President Obama (and Hillary Clinton) were out and about today, pimping the position that U.S. military might might cause Syria to cave on chemical weapons. They repeat: if President Assad backs down it’s because President Obama rattled America’s saber. Which could well be true. But did anyone else think huh, if a “credible threat” is necessary to defend innocent life against a ruthless mass murderer why the hell can’t I have a “credible threat” to protect me from, I dunno, a ruthless mass murderer? Or even just one potential murderer? I can and it’s called a gun and my right to keep and bear it is protected by the U.S. Constitution. I wonder if our President, a Constitutional scholar, can see the parallel. Nah. Probably not.