The case for Barack Obama's consistency about the DC gun law rests on the following argument. (a) A spokesman gave an incorrect statement on whether Obama supported the DC law. (b) several questionnaires got it wrong -- including one with Obama's handwriting on it. (c) When Obama responded to CNN's Leon Harris, who had just asked him, " You said in Idaho recently, I'm quoting here, 'I have no intention of taking away folks' guns.' But you support the D.C. handgun ban and you've said that it's constitutional?...How can you reconcile those two different positions?" and Obama said: "Right, right." -- he was simply acknowledging the question, and for some reason, did not correct Harris in his answer, and (d) has always favored the right of locales to regulate handguns and (e) had never publicly opposed the DC law.

It's true that Obama regularly says and has said that he interprets the 2nd amendment to hold secure an individual's right to bear arms while being constrained by the rights of the community to "maintain public safety," as he put it today.

It's just that, with regard to the DC law, it seems clear that Obama was OK with how DC government balanced those rights and is now OK with the see-saw swinging in the other direction.