I have to admit this is a new angle on the issue I haven’t seen before in the media. The article is one of those middle ground articles, and one of my areas of disagreement is that the debate are at dogmatic poles. It only seems that way because the media doesn’t know anything else, and their reporting on the issue sucks. In truth, we’re currently at a middle ground, and will have reached a consensus when one side can no longer move the debate to one side or another very much. I tend to view the role of the courts in this whole affair as eliminating the outliers (like Chicago, New York, New Jersey, etc) and forcing on them a basic respect for the right, while perhaps letting them get away with a bit more in the way of controls as other places. One of my big beefs with these middle ground people is a lack of understanding that politics just doesn’t work like that. Politics arrives at a middle ground, because people on both sides struggle, and reach the limits of their political power.
UPDATE: Bill Quick of Daily Pundit:
You stand there without your gun, and Iâ€™ll attack you with a club and beat you to death. You obviously donâ€™t need a gun because I donâ€™t have one. Or if youâ€™re weak enough, Iâ€™ll just beat you to death with my bare fists. No weapon needed.
Heh. I wonder how much middle ground he could find in that scenario. I think there was actually a lot of wisdom wrapped up in the old saying that God may have made man, but it was Sam Colt that made them equal.