TexasCHLforum.com

There is no debate. When Obama says he's frustrated because "the gun debate isn't over yet", it has exactly the same moral weight as if he had said he's frustrated because "the rape debate isn't over yet." Rape is rape. There is no way to justify it. Rape doesn't have a rational defense. Any attempt to try and justify it is an attempt to rob women of the right to personal safety. Any attempt to blame the victim of a rape exculpates the perpetrator of the rape........but that is exactly what Obama does when he goes after the 2nd Amendment.

It's not that the debate is over, it's that there never was any kind of debate. And there never was any kind of debate because the uninfringed right to keep and bear arms is manifestly not debatable. When Obama says the debate isn't over, he is using a desperate ploy to try and inject an idea into the national consciousness - and that idea is that the 2nd Amendment can be infringed........despite the clear language of the Constitution.

So, in his mind, there is a debate........NOT over whether or not the 2nd can be infringed, but rather over how much MORE it can be infringed than it has already been. He takes the fact of its current infringements as a de facto proof that it may (not "can") be infringed. Naturally, any old dictator CAN infringe it; but no president with any reverence for the Constitution MAY infringe it. To bring it back to the rape comparison, he's effectively saying, "the rape debate is not over, because you have been raped in the past, and that means that I can rape you today, and again in the future........so we need to talk about that."

Well, I'm not willing to talk about that........so there is no debate.

I believe in the "may-ness" of the issue, not the "can-ness" of it. "Shall not" speaks to "may-ness". Thus, there is no debate, except in the minds of those for whom the Constitution makes a handy and ample piece of toilet paper.