You know what? IF the first amendment right to free speech isn’t an absolute (and I hesitantly agree that it isn’t), then I’m okay with seeing the 2d Amendment as something other than absolute, too. In each instance, however, those Constitutionally guaranteed rights are close to absolute. And to the extent that some exceptions must exist, they need to be very precisely carved-out and the rights need to be treated very deferentially.
I’m not sure the Alzheimer’s Patient in Chief is up to the important task of helping to define those very limited exceptions. But I’d be willing to give my assent to a discussion by and between the proponents and opponents of “gun control.” Like a real President once said, in sum and substance, we should never fear to negotiate but we should never negotiate out of fear. — JFK.
That said, I get it: Very reasonable fellow conservatives fear the slippery slope. Give the gun-grabbers an inch, and they’ll demand the rest of the mile. So agreeing to even discuss it or concede that it might be subject to negotiations does pose the risk that they will eventually erode the 2d Amendment to the point of effectively repealing it. Guards and barriers would need to be set up so clearly and firmly that no further incursions could even be sought.
Is it possible? I don’t know. I personally don’t trust liberal Democrats. I saw what they did with the Reagan compromise on illegal immigrant amnesty. They can’t be trusted. But it might nevertheless still be appropriate to at least meet with them. Then we can see if they are of a kind to be realistic.