I watched the news this morning and I'm horrified by something that Dianne Feinstien said on Meet the Press. "The rights of a few do not outweigh the safety of the many." Ignoring the obvious Mr. Spock quote "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" for a minute. Was this country not founded on "the rights of the few". In 1776 we were "the few" being stomped on by "the many" 3,000 miles away. Have we forgotten so much? We strive in this country to remain "free", when are we going to realize that a free society is inherently a vulnerable society? I ask myself these questions; Would armed guards in schools help? Sure .maybe a little. Would an AWB help? Sure maybe a little. More police? Sure ..maybe a little. Would making CCW available in all public places help? Sure .maybe a little. Would a physiological watch list help? Sure maybe a little. But do we stomp on the rights of all to protect the many? No but it makes me physically sick when I think of the mothers and fathers who have lost everything. No one solution is the answer here and yet we have descended into a nation that talks only in terms of absolutism. My worst fear is that we give up liberty for new laws that promise safety and lose both. Why?....when we descend into absolute arguments, then the only reasonable outcome is one side wins and the other loses. And when that happens we lose our way and our liberties with it.