Columnist Suggests 2A Compromise In Heller Case Before U.S. Supreme Court

A columnist for Tribune Media Services, in a piece that appeared in the Orlando Sentinel, suggests that both sides in the U.S. arms war need to compromise.

With respect, I humbly, and strongly disagree. Firearms owners have been "compromising" for decades, and with such appeasement have seen the rights of every American nibbled away. When I give a lecture on this subject, I use a timeline on a blackboard, with "compromise" being the point in the middle. Compromise for so many years has gone in favor of the gun controllers, until recently, with an increasing number of jurists recognizing that the shrill cries of "reasonable restriction" hold no merit, and provide no safety net.

Americans, with decisions like the DC appellate court and elsewhere, are slowly recovering these rights. If you have time, please take a moment to read the comments at the end of Mr. Pitts' column. A handful of those responding made some very good points.