all our liberties to the maximum extent possible? Is it the role of Government to intrude as little as possible so we can achieve our own liberties. Should we all have to go through metal detectors everywhere and have surveillance cameras monitor our lives?
One place Two-Dogs and I disagree is that he thinks that people that feel the over application of Government in our lives are stupid. I think that it is the furthest from the truth. If they were stupid we could easily defeat their ideas and that ain't happening McGee. In fact, there are many smart (although misguided in my humble opinion) people that want the Government to be so big that it provides everyone a place to start their quest from an equal footing. This system must provides safeguards to ensure the journey isn't without pitfalls.

To be fair, Barb discussed the Due Diligence issue from the point of view of a parent and discussed handgun control because of the ongoing trial mentioned in today's paper. A young man had a handgun in his pocket, he pulled it out and aimed it at the head of a three year old, and pulled the trigger. That unloaded gun went off and ended the chance of that child to grow up and be the President of the United States. How could a household full of adults not make sure that the kid didn't have a gun, that if he did, be so trained as to never point it at anybody and to run a dry run of the mechanism to clear the chamber. Is it the role of Government to provide Due Diligence and to ensure that no guns are available or at what limited role? Do we make people attend Gun safety classes so that we all know how to treat guns? There is a wonderful U-Tube of an instructor with a loaded gun that shoots himself as he puts his gun away.
I for one, cannot understand what could compel an officer, who is a Doctor, who is a devout religious man think that killing a bunch of unarmed soldiers is somehow a solution to the problems of the world. What could compel an ex-soldier to fill a Rider rental truck up with fertilizer and diesel fuel and blow up a Federal Office building? What would compel a man to fill his trunk with a weapon and a sniper and drive around near our nations capital shooting people. I do hope that if there is a Hell, those three will get a chance to meet there and discuss the issue.

No, I don't have all the answers. Hell, I am not sure that I understand all the questions.



  1. MUD, you raise some interesting thoughts. What compels mass murder is the demonic. These people are so eaten up with the devil, either through their religion, or their self-hatred that they can act on what the devil is urging them to do.

    And, you've been around long enough to know that the problem with gun laws is that they restrict the liberties of ALL...and the criminals don't obey them anyway.

    The speed limit might be 35, but some damn fool is gonna go 70...

    Sad deal in Killeen...sad day for The Army...just sad, period.

  2. I agree with Andy. I don't believe you can even begin to understand things like this unless you acknowledge the spiritual aspect. That doesn't mean I believe "The devil made me do it" is an acceptable defense. Each of us still has free will, even if some of us choose to relenquish it. Even so, such crimes are not something I think any sane person is entirely capable of comprehending.

    I agree on his second point as well.

    The key is balancing personal freedom and government protection from poor use of it. That said, balance is tricky to achieve, and it leaves the question of who will determine what the proper balance is.