I don't think the debate would look any different than it does today if Romney had been elected.
The very fact that we even HAVE a debate proves the point. Logically, there is nothing to discuss. The letter, spirit, and intent of the Second Ammendment is clear.
But logic has nothing to do with this argument. Emotive-based thinking does. This is the very form of thought that the Bill of Rights is supposed to protect us from; from an emotion charged group trampling on the rights of their fellow citizens. This emotive thinking is the basis for a prevalent willingness to trade liberty for a SENSE of security. It is rampant. We all know people whose decision-making processess and world view are shaped by emotion rather than logic and reason.
While logic has nothing to do with this, neither does Obama, in a sense. He's not the problem. He's a mere symptom of it.
The real problem is that we all know people who don't believe that we can be trusted with our Constitutional Rights. Being emotive-based thinkers, they are rabid and shrill and largely illogical in framing their argument for their world view. At its root, however, is a readiness and willingness to trade the liberty of an entire body of free people for their own selfish SENSE of security. That is the ultimate definition of greed, in my book. In plain English, they want to feel safe and secure at the expense of everyone else.
Have you engaged in a debate in which someone is not at all shy about proclaiming that if they had their way, private ownership of arms would be illegal in this country? Have you ever had one go further, stating that if they had their way, they would order the police and military to confiscate all weapons? Have you ever had one go further and suggest that your vocal defense of the constitution is "irrational" or "stupid" or "hate speech."?
Obama isn't the problem. It is those tyrants that you know personally. They show their true colors when you ask them what would happen "if they had their way" or when they offer their unsolicited opinion on the subject.
They are not "gun control advocates." They are Anti-Rights Tyrants. They are against the whole lot contained in the Bill of Rights, and they have to be because of their emotive-based thought process and selfish sense of entitlement. If they are willing to trade your Second Ammendment right for their own selfish sense of security and safety, they will trade the rest of them for the same aim, too.
They don't quit being your family members, your friends, your co-workers, or your neighbors on the outcome of an election, nor does the outcome of said election morph them into people bound by logic and reason, rather than emotion.
JP
